Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the tremendous contributions of Michelle and Brian Cree of Highland Village, Texas. It is my privilege to recognize the philanthropic generosity of Mr. and Mrs. Cree to the people of Denton County over the past twenty-five years.

Originally from Amarillo, Michelle graduated from Texas State University with a degree in Social Work. She began her career with Dallas County MHMR, where she worked with adults with disabilities for thirteen years. Afterwards, she served and held leadership positions with various non-profit organizations, including Metrocrest Community Services, 100 Women of Influence, the United Way of Denton County, The Salvation Army of North Texas, and the Lewisville Education Foundation. In addition, Michelle has been active in the PTA in Lewisville ISD schools, earning her the PTA Lifetime Achievement Award for her service.

A native of Dallas, Brian learned the value of giving at an early age through the example of his grandparents and parents. His mother, Mary Anne Cree, is a well-known philanthropist for whom the headquarters of the United Way of Metropolitan Dallas is named. Under his capable direction, Brian has chaired the Jim Collin/Steve Allen Memorial Golf Event, which since 2017 has successfully raised over $250,000 in scholarship funds to benefit Denton County students. Brian is a respected business professional, currently holding the title of CEO or Chairman of several companies: SWX Global Design & Production, Cree Visual Marketing Company, Cree Strategic Investments, and SWX Global Container Conversions.

Through their generous contribution of time, talents, and funding, Mr. and Mrs. Cree's efforts have significantly benefited multiple organizations including the United Way of Denton County, the Lewisville Education Foundation, the Denton Public School Foundation, The Salvation Army of North Texas, and the United Way of Metropolitan Dallas. The Crees brokered a crucial partnership between the United Way of Denton County and the United Way of Metropolitan Dallas which allowed the United Way of Denton County to expand fundraising into southern Denton County to better engage local governments, non-profits, and businesses to collectively combat county-wide challenges, such as homelessness and mental health. As well, the couple have contributed over $1.5 million dollars in college scholarships and have pledged $50,000 toward the ``Michelle & Brian Cree SWX Global Design & Production Leadership Giving Circle'', which is designed to increase individual leadership gifts of $1,000 or more for the United Way of Denton County.

I am pleased to join the United Way of Denton County in saluting philanthropists Brian and Michelle Cree as they were recently honored by the organization with the 2021 Dr. Betty Myers Humanitarian Award.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the exemplary work of Captain Mark Bergstrom as he retires after a life of service in the United States Marine Corps and as a Police Officer at the University of North Texas in Denton, Texas. During his over 30 years of service to our nation and the University of North Texas Police Department, he has been a committed leader in his community.

Mark started his life of service in the Marine Corps in 1987. He served as Battalion Communications Chief Billet in the 2nd Battalion 14th Marine Regiment. He received numerous awards while serving including the Combat Action Ribbon, National Defense Service Medal, Marine Corps Expeditionary Medal, and Marine Corps Good Conduct Medal. He received an honorable discharge in 1993.

While completing college classes, Captain Bergstrom joined the UNT Police Department in 1994 as a part-time Community Service Officer. In 1996, he graduated from UNT with a Bachelor of Business Administration in Strategic Management and was hired full-time as a police officer. During his career, Captain Bergstrom has worked and served as a supervisor in every UNT Police Department division. He earned his Master Peace Officer License in 2006.

Throughout his career at the UNT Police Department, he bas been recognized numerous times for outstanding service. His awards include Police Commendation, Supervisor of the Year, UNT Staff Contribution Award, and most notably, a Lifesaving Award.

On the morning of September 28, 2015, Captain Bergstrom saved a young lady in mental distress from being struck on I-35. He observed her wandering back and forth across the multi-lane highway narrowly missing being hit several times. Several vehicles had to take evasive action at high rates of speed to avoid striking her. Thanks to Mark's quick effective response, he was able to detain her safely and remove her from the roadway with no injuries or accidents.

Captain Bergstrom has devoted over 35 years to serving and protecting his country and community. For more than three decades, he has put strangers' safety above his own, and we are indebted to him. I am deeply grateful for his service to our nation and community, and I wish Captain Bergstrom and his family the best in his retirement.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of a great man, Mr. Raymond L. Crawford, Jr. of Denton, Texas who passed away on January 17, 2022. He lived a full life and was a respected business leader, philanthropist and beloved husband and father.

Mr. Crawford was born and raised in Lewisville, Texas where he was baptized at the First Presbyterian Church. He attended Lewisville High School and was a four-sport letterman. As President of the Senior Class of 1958, he led a class trip to Washington, D.C., where the group met with their Congressman, Frank Ikard. He furthered his education at North Texas College in Denton. As a student, he was a football player and a member and President of the Geezles fraternity, graduating in 1963 with a BA in Mathematics.

He was a life-long financial and insurance services professional, beginning his successful five-decade career with Northwestern Mutual with an on-campus interview at his alma mater. The trade association, Million Dollar Roundtable, recognized him in 2018 with a lifetime membership for having 50 consecutive years meeting the organization's ethical standards and sales requirements. In addition, he was recognized by Northwestern Mutual in 1983 as one of its top 20 salesmen in the nation. He prided himself on doing his best to build client relationships based upon trust and integrity, and advising them with the best investment products to protect and provide for those most important in their lives.

