Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak very well about H.R. 641, the Conservation Easement Incentive legislation. I get confused sometimes by the discussion on the floor.

If I understand it, if you do it for a year or 2 years and you don't pay for it, that is good policy, that is good legislation, that is good for America, but if you go beyond that time, it is not good.

This is a piece of legislation that came up in 2006. In fact, my colleague Mr. Thompson brought it up. He and Chairman Camp did it. He and Mr. Gerlach, who retired last year, did it. This just makes good sense.

I can tell you something about this. It is not only bipartisan, it is bicameral. It is in the President's budget. If you are talking about trying to work together to get somewhere, isn't this it? Isn't this it?

Sometimes, we always try to bend the rules for something else, but this is about conservation. This is about allowing a landowner to set property aside. So I don't care if you are a farmer or a rancher, I don't care if you are a hunter or a hiker, I don't care if you

like to look at birds or hunt birds, there are over 65 associations around the country that say, Please do more of this, set this ground apart.

Now, if you are a farmer or a rancher, you can still work that ground. All you are saying is this is a set-aside, this ground can't be developed, we can't lose this ground.

This is so basic who we are as Americans. We are saying, Let's preserve what we have. Let's just keep what we have. Let's make sure that our kids can hunt, hike, and swim. Let's make sure that they can fish. Let's make sure they can do all those wonderful things that this land affords us to do.

Then it becomes, Gosh, this is about politics. It is not about policy. It is good policy. It has never been paid for. I just don't understand why, all of a sudden--now--why is it paid for?

I am only starting my third session here; but, my God, you would never do this back home. I wouldn't do this. I am an automobile dealer.

I couldn't do this to a customer and say, Yeah, it is okay now, but do you know what, later on, you are going to have to pay me for it.

And they say, Wait a minute, I thought you gave it to me.

No, no. We are going to take it back.

Mr. Speaker, there are millions of acres that have been set aside now. Why not give some permanency to this? We talk about tax reform. Let's give it some permanency. Let's do what makes sense for all of America.

Let's talk about preserving America's ground and making sure it doesn't go under development. People can still farm it, and they can still ranch on it. It just makes good sense.

Mr. Speaker, I am just asking our friends on the other side, let's think about what is good for the people we represent and not what is just good for the moment.

We have always done this in the past. It has only become a problem now because it is not a 1-year extender or a 2-year extender. Now, all of a sudden, we say, Well, let's just let people know this is the way it is always going to be from now until all time.

But, no, that is a bad idea to do that. You don't want to give anybody certainty. You don't want to give anybody permanency.

There is no time in my life that I would ever say to my friends, my family, or anybody I represent, This is just a temporary thing for me. Tomorrow, I may have a change of heart.

I just ask my friends, H.R. 641--Mr. Thompson is on this piece. Let's make sure that we move forward for America. Let's make sure that we set ground aside for the future.

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

I could not be in better or more agreement with you. I have watched for 6 years--an opportunity in a country with the greatest assets in the world--watched our working class, our middle-income people, our lower-income people suffer the greatest harm they have ever had in their life.

If this is truly about getting America back to work, putting food in the mouths of our children and being able to do all these things, the only one way to do that is to have a dynamic and robust economy. That is what I think we need to do.

I have watched it for 6 years. It is appalling what we have allowed to have happen in a country that has been blessed with so many things. It is just bad policy. We can't get beyond the politics. That is what is hurting our people.

It is not the fact that this is not being paid for because we are not manipulating it for a year or 2. The whole purpose of why we should be here is let's raise all America. Let's get everybody looking up, being able to feed everybody. We shouldn't have to have programs for people who can't take care of themselves because, by their very nature, they can do that. We have all of that potential.

I agree.

Will the gentleman yield?

I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Keystone XL pipeline. It is going to create 42,000 jobs. By the way, those jobs that you are talking about that will be part-time, I guarantee you the Department of Labor will include them in their numbers when they talk about how great we are becoming.

This is the most federally reviewed pipeline in U.S. history--it is 6 years--

and the thing about this that is most impressive is it doesn't cost the American taxpayer one single penny. It is privately funded. And I would guarantee you that along that pipeline, as it is constructed, all those communities are going to benefit from the fact they have people working there, staying in their hotels, buying their food, enhancing their local economy.

How many more times do we have to talk about this? This is not a Republican issue, by the way. This is an American issue. A majority of the American people support this, and Democrats and Republicans in both the House and the Senate. It is bipartisan and bicameral. My goodness, how rare is that? Business groups and labor unions. You know what? Even President Bill Clinton and President Bush agree this is something that needs to be done.

