Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman McClintock for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1927. Nearly a decade ago, the National Park Service, with the help of the Organization of American Historians, completed a study to help identify significant sites related to the modern civil rights movement. Through this effort, the National Park Service found that many sites with a connection to the movement had not been formally recognized and that many were in severe disrepair and at risk of being permanently lost.

This legislation establishes a network of sites to include all National Park Service's units and programs, as well as other Federal, State, local, and privately owned properties for the National Register of Historic Places.

A similar network was created previously by Congress to identify and commemorate the sites and stories related to the underground railroad. This bill would allow the National Park Service to build partnerships with other public and private entities to help preserve the remaining sites.

As part of my religious beliefs, I believe that knowing who you are, where you come from, is a foundation of knowing where you are and where you will be going.

History teaches us important lessons that we need to learn and grow from. Because of great leaders like Martin Luther King, President Abraham Lincoln, Rosa Parks, and many unsung heroes, I am here today as a Member of Congress representing the great State of Utah. We can be proud of who we are and what we believe in, that all men are created equal in the eyes of God.

It is imperative that here in the United States, that we don't make people feel like victims, and that all Americans are not afraid of, but empowered by, their history and our future.

Mr. Speaker, I commend Representative Clay for his sponsorship of this bill, and I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1927.

I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to speak about my proposed amendment to the Legislative Branch Appropriations bill. My amendment will have zero budgetary impact, and the intent is to merely advocate for the expansion of permissible uses of the MRA funds that have already been designated for Member security.

Currently, the Appropriations Committee has provided MRA resources in the amount of $25,000 per Member for providing Member security away from the Capitol complex; however, this money may not be currently spent on security at a Member's private residence.

In the current environment, however, many Members, myself included, have faced threats that extend to our homes and our families. For me, that included a person putting my address on Facebook and Twitter with a statement that stated: ``We've signed your death certificate. You won't see us coming.''

In fact, in recognition of this disturbing trend, a recent FEC advisory opinion held that the campaign funds may be used, ``. . . to install or upgrade residential security systems that do not constitute structural improvements to a Members' homes.''

My amendment proposes that MRA funds for Member security may be used

in this same way. We do not face these threats because we are candidates for office but because we are sitting Members of Congress.

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Richmond), my colleague from Louisiana's Second Congressional District.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Bridenstine), my colleague from Oklahoma's First Congressional District.

Mr. Chair, I would like to go ahead and reiterate my thanks to the Appropriations Committee and to my colleagues for all of the support on this amendment.

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support for the Financial CHOICE Act, and I urge a vote for it.

America's workers, farmers, businesses, households, savers, and investors all deserve the flexibility and access to credit that the Financial CHOICE Act puts in place for our financial system.

As a former mayor, I know that families, cities, and counties need access to credit. Whether it is a city that wants to build a library or a community park, or a family that wants to buy a house, or the farmer that needs a new tractor to plow her field, we need a financial system that is strong, innovative, but, most of all, accessible.

Right now, under Dodd-Frank, that isn't the case. For example, one of my constituents in Utah owns a catering business that is very successful, but the growth of her company has been stunted because she ran into red tape and delays after applying for a small business loan.

That is not how things should work. Community banks, which provide the majority of small bank loans, are closing at the rate of one per day. Middle- to low-income Americans are getting higher fees, less consumer service, and less access to credit than ever before.

Everyone deserves a chance to realize their version of the American Dream, and the Financial CHOICE Act is a bold step toward achieving that dream.

Madam Speaker, let's talk about what this is really about. This is about the loss of human lives.

Each child potentially brings with him or her unique gifts and talents that can be used for the betterment of our society. An unborn child may be the doctor that cures cancer or Alzheimer's, may be the astronaut that lands us on Mars or the future leader that solves the problems of today. The list of our children's potential is infinite in value.

Any time a child's life is lost, there is something more that is lost. It is a loss for us, it is a loss for our society, and it is a loss for our Nation. If you want to invest in our future, in the words of Henry Hyde: ``We cannot in logic or in conscience help fund the execution of these innocent, defenseless human lives.''

A strong majority of Americans and a bipartisan majority in Congress opposes taxpayer-funded abortions. Because of this, there exists, currently, over 40 years of laws that prevent this practice. These laws have been deemed constitutional by the United States Supreme Court.

So this is not about women's health. I want you to know very clearly that I support women's health. I support a healthy, organic, and open healthcare system that gives women more care than they currently receive today. What this bill does is codifies something that we already have. It ends the patchwork and establishes permanent protections for our children and the future of our society.

I want you to know, Madam Speaker, that when I stand up and I meet with my Maker, I want you to know that I am not going to be ashamed. I am going to know that I stood up for the lives of these innocent children.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of our future, in favor of our unborn potential, and in favor of H.R. 7.

Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of a point of order.

Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to the gentleman's motion.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask a few questions of my colleagues as it relates to health care.

Has Congress made health care more accessible and affordable? Has the quality of care improved? No.

Do hardworking families and our children deserve better? Absolutely.

Now is the time to repeal and replace this disaster of a law. This law has hurt more poor and more middle-income families.

I received a letter from a constituent. Mr. Speaker, the letter states:

I wonder if you would like a real-life example of what

ObamaCare is doing to families. My daughter and her husband

are expecting their second child. They were planning on

moving from their small apartment to a small home. Their

insurance has doubled under ObamaCare, and they will pay $500

a month. Their deductible will be $10,000. They

will have to pay each doctor for a phone call plus $50

copayment. No specialists are covered. They barely are

getting by as it is. Because of their insurance costs, there

is no chance of getting into a home or even a bigger

apartment. How can insurance for everyone be of help if it

causes such a financial burden on families? My daughter is so

depressed. She isn't even excited about her upcoming child

because she is so worried about their future. If we had the

means to help, we would, but we don't. My heart breaks for

her. How can Congress help?

Sincerely, Paula.

Now, people talk about tweaking ObamaCare. I ask: How do you tweak that to help that family?

The American people deserve better, Mr. Speaker. Imagine a health care system that is centered in service. Imagine a health care system that is measured by outcomes, not by Washington dictates.

I know that it is hard for some of my colleagues to contemplate, but imagine, if you will, for me, Mr. Speaker, a health care system where dollars and decisions are left with patients, their families, and their doctor. I see an American exceptionalism at work, where families and innovation and compassion drive the highest quality of care.

Members of Congress, Representatives of the people, do not settle. Don't settle for just tweaking a bad program that hurts more than it helps, that controls more than it empowers. There are too many Members of this body that are content with just getting this health care law to be good enough. I am here to tell you that, for the American people, good enough just isn't good enough.

I reject the downward spiral of mediocrity and government takeover of health care. I refuse to pursue the administration's path of fear, blame, and failure. I oppose this motion to recommit a bad health care law.

It is time for us, for this body, to advance the policies and the principles which have lifted more people out of poverty, fueled more freedom, and driven more dreams than any other set of principles in the history of the world. I ask this body to come with me, boldly step forward and unleash that American exceptionalism that produces the health care solutions that this family is worthy of and every hardworking American in this country is worthy of.

May God continue to bless this great, exceptional country.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Amendment XIV, section 1:

``All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.''