R.L.'s love for the University of North Texas manifested in his financial support and volunteer service on many UNT boards, including the UNT Board of Regents from 1989 to 1995 and as chairman and emeritus director of the UNT Foundation Board. He was also a proud member of the Mean Green Club and the UNT Alumni Association. He also actively engaged in his community, serving in leadership roles as the President of the Greater Lewisville Chamber of Commerce, Chairman of Medical City Lewisville, and President of the Lewisville Rotary Club as well as multiple non-profits. He was named Lewisville's 1983 ``Citizen of the Year'', an honorary lifetime board member of the Dallas United Way and a Paul Harris Fellow Rotarian.

He was devoted to Brenda, his college sweetheart, and wife of 57 years. Their marriage was blessed with two sons, R.L. ``Trey'' Crawford III, and F. Guy Crawford. Following in the steps of their parents, both men also graduated from the University of North Texas. R.L. Crawford, Jr. was a great personal friend and advisor to me and my wife. We extend heartfelt condolences to R.L.'s family; he will be deeply missed by his friends and family and the North Texas community.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, this bill we got in short order tonight does not reflect the actual text, and once again, the Rules Committee had very short notice to consider the text without really any chance of being able to read it. Certainly, we are now on the floor with no chance to amend it.

It is supposed to be a NASA-focused bill, but it is actually a Trojan horse, a Trojan horse the Democrats are using to drastically change election law and do it without any input from Republicans, no input in the Rules Committee, no input here on the floor, and no chance to amend it in the House Administration Committee.

It is a messaging bill from Democrats to get a bill quickly passed in the Senate while they have an agreement. We saw how difficult their chaotic attempts to pass Build Back Better became and how that bill eventually failed.

It is ridiculous that such large changes to longstanding law would happen approaching the middle of the night when the American people likely won't realize until after the fact what we have done. And that could be no surprise.

Does anybody really think the American people voted for 8 percent inflation, for gas lines, for gas at over $4 a gallon, and for a chaotic foreign policy that has caused the death of many of our allies and many of our servicemen as the exit from Afghanistan showed?

No. No one voted for that. Yet we are told that there is no problem, that we will just push ahead and we are going to get this done.

We have a lot of issues that we could face, that Americans are facing right now. There is no oversight of the COVID relief bills amid reporting of waste and abuse. Inflation is sky-high; grocery shelves are empty; and the crisis continues on our southern border.

Congress has provided over $5 trillion in coronavirus relief funds, but no oversight. Billions of dollars remain unspent, and inflation is at its highest level in decades.

Right before Christmas the President said everybody ought to get a COVID test and, by golly, he would make them available. They are not available today. I went online and ordered some because I thought, this may be important. I received them 2\1/2\ weeks later. Of course, I paid for them. These weren't free from the government.

But there aren't enough COVID tests, and the hospitals and healthcare facilities are on life support.

What is our administration doing? What is our Democratic leadership in Congress doing? Nothing.

Our response should not be so uncoordinated and ineffective going into the third year of this pandemic. And let me just point out, we have not had a single hearing in the Energy and Commerce Committee, where we have jurisdiction over this, on this very issue.

Another national crisis are the hundreds of thousands of migrants pouring over our southern border since President Biden took office and declared an open border. Our frontline border officials are overwhelmed and under-resourced. The open now sign remains on.

And even more concerning, we require our Federal agents to take a vaccine. It is a mandated vaccine. And yet, the people coming in, it is voluntary. We will give them a vaccine if they would like, but of course, they don't have to take it.

And I will tell you, being down in El Paso last week, it is all about getting these kids in the ORR facility, getting them pushed through and getting them placed with families. The average length of stay now at Fort Bliss is down to 12 days. That means no background check.

What are you going to do when the stories start emerging about how these children have been misplaced and abused in the locations that we now--the government--are sending them? We are providing the last mile to the cartels' business.

These crises remain unresolved. Congress could work on these. We are supposed to do that. We are the people's Representatives, and yet we spend our time in the middle of the night doing something that will never become law.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the tremendous contributions of Dr. Kevin Rogers, Superintendent of Schools for the Lewisville Independent School District in Texas. After serving for six years in that position, it is my privilege to recognize Dr. Rogers' distinguished career in education as he enters retirement.

Kevin Rogers, was born in Wichita Falls and raised in Andrews, Texas, graduated from Fort Stockton High School and obtained his undergraduate degree at the University of North Texas. He then received his master's degree from Texas Women's University and his doctorate from UNT.