News outlets from Bloomberg to The Washington Post to USA Today all say: Build it.

USA Today gets it right. They say:

On the merits, the Obama administration should long ago

have said yes . . . but the White House seems to have been

paralyzed by its fear of angering our ally Canada if it says

no or infuriating Democratic environmentalists if it says yes

. . . It is long past time to say yes.

President Obama must say ``yes'' to new jobs, he must say ``yes'' to bipartisanship, he must say ``yes'' to good government, he must say ``yes'' to America, and he must say ``yes'' to the Keystone pipeline. It is long past due, my friends.

Let's move American forward, let's become energy self-sustaining, and let's be the leader in the world when it comes to energy. This debate is way past time, and the thought that we shouldn't do it now because the oil market is down, my goodness, nothing could be further from the truth.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 596 because I think it is time for everybody that sits in this House to listen to the American people. This is America's House. This is the House of Representatives. It is not the Republican Party who disapproves of the Affordable Care Act. It is the American people.

Mr. Speaker, it doesn't matter what poll you look at, whether it is Quinnipiac, Rasmussen, CBS, FOX News, Associated Press, Gallup, or Pew Research. Overwhelmingly, Americans are saying resoundingly: We do not like this bill. We disapprove of this bill.

To continue to say that somehow we are taking something from somebody, wait until the tax season hits. I am talking to people back home that do tax preparation. They are already looking at--they are at just day two of tax preparation; and, my goodness, what we were told was a lie.

Mr. Gruber could not have been more truthful when he said:

Look, we relied on the stupidity of the American people. We

lied to them to get this passed.

Mr. Speaker, where I am from, you are allowed to make an honest mistake, but you are not allowed to outright lie to people. They will never forgive you for that.

It is time to repeal this horrible piece of legislation that got passed through lies. It didn't get passed through honesty. I think it is very dishonest to sit here today and say that somehow the Republicans are trying to do something to hurt the American people when the American people speak out and a great majority of them disapprove of this law.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize one of my constituents from Western Pennsylvania, Sally Carlow Kohler. Sally is a lifelong resident of Erie County, where she was born and raised, attended college, started her own family, and

has made quite a name for herself within the community.

Sally is a proud mother of five, grandmother of twelve, and great- grandmother of one. In 1951 Sally received a Bachelor of History Degree from Mercyhurst College and then went on to earn her Master of Education Degree from Gannon University. Sally worked for the Erie School District as a classroom teacher and guidance counselor, both unique positions that allowed her to positively influence the lives of many. After 30 successful years, Sally retired from the Erie School District however; she continues to play a significant role in the education system.

Sally has actively participated in over 30 civic organizations, proudly making community service a central part of her life. She has served on countless advisory boards, committees, councils, and task forces, voluntarily committing her time and efforts to support these initiatives. As a result of her educational background and expertise, Sally's participation has been an asset to various organizations, including Penn State Education Association--Department of Pupil Services (President), Mercyhurst College Alumni Board, Villa Maria Academy Board of Trustees, Erie School District Middle School Evaluation Committee (Chairman), Erie Guidance Counselors Association (President), Memorial School PTA (President), Northwestern Pennsylvania Personnel and Guidance Association (Secretary), Wayne School Truancy Prevention Program Board, Wattsburg School District Advisory Committee, and the Committee for Better Schools (Vice Chairman).

In addition to her loyalty to education, Sally is also a dedicated advocate for safety. Her sincere desire to protect the vulnerable and create an overall safe and secure environment has motivated her to participate in local, county, state, and national organizations such as the Northwest Pennsylvania Business Coalition for Homeland Security, Erie County Public Safety Citizens Corps, Neighborhood Revitalization Task Force, Erie Bureau of Police--Citizens Police Academy, Greater Kahkwa Neighborhood Watch (Coordinator), Erie Neighborhood Watch Council (Trustee/Officer), Presque Isle State Park (Advisory Committee), Erie County Juvenile Probation Diversion Committee (Chairman), Erie County Children and Youth Advisory Board, Child Welfare League of America, Children Services Advisory Board, Erie County Children Services, Western Pennsylvania Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee, and Erie County Youth Services Coordinating Council.

Sally's involvement does not stop there, she also proudly associates herself with the Erie Rotary Club, Erie Yacht Club, and Jaycee Wives Auxiliary (President). Sally is a catalyst for improvement throughout Erie County and the determination and passion she displays is truly remarkable. To this very day, Sally enthusiastically participates in 13 organizations, humbly remaining a fully engaged community volunteer.