Beginning his 36-year long career in education as a Lewisville ISD science teacher, Dr. Rogers was then promoted to a supervisory role as the Assistant Principal of Marcus High School. He then served as the Arbor Creek Middle School Principal, Marcus High School Principal, and Lewisville ISD Chief Operations Officer prior to his appointment as Interim Superintendent,

Dr. Rogers' contributions to Lewisville ISD include the introduction of Elementary STEM academies, Pre-kindergarten Discovery Academies, The Colony High School Collegiate Academy, and additional immersive Spanish classes at the middle school level. In order to further bolster the physical well-being of his students, Dr. Rogers also inaugurated Student Assistance Counseling and Behavior Intervention into the register of Lewisville ISD services. Under his diligent stewardship, during the last school year, LISD served over 50,000 students from 13 municipalities on 69 different campuses. His improvements to the school district's operations will benefit future generations of students for years to come.

The University of North Texas previously honored Dr. Rogers with the title of UNT Outstanding Doctoral Student in Educational Administration. The Lewisville Parent-Teacher Association also awarded Dr. Rogers with a Lifetime Achievement Award, and The Town of Flower Mound named him Citizen of the Year in 2016.

I join the parents, teachers, and students of Lewisville ISD in congratulating Dr. Rogers on a long and successful public service career. In addition, I would like to sincerely thank him for the positive working relationship he fostered with my district office and the hospitality extended by LISD in hosting multiple congressional events. Dr. Rogers has worked closely with my staff since his tenure as Marcus High School's principal and has graciously allowed me to hold numerous Town Halls, Energy Summits, and Emergency Preparedness Summits at Lewisville ISD's facilities. As he concludes almost four decade of tireless service to the young men and women of North Texas, I wish him all the best in his well-earned retirement.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, we will immediately consider the Strategic Production Response Act which will require the Secretary of Energy to develop a plan to increase energy production on Federal lands if oil in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is used without a severe energy supply interruption. In November, the Biden administration announced the release of 50 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to manipulate the market and address high energy prices that were created by his policies.

On his first day in office, President Biden weakened America's energy independence by rejoining the Paris climate agreement, blocking new energy development on Federal lands, and killing the Keystone pipeline. These are just a few examples of how this President's policies have slowed our Nation's economic recovery and will prevent us from reclaiming true energy independence.

Releasing oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve without an emergency declaration is unprecedented. No severe supply disruption exists, only a President who seeks to enact radical Green New Deal policies. Low Presidential approval ratings are not the emergency that Congress envisioned when the Strategic Petroleum Reserve was established in 1975.

The path to affordable energy is simple: increase supply to meet demand. Congress must reverse the policies that limit production of energy here at home. Clean energy is a priority for all Americans, but hurting domestic producers will only increase our Nation's dependence on dirty energy products from Russia, China, and the Middle East which are inherently less clean than American energy.

In conclusion, the Strategic Production Response Act ensures that a plan is in place to increase energy production before any President may use the Strategic Petroleum Reserve for purely political purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question so we can consider this amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Morelle for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, this rule provides for consideration of S.J. Res. 33, a bill to raise the debt ceiling by $2.5 trillion.

The Federal debt limit began over 100 years ago, in 1917, and it has been required to be raised 100 times since then.

The problem isn't whether we should increase our debt limit; it is that we have to issue debt at all. Debts are issued to cover the difference between what you make and what you spend. When you spend more than you make, you have to find a way to pay for the spending.

We are in the middle of a spending spree. For the last 11 months, well over $1 trillion in taxpayer money was spent largely on partisan priorities, and more likely coming if the Democrats manage to get a final agreement on the Build Back Better Act or perhaps what more aptly might be described as a socialist spending scam.

On December 10, the Congressional Budget Office published an estimate of the Build Back Better Act, confirming the bill's true cost to be almost $5 trillion, $4.9 trillion, while adding $3 trillion in new debt.

Democrats claim the bill is paid for, but that is simply not true. Now, it is confirmed by independent analysis. Instead of zero dollars, the bill will create a carve-out for deducting State and local taxes that will add almost $250 billion to the deficit.

It will protect so-called green companies from a new minimum tax and provide $12,500 tax credits for purchasing an electric vehicle so long as that vehicle is made using union labor.

The bill will also provide billions in benefits to the wealthy through the expanded child tax credit that will add over $1.5 trillion to the deficit if this policy is made permanent, and that is, of course, what is being pushed for in the Build Back Better Act.

Additionally, the $1 trillion infrastructure bill that the Democrats just ushered into law requires a $118 billion transfer from Treasury to the highway trust fund, which Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has stated will occur tomorrow, December 15.

Republicans will not support raising the debt limit while Democrats push through trillions of dollars for purely partisan political spending, thereby depleting our Treasury not just for today but for generations to come.

Unfortunately, all this spending will only exacerbate the very high rate of inflation, inflation which has been crippling so many Americans and causing so much suffering in the last 11 months.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in November, the Consumer Price Index rose by 0.8 percent, but 6.8 percent over the last 12 months. The most significant increase was in the energy sector, while prices went up for gas, food, shelter, and vehicles, among other things.

Here is the real bad news: We have only seen the tip of the iceberg when it comes to inflation. Likely, the inflation rates by March are going to be absolutely astonishing. And that is what happens when you push so many dollars out into an economy that has no way to absorb them.

Sure, 2 years ago we all voted for the CARES Act, a trillion dollars to rescue the country from the coronavirus. And then there was additional coronavirus relief passed in December. And then almost immediately another coronavirus bill in February, and then the transportation bill in September, and now the Build Back Better Act.

The economy simply cannot absorb those dollars that the Federal Government is pushing out. They have got no place to go except to create more and more inflation. And who does inflation hurt? It hurts those people at the lower end of the income scale.

Despite repeated encouragement from the Committee on the Budget Ranking Member Jason Smith and Senator McConnell, Democrats have refused to raise the debt ceiling through reconciliation, which of course is their right to do. They have majorities in both the House and the Senate.

They have had ample time to do this, but they simply would not act. So, instead, a temporary extension that would only last a couple of months happened earlier this year. And now, once again, in the middle of the night,

we are having to vote on a bill to increase the national debt in order to pay for Democrats' social spending and infrastructure policies.

Democrats claim that raising the debt limit has always been bipartisan. But, you know, here is just a little bit of history: In 1993, the Democrats used reconciliation to raise the debt limit with a party-line vote in the omnibus budget reconciliation bill.

In 2010, the Democrats again raised the debt limit by $1.9 trillion with a purely party-line vote. Republicans voted in opposition out of concern for the then-Obama administration's amount of spending that was occurring. A New York Times article reporting on the vote said, ``They wanted to raise the ceiling enough to avoid putting their Members through another such vote before the midterm elections.''

Do you kind of get the sense that history is repeating itself tonight?

Financial success and financial longevity begins years before it is realized. We certainly cannot be reckless and feckless with the Nation's future now. Under no argument is this plan fiscally responsible. Under no fantasy is the Build Back Better Act paid for.

We have to remember to be beneficial to the American people, we have to be demonstrative of representative government. We should not be raising the debt limit to allow for continuation of partisan social spending.

Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to the rule, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, Republicans will amend the rule to immediately consider an amendment to the Democrats' fiscal year 2022 budget resolution to replace the socialist $5 trillion tax-and-spend reconciliation instructions with new instructions for authorizing committees to produce legislation to reduce the deficit to combat runaway inflation currently fueling the highest price spike in 40 years and to get Americans back to work.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of this amendment into the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith), the ranking member of the Budget Committee, to explain the amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Fallon).

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

Mr. Speaker, just before I close, I do want to take a moment and acknowledge that it was 1 year ago last night that the FedEx trucks departed from Kalamazoo, Michigan, carrying the very first doses of what we now know as the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.

And when you stop and reflect upon what was accomplished between the middle of May and the middle of December of 2020, it truly was a startling scientific accomplishment; not one, not two, but three vaccines.

We told ourselves at the beginning of the Operation Warp Speed process that if we got 40 to 45 percent effectiveness, it would be a victory, and those vaccines delivered in excess of 90 percent. People might quibble and say, well, you have to get a booster or you have to get an additional shot. We are so fortunate to have those tools to be able to combat this illness.

We are by no means through, but then even just last week the additional news that now an oral medication, the so-called Tamiflu for coronavirus, is now available, which I submit is going to change with the application of additional therapeutics, is really going to change the equation, and I just wanted to take a minute and reflect on that.

We are, again, just one day past the 1-year anniversary of Kalamazoo, Michigan, delivering that vaccine to the world.

Otherwise in closing to this argument, raising the debt ceiling to $2.5 trillion does seem a tad irresponsible in the middle of unprecedented spending by House Democrats. You have got control of the White House, you have got control of the Senate, you have got control of the House, and you haven't passed a single appropriations bill.

How are we supposed to run our business if we will not do our normal work and pass a budget and pass the 12 appropriations bills?

The Federal Government is currently operating under the second continuing resolution of this fiscal year. One-third of Federal spending is done through discretionary appropriations. When you stop to think about it, that is really not much. That means two-thirds comes through on autopilot. But the amount that we actually tell ourselves we are going to control, the one-third of the Federal budget, we haven't done our work.

Now, we are talking about raising the debt limit to pay for trillions of dollars in spending, and the Democrats won't even fund the basic functions of government through regular appropriations. That actually comes at a cost. It is very difficult to get a phone call answered by a Federal agency, by the head of a Federal agency, by a Cabinet Secretary because we no longer make the appropriations.

These folks are relatively new on the job, within the last year. They have no history of knowing that they have to come to Congress to get their appropriations bills passed. So as a consequence, they basically ignore the Congress.

Democrats are desperate to push through as much social spending as they can because the balance of power, quite likely, is getting ready to change. Why else would they be so reckless in such a short amount of time with Americans' hard-earned taxpayer dollars? We cannot push inflation higher by raising the debt limit to allow for trillions in additional partisan spending.

Mr. Speaker, here is the real problem that is going to lead to that balance of power shift. It is inflation that is at levels that have not been seen since the Carter administration.