Sally has built a legacy based on altruism, compassion, and faithfulness. She has set a standard of excellence and generosity that will inspire others for generations to come. Sally is the epitome of a service-minded citizen and her selfless contributions are admirable and noteworthy. On behalf of many, I would like to express sincere gratitude and appreciation to Sally Carlow Kohler, a respectful Community Champion.

I thank the gentleman.

Madam Speaker, make no mistake about what this debate is about. H.R. 7 codifies that no taxpayer money would be given for abortions.

But the real debate on the floor today is about life. We are talking about life in the people's House, on the floor of the people's House. We are talking about a gift from God. We are talking about something that was so well put into our Declaration of Independence--life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, the first of those being life. I understand that there is a serious debate about that.

There are times that people say: Listen, we are not really ready right now for this child. But expectant mothers and unborn children have got to be protected. My goodness, in a nation that recoils at the news around the world, at the loss of life, and says this is horrible what is happening in Syria, this is horrible what is happening in the Mideast, this is horrible that this is happening, then we want to go there, and we want to rush to help people because there is a loss of life, and then in our own country we have turned a blind eye and a deaf ear to the loss of 56 million unborn children. These are lives that were lost that did not have to be lost.

I know there is a law that says they have the right to make that decision. It may be legal, but I don't think it is right.

As far as giving a gift to the 500,000 or so people that are in Washington today in the pro-life march, this is not a gift from the Republican Party to these people. This is a gift from our Creator, Himself, on reproduction. How we have demeaned this and reduced it down to a political discussion is absolutely abhorrent.

Never, never has this country ever turned its back on the most vulnerable.

I have been there for the birth of my four children. I have 10 grandchildren now. I have also held the hands of my mother, my father, and my sister as they died. There is nothing more precious than life. There is just nothing more precious than that.

I ask all my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 7 to answer the American people who say we do not want to fund abortion, to end this debate, and let's move forward.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in very strong support of H.R. 33, and I want to thank Speaker Boehner and Majority Leader McCarthy for allowing this legislation to come forward so early in this Congress.

I agree with the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson). People always say: I wish you guys could get along; just get something done. This is something that we overwhelmingly believe in and we are going to get done.

I think that the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Barletta) has explained very clearly that it has to become statute. It can't be left to be some nebulous fact that is rolling around out there.

Now, these people who do this work--and in Pennsylvania, 97 percent, almost eight out of every 10 firefighters come from the volunteer aspect of it; they are not paid. Yet because of some type of allowance they are given, they fall under the Affordable Care Act, and this would destroy volunteer fire departments as we know them. So what Mr. Barletta has very thoughtfully done is he has put forth a piece of legislation that would guarantee that these folks don't have to worry about that.

Now, I have got to tell you, in the little town that I grew up in and live in, Butler, Pennsylvania, so many people volunteer their time to do the volunteer fire fighting. They are also the EMS. They are the first responders.

Last spring, one of our volunteer firemen by the name of Ryan Sekerski, on his way home from work, he heard over his scanner that a fuel truck had overturned. The driver was trapped inside that truck. He then went to the scene of the accident, got his equipment that was in the trunk of his car, got out, and saved that driver's life. These are the people that we are talking about.

When you come to the people's House, America's House, America's Congress, we look at the things that we can do together, things that just make sense. While we may disagree on some other aspects of what it is that we try to get done, on this, we are solid. This just makes sense for America. This makes sense for all those that lay their life on the line anytime there is an emergency or a fire. They do it voluntarily.

Hundreds and thousands of hours in training go into this. They spend time away from their families. They take time away from personal time, where they could be doing other things, to get trained so that they can help other Americans who may need their help. It is absolutely incredible. It is so American. It is something we look at with a great sense of pride.

And we went to the IRS and said: Listen, what we really need now is a statute that guarantees that these volunteer fire departments will not be put under pressure, where they would have to go out of business.

This is not a health care issue, not as far as it is supplying health care or paying a fine for those that volunteer; but this is a health care issue for every single American for whom these people supply necessary services on a voluntary basis to save their lives and their property.

So I think the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Barletta) is a champion on this issue. He was in the last Congress and the fact that it has come forward again--it is so overwhelmingly supported by both sides of our House that it truly is America's Congress. It truly is America's issue. It truly is an issue that makes sense for all of us. It is maybe our small way of thanking all those folks that do that every day without any pay, just because of the greatness in their hearts.