Again, my prediction is, over the next 6 months, this is going to become a great deal worse. It will be unsustainable for most American families who live paycheck to paycheck. Then on top of that, it is a spending level that is driving that inflation level. And we are doing nothing, nothing to put the brakes on that.

Mr. Speaker, again, I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question so we can get to the talk for fiscal sanity and ``no'' on the underlying measure, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I do intend to speak on my amendment to H.R. 5314, but I do have to reference the remarks recently made by the Democratic Speaker of the House on her testimony.

Look, it is no news flash that Democrats dislike the former President. Democrats dislike President Trump. The news flash is they really fear the former President, and that is what this legislation is all about, because their fear is so intense and so overreaching and so preoccupying in their lives, they can think of nothing else.

I do want to thank my friend from Kentucky for including me in this en bloc discussion. I think the amendments that Mr. Comer and I are offering are an important addition to this bill, the so-called Protecting Our Democracy Act.

Title II of this bill extends the statute of limitations for offenses allegedly committed by a sitting President or a Vice President for the duration of their tenure and any period of time preceding their tenure in office. While we can agree with the title of the section, ``No President is Above the Law,'' this section further sets our President and Vice President apart.

Under current law, elected officials, President and Vice President, may be investigated for alleged commissions of crimes, and any information can then be brought before Congress where Congress can then choose to remove that official from office via impeachment.

We know how facile our Democratic majority has been with the tool of impeachment in the past 2 years. If impeached and removed from office, that individual, the President or Vice President, would then be open to prosecution to the fullest extent of the law, well within the statute of limitations, just like every other American.

Additionally, Title II is very likely unconstitutional, as the Sixth Amendment's speedy trial clause protects the accused against unreasonable delays between an indictment and a trial. Extending the statute of limitations in Title II of this bill would only further politicize the Presidency and Vice Presidency, further politicize the impeachment process, which the Democrats have elevated to a high art, and make holders of those offices the targets of politically motivated investigations during and after their terms.

For those reasons, I urge support of this amendment and support of Mr. Comer's amendment.

Mr. Speaker, you just have to ask yourself what in the heck is going on here. Doctors across this country, our heroes in the healthcare fight that we have been in the last 2 years, are facing significant cuts in their Medicare reimbursements.

Instead of getting a commitment from Congress that we are going to work on solving this problem, what do they get? A gimmicky bill tying a reprieve on the Medicare cuts to the debt limit. That is a dead duck over in the other body. It is not going to pass, and the majority knows it is not going to pass.

Why don't we face the facts and get things done correctly from the start?

Unfortunately, our authorizing committees, the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Ways and Means, have not seen fit to hold the hearings that would be necessary to provide a solution to this problem. Our providers need and deserve that certainty.

Mr. Speaker, I don't know what it is like in your part of the State, but in my part of the State, we are experiencing a shortage of healthcare workers. We are also seeing hospital consolidation becoming more and more prevalent. The coming Medicare cuts will only worsen these issues.

Furthermore, we have not even considered the cuts due to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services clinical labor pricing updates. Some studies are now indicating that these cuts could be as significant as 20 percent for some providers.

Many of these same providers serve our seniors. They serve patients in critical care populations, including cancer patients and patients receiving critical surgeries or procedures. Overall, the clinical labor pricing updates will have an extreme impact on health quality, as they will affect our most vulnerable populations.

I appreciate the fact that the rebate rule is not included as an offset in this bill. That truly was budgetary smoke and mirrors that had no place in a rational discussion of this. But I do have to ask why we are reluctant to reuse the dollars in the Provider Relief Fund as an offset instead of creating a new Medicare sequester that, oh, yeah, won't start until 10 years from now.

Mr. Speaker, we are all familiar here with kicking the can down the road and robbing Peter to pay Paul. We are basically now robbing Peter's grandchildren to pay Paul. The Provider Relief Fund is sitting there waiting to be used. It would provide targeted relief to providers consistent with the original intent of the fund that we all voted for on March 27, 2020.

Unfortunately, this bill includes a one-time procedural change to allow the Senate to originate and pass a debt limit increase with only 51 votes. The Medicare issue and the debt limit do not belong in the same room, let alone in the same bill.

Protecting patients' access to care and helping healthcare providers during a public health emergency is a bipartisan issue. It deserves sincere congressional action, and it is time we work on meaningful payment reform.

Madam Speaker, I am on the Energy and Commerce Committee; I am on the Budget Committee; and I am on the Rules Committee. But I am also a co-chair of the House Republican Doctors Caucus, and last week, the Surgeon General of the United States, Vivek Murthy, asked if he could come talk to us. We made that a bipartisan meeting. We included Democrats who are physicians as well in that meeting.

Dr. Murthy was concerned primarily about physician burnout, and he has encountered a lot of it since he has reassumed his role as the Surgeon General, the Nation's top doctor.

We shared with the Surgeon General one of the principal drivers. Yes, the pandemic has been a problem. Yes, cutting down elective surgeries early in the pandemic and clobbering the cash flow in offices was a problem. But one of the real drivers of physician burnout today is constant, constant haggling and no solution over these cuts.

A year ago, we were here on this floor talking about a 9.4 percent cut in Medicare reimbursement rates. Now, at the last minute, God came out of the machine and saved the Nation's doctors, but here we are again.

The thing is, we all knew this was coming. It wasn't a mystery. We could have had hearings, as Ranking Member Brady has pointed out. We could have had hearings in our committee, but we chose not to.

We chose to squander that time, and now the Surgeon General is concerned about burnout in the Nation's physician corps. Here is the problem: They are burned out because we won't answer their calls. We won't solve their problems.

We had an opportunity to do it. I asked in the Rules Committee for an amendment to divide the question. We don't have to do the debt limit and the doc fix at the same blow. Let's divide the question. Let Members have the freedom to vote on this issue and vote their conscience, and let doctors all over this country know who stands with them and who is against them.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to commending the leadership of Dan Finch, Texas Medical Association Vice President of Advocacy, upon his retirement after 39 years of exemplary work on behalf of patient care and the physician practice of medicine.

Daniel ``Dan'' Thomas Finch was born on November 16, 1952, reared on the outskirts of Washington, D.C., the eldest of seven children, and the son of a Navy veteran. He moved to Texas in 1982, to work for the Harris County Medical Society before heading to Austin in 2006 to join the public affairs advocacy team of the Texas Medical Association.

Dan's commitment to hard work and serving others began early in life in Catholic school as an altar boy and later with his first job out of University of North Carolina as a bus driver. These early life experiences molded Dan's leadership, communication, and navigation skills which serendipitously led him into a medical association communications position with the North Carolina Medical Society, and then a brief stint with the American Medical Association in Chicago, before heading to Houston where he began a 24-year stint with the Harris County Medical Society, and eventually to Austin where he has served the past 15 years with the Texas Medical Association.

Dan's rapid trajectory and success professionally in the field of medical association communications and advocacy was matched only by his private life as a Renaissance man who developed keen interests as a guitarist, singer, photographer, golfer, motorcycle enthusiast, world traveler, cigar afficionado, Astros baseball fan, home gardener, and outdoor grill master.

Dan has been equally well grounded as a dedicated husband to his loving wife, Becky, for the past 41 years, as a caring father to their daughter, Liz, and son, Nate, and as the loving ``Pops'' to all of his grandchildren. He has offered his many talents to the community, including being a member of his church band in Houston which performed every Sunday in their Hawaiian shirts. His respect among his working peers, his dedicated service to the more than 53,000 member physicians in the Texas Medical Association, and his public affairs accomplishments in both the Texas Legislature and in Congress led to his ascension as Vice President of Advocacy for the Texas Medical Association.

Texas is a better and healthier State in part to Dan's steadfast commitment to the highest standards and quality of patient care in Texas, protections for physician autonomy in caring for their patients, common sense health insurance reforms which put patients before insurance profits, and medical liability protections which prevent lawsuit abuse.

Dan's most memorable advice to his younger colleagues was, ``A doctor long ago told me if we do what's right for patients, we'll do what's right for physicians, and that's always been my guiding light.''

Dan and Becky are now replacing the rolling Texas Hill Country of Austin with a retirement home closer to their grandkids in the rolling hills of Manhattan, Kansas (which is much preferable to that other Manhattan).

I ask that my fellow Members join me in saluting the life, work, and accomplishments of Daniel ``Dan'' Thomas Finch, on behalf of the Texas Medical Association, for a healthier Nation. I am humbled to formally declare Dan a ``great American'' who has earned his retirement spurs and a ``great Texan'' (even if he's not in Texas anymore).

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Assistant Chief of Police William Christopher Chandler and his exemplary public service to the City of The Colony, Texas. After over 31 years as a Texas Police Officer, he is retiring as a respected law enforcement professional and community leader.

In high school, Chief Chandler met a fellow student and the love of his life, Olga. Chief

Chandler and Olga married after high school in January 1986, and he started working at Houston Lighting and Power Company as a Power Plant Manintenance Mechanic. Olga attended the University of Houston on a full scholarship, and the couple intended that Chief Chandler would enroll in college after she graduated. Life got in the way, and while Olga was attending college, they added to their family with the births of two sons.

Following in the footsteps of his father, a police officer, Chief Chandler began his law enforcement career in December 1989, joining his cousin as a fellow officer at the Jacinto City Police Department. He was promoted to Sergeant in 1993 by Chief Joe Clark. In 1996, Chief Clark was hired as Chief of The Colony Police Department, and he hired Chief Chandler away to serve as his Lieutenant and second-in-command. May 28, 1996 marked the first day of Chief Chandler's career at The Colony Police Department.

Chief Chandler was promoted to the rank of Captain in October 1998 and Assistant Chief in March 2012. Chief Chandler worked in the Operations Division overseeing Patrol, SWAT, Crossing Guards, and Bike Patrol. In January 2016, he took over the Support Services Division and oversaw the Criminal Investigations Division, School Resource Officers, Jail Operations, Communications, and Records.