I thank the chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 30.

I am amazed as to how many times we let politics interfere with policy. I want to tell you who you are really hurting. You are not hurting the Republican Party by your remarks. What you are doing is hurting the American people by your remarks.

This is America's Congress. It is not a Republican Congress, and it is not a Democrat Congress. It is America's Congress. Who have you hurt the most with this policy? Women. Lower-income people and lower middle- income people have suffered greatly.

How do I know that? It is because I am actually in the job market. I have actually hired people. I know the dignity of labor, and I know the harm that is being done by this care act that is totally unaffordable and uncaring.

It is unbelievable that we would come to the floor of this House and somehow make the other political party look bad and turn our backs on the people who sent us. It is not working, gentlemen. We don't have to dismantle it. It is falling apart on its own.

In fact, it is so bad that the President won't even enforce the full law until after an election. Please tell me politics didn't have anything to do with that. Let's do what is right for the American people for a change and quit trying to posture on some kind of a political stance that is just based on fantasy.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from Ohio, but I would also like to thank a lady and a Member, whom I have begun to call our ``lady of our lakes.'' Ms. Kaptur, thank you so much for speaking out the way you do about the Great Lakes, and also Mr. Joyce, a very good colleague and a friend, because we all understand what it is that makes the Great Lakes great. I think that is the whole point of what we are talking about. This is a gift from God.

Now, you have heard Mr. Joyce talk about some of the statistics. But when you think about it, if you just close your eyes for 1 minute and visualize in your mind's eye the continental United States, the land mass. The volume of freshwater contained in our Great Lakes would cover that land mass by 9\1/2\ to 10 feet. It is an incredible amount of water. But, more importantly, it is an incredible gift from God. We have to protect this area. Why would we not?

The statistics that we talk about are overwhelming. We thank a lot of people for being involved in this. But do you know who I want to thank more than anybody else? The hardworking American taxpayers. By our Constitution, we are granted the authority to tax them, but we are also given the responsibility to spend their money the right way. Why would we have a situation where we can't imagine that we would fund the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative? It just doesn't make sense.

One-fifth of the world's freshwater, not one-fifth of Pennsylvania, not one-fifth of the United States, not one-fifth of North America, but one-fifth of the world's freshwater resides in our Great Lakes. I would suggest to people that talk about energy, you can go a lot longer without oil than you can without drinking water. We have an opportunity to do something that just makes sense to each and every one of us. We can get this done.

If I may, just for a minute, to paraphrase Luke 12:48:

To whom much is given, much is required.

Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that this is not an option, this is a moral obligation on behalf of the people of this great country to look at one of the assets that we have, a gift from God, and make sure that we preserve it for future generations.

I thank both gentlemen from Ohio, the lady from Ohio, and everybody else who was involved in this. I especially want to do a shout-out to a young man who works in the Northeast-Midwest Coalition, a guy by the name of Sam Breene, who lives and breathes the lake's initiatives. I want to thank him for his hard work, and I want to thank everybody involved in getting this taken care of.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise because I want to talk about a piece of legislation that I am dropping with a colleague from the Senate, Senator Rubio. It is H.R. 5746. Its title is Keeping America Safe from Ebola.

Now, I know a couple weeks ago, Ebola was in the headlines everywhere and we couldn't stop talking about it. Every newscast was filled with more and more information about Ebola. There was a great concern around not only our country, but around the world about this disease that was so lethal and what were we going to do to stop it.

Well, I didn't know that much about Ebola, so what I decided to do was go back and look in and find out as much as I could about Ebola and find out how we ever became even knowledgeable of Ebola.

I found out that there was a doctor in 1976 by the name of Dr. Peter Piot. He is a Belgian doctor. He discovered the Ebola virus in 1976. In fact, my staff and I said: Okay, we know Dr. Piot discovered Ebola. We know he knows about this virus. Let's find out from him the true information that we need to have. If this is such a dangerous disease, if this is such a dangerous virus, if it is so lethal, shouldn't we try to find out everything that we can about Ebola?

And so I contacted Dr. Piot. He was in London. Let me just tell you who he is.

Dr. Peter Piot is not only a doctor, but he has a Ph.D. He is a clinical microbiologist. He is the director of the legendary London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. He is the former Undersecretary General of the United Nations and a former executive director of UNAIDS. He lives in London, and he has spent his entire life studying infectious diseases.