He has been a committed life-long learner. He earned his Associates Degree in Criminal Justice from Collin County Community College, followed by a Bachelors of Applied Arts and Sciences Degree in 2021 from the University of North Texas. He is a graduate of the Bill Blackwood Law Enforcement Management Institute of Texas Leadership Command College at Sam Houston State University in Huntsville. He also graduated from the Federal Bureau of Investigation National Academy, Session No. 275, at Quantico, Virginia. Chief Chandler holds a Master Peace Officer License through the Texas Commission of Law Enforcement (TCOLE) and has compiled more than 5,890 hours of training since beginning his career.

He and Olga are the proud parent of three boys, each who have followed their father into law enforcement and are serving as officers in the cities of Frisco, Plano, and Carrollton.

For more than three decades, he has been devoted to protecting the citizens of the communities he has served, putting strangers' safety above his own. I am deeply grateful for his public service to the City of The Colony and North Texas, and I wish Chief Chandler and his family the best in his retirement.

Mr. Speaker, my understanding is the longest recorded vote in the House in the past has been 2 hours and 50 minutes. This motion has been open a similar amount of time.

May I ask how long you intend to keep the House suspended with this vote?

Mr. Speaker, I have a further parliamentary inquiry.

With one vacancy in the House of Representatives, 217 votes represents a clear majority on your side. The clear majority means that the vote will not change regardless of who else shows up. It is time to close this vote.

Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. Speaker, is it possible to defeat this motion currently with 217 votes up on the board?

And with the full number of the House being 434, this is a majority vote. It is anatomically impossible to defeat this with more than 217 votes. They don't exist.

Mr. Speaker, I would just submit, anyone who is up watching C-SPAN at this hour wonders what in the heck the House is doing right now. All the problems we have to solve, and this is the best we can muster.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman, the chairman of the House Committee on Rules for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, you have to ask, What in the world have people been thinking today?

Congress--which doesn't enjoy a high approval rating in general--the Democratic leadership and Speaker have shown such disrespect and disdain for every Member on both sides of the aisle that it will be very, very difficult to repair that damage.

Now, exactly 12 hours late, we are considering a rule that provides for the consideration of a so-called Build Back Better Act. The final text of the bill, of course, does not have an opinion from the Congressional Budget Office, and the final text of the bill has been difficult to obtain, but now, there for all to see but none to read, it certainly does not provide for the American people.

So let's just briefly recap the series of events: in an emergency August session, the House deemed passed on a procedural vote the budget resolution--not a real vote, a procedural vote--setting the top line reconciliation levels. In September, the 13 committees of jurisdiction did markup their portions. The Budget Committee held a markup on a Saturday night on a zoom call without a score from the Congressional Budget Office.

Speaker Pelosi, Democratic Senators, and the White House then engaged in a new round of negotiations, guaranteeing that after over a month of work--very partisan work--this bill would become wholly new legislation before heading to the House floor.

With only a few hours' notice, the Rules Committee met last week on rushed reconciliation text that did not include language for every title. In the middle of this hearing, Speaker Pelosi decided to abruptly end testimony as her hastily crafted agreement completely collapsed.

We were then called back on Wednesday of this week to restart consideration on even newer text with very little time to review. I wish I could tell you everything that is in this bill, but we really haven't had the time. I guess we will have to follow the lead of Speaker Pelosi at another time when she said we will have to pass the bill to find out what is in it.

This is the most expensive piece of legislation in the history of the United States House of Representatives. The spending in this bill is five times America's annual defense budget, seven times the cost of the interstate highway system, five times annual Medicare spending, and more than the gross domestic products of Canada and Mexico combined. If enacted, new spending will be more than the total combined annual wages of the American people. Think about that for a minute. If you tax the American people every single dollar they earn, you still would not be paying for this bill, but Democrats seem unconcerned with this discrepancy.

This bill includes a Methane Emissions Reduction Program. Methane is a pollutant if released into the atmosphere, but it is also a valuable commodity in the form of natural gas; it heats homes, it runs our plants that generate electricity. Domestic energy protection has skyrocketed over the past few decades, and yet at the same time methane emissions in the United

States of America have fallen 15 percent over that timeframe.

Instead of building on this progress and welcoming the innovation, this provision would provide millions of taxpayer dollars to create a new natural gas tax, increasing the cost of residential natural gas by up to 34 percent.

During the Rules Committee meeting, I submitted an amendment that would strike this methane language and instead provide incentives to build the infrastructure necessary to get this valuable product to consumers.

Stranded gas in the Permian basin could be shipped to major population centers in the eastern part of the the country, or shipped overseas, but we couldn't find the necessary money to do that in a $5 trillion bill.

This package also provided billions of dollars to roll out electric vehicles and electric vehicle infrastructure--basically toys for rich people. There are also subsidies for electric vehicles manufactured using union labor. Ironically, these pro-labor provisions could put thousands of nonunion auto workers out of a job. The subsidies would also breach international trade agreements. I submitted an amendment to remove this language, but it too was not considered.

This bill contemplates an expansive drug pricing provision. This proposal claims to protect research and development, yet the Secretary still has the ability to set the price of any new drug at any level the Secretary wishes, even zero. There is no judicial review of arbitrary decisions.

Additionally, disagreeing with the prices set by the Secretary will result in a 95 percent excise tax. Under this bill, the government will be the deciding factor determining which drugs and which cures can come to market and be available to the American people.

I am specifically concerned about funding for some of the disproportionate share hospitals being cut from 100 percent of what is expected to be provided to 87 percent; and it will prohibit nonexpansion States from implementing uncompensated care pools, who provide healthcare to the uninsured and underinsured.

When the American Rescue Plan was signed into law, it included a vast expansion of the Affordable Care Act premium subsidies. While these subsidies were intended to be temporary, this bill will provide a cliff that people will fall off in 2025, and premiums having risen during that time, people will be left in the lurch. It is bad that this has very shortsighted, very punitive policy on some of the poorest people in the country, and it hurts the very people we should be trying to help.

Additionally, the American Rescue Plan eliminated the eligible income cap for the Affordable Care Act premium subsidies, permitting those with very high incomes to qualify. Experts estimate this will cost $34 billion over the next 2 years and incentivize businesses to stop offering group health insurance. So 190 million Americans could be in jeopardy of losing their healthcare coverage. Remember that one, If you like your insurance, you can keep it?

I am also concerned that during last night's Rules Committee meeting not one chairman or ranking member could tell me when I asked, All of these new gifts that are being given by this bill, in addition to the ACA credit, the paid time off, do any of these new benefits require American citizenship? Absolute silence from every chairman and ranking member because the answer is no. These benefits will be available to people who cannot provide proof or show that they are citizens of this country.

The magnitude of the changes contemplated in this reconciliation package require the full input of Congress, not just a few privileged in a secret room somewhere; like we have seen all afternoon.

Madam Speaker, I urge opposition to the rule, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), the ranking member of the House Committee on Rules.

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Oklahoma.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. Fischbach), who is a valuable member of the Rules Committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy), the designated conscience of the Conference.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Reschenthaler), a valuable member of the Rules Committee.

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Pfluger), one of the newest members of the Texas delegation from out in west Texas, the Permian Basin.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oklahoma (Mrs. Bice).

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Meuser).

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

If we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to immediately consider the Illegal Immigrant Payoff Prohibition Act, introduced by Mr. McClintock. This bill will prevent the Attorney General from making settlement payments to individuals and families who have entered the country illegally for claims arising out of the illegal entry.

Madam Speaker, we have a crisis along our southern border, and this will only incentivize further unauthorized immigration, overwhelm our border officials, and expose additional immigrants to danger.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment into the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Madam Speaker, to explain the amendment, I now yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock), my good friend.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise), a member of the Republican leadership and a valuable member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.

Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time remains on our side?

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, a couple of things come to mind. We are told that, by 2050, the United States will no longer have carbon emissions and that, over that same 30 years, energy requirements in this country, energy consumption, are going to increase 50 to 60 percent. Those two facts do not match up.

It is strange that in this massive bill we have in front of us--$4 trillion, $5 trillion, $6 trillion, who knows--there is not one word and not $1 for nuclear energy, for advanced nuclear energy, for new nuclear technologies and reprocessing of spent fuel. You cannot produce 50 to 60 percent more energy with windmills and solar panels. China can't produce enough solar panels for you to keep up with that kind of energy demand in a zero-carbon future.

We have heard a lot this evening. In fact, the previous speaker recalled President Kennedy. His was the first inaugural I remember, back in elementary school, and he exhorted us, he exhorted the people of our generation: Ask not what your country can do for you.

Yet, we find ourselves here tonight with this behemoth of a bill that is going to spend our children's and children's children's inheritance as far as the eye can see.

This bill was finalized by just a couple of you in some secret room someplace in this Capitol behind closed doors with no input from Members, Members who represent literally one-half of the country. No one seemed to pay attention to when the voters spoke earlier this week and said: We don't want Big Government, and we don't want this creeping socialism that we are seeing.

Yet, the response of this House was to double down on that and jam through this massive bill.

This bill, we are told, is a messaging bill for House Democrats. I will say the Senate is going to rewrite it. I submit you will not like what the Senate rewrites and sends back to you. But I will tell you this: You will not have the opportunity to change anything. Once it comes back from the Senate, it will be a straight up-or-down vote. You will not be able to change one syllable of your bill, and it will become law with whatever the Senate puts in it.

There is nothing here but a partisan social spending scam that is meant to bolster Democrat prospects. Unfortunately, your prospects really took a hit last Tuesday night.

This bill will fundamentally change life in America for every citizen, and not in a good way. The magnitude of the changes contemplated in this massive reconciliation bill should require the full input of Congress.

This should call on us and our various generations to be transformational. Instead, we have watched all afternoon while we are mired in the transactional. You can't be transformational if you are mired in the transactional.

Madam Speaker, vote against this rule, vote against this bill, and vote against the infrastructure bill. Let's do the right thing for the people.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.