Despite the fact that when he was in med school and he had said: I am going to study infectious diseases, he was told: You don't have to worry about infectious diseases. I don't know why you would even be concerned about infections diseases. The world is no longer being troubled with or being threatened with infections diseases, Dr. Piot thought: That doesn't make sense. There is no reason for us not to continue to study.

So he did study. In 1976, as I have already told you, he is the doctor that discovered the Ebola virus.

Now, you may wonder, so what was our conversation like?

I said: Well, Dr. Piot, I just want to tell you, here in the States, we are very concerned now about Ebola. In fact, we have written about Ebola. We have said this is a Paul Revere moment when people have to really understand that there is something coming that we are not ready for.

Dr. Piot said to me: You know what, Mr. Kelly, I am glad you called me, because let me tell you a little bit more about Ebola. Let me tell you that right now what the world is looking at, and not just your country but the world is looking at a dress rehearsal for the next great virus. It is true that this one is very lethal, but this is tactile. In other words, you have to come in contact with it some way. But it is constantly mutating, as are other viruses.

And I said: Okay, Doctor. Because our idea was, first of all, you must isolate those who have this disease.

He said: That is right.

I said: Well, I can remember growing up, if you had the mumps or the chicken pox or the measles, the first thing you were told is you can't go to school. You have got to stay home, because you don't want to carry this into a school or with your friends. So we would stay home. They would isolate us from the general population. Even though we were children and we would only go outside and play, they said, No, not until you are clear. It just seems so basic.

He said: It is absolutely basic. We must contain it to West Africa. We cannot let it get beyond those shores.

Now, because of who we are today and the technology we have today, we can be sitting in this wonderful House this afternoon and we can be in Rome tonight. We can be halfway around the world in a very short period of time. It is not like the old days where these diseases, these viruses were carried and it took months for them to get from shore to shore and from country to country. It now can travel very quickly. It mutates very quickly.

So I said to Dr. Piot: What else should we do?

Number one, isolate. Number two, quarantine.

I said: I have heard of quarantines.

He said: Well, you should have heard of quarantines. Back in Italy, when the bubonic plague broke out, they took people who were infected and they put them on an island. They left them there for a quarantine, or 40 days. They were then allowed to come back in if they survived, to enter the general population.

Isn't it amazing that during those days everybody understood you must isolate, you must quarantine. Why? So you don't infect the general population. It is so basic. But yet we are trying to struggle today to find out how do we contain this disease, this lethal disease? What can we possibly do?

The answers, my friend, are so obvious.

The other thing that Dr. Piot talked about--I want you to think about this. Dr. Piot discovered the Ebola virus in 1976. Fast forward, 1986, 1996, 2006, and now 2014. It has been almost 40 years since Dr. Piot discovered the Ebola virus. In those 40 years, we have not developed a vaccine to inoculate people against the Ebola virus.

It is unthinkable that at this time in human history we are still playing around trying to figure out what we should do. The answer is it better be politically correct or we can't possibly do it.

So we are going to risk entire populations. We are going to risk infecting people that have absolutely no contact but come in contact because somebody is able to travel the world freely--somebody wasn't isolated, somebody wasn't quarantined because it doesn't fit our political agenda. This makes no sense.

This administration appointed an Ebola czar. That is as far as it went. We have got an Ebola czar. We don't have an Ebola agenda. We don't have an Ebola strategy. We don't have anything to combat this very lethal virus.

What is it going to take to wake this country up?

And I would just suggest that while it is no longer a headline, it is still very important--not just to every citizen of this great country, but every citizen of the world. And so the answer is to isolate. The answer is to quarantine. The answer is to develop a vaccine.

The problem with developing a vaccine, there are at least four vaccines that are available right now. Dr. Piot told me the greatest advances have been made by our Department of Defense. The United States Department of Defense has made the greatest progress in developing a vaccine for Ebola.

I said: Then why don't we just bring it out?

He said: It has not been tested on humans.

I said: That doesn't make sense.

He said: Of course it doesn't make sense, but that is how these infectious disease concerns work.

I said: So what would the process be?

He said: We have tested it on monkeys. We haven't tested it on humans.

The biggest thing when it comes to a vaccine is what dosage should we be giving. You have to give the right dosage in order to defeat the disease.

Now, think about if we develop a vaccine. We can now talk to the medical providers, and we can talk to the doctors and nurses that go into these infected areas and say: We are going to inoculate you. You are not going to come home with this lethal disease.

How basic is that?

Then the question is: So what are we waiting for? Why are we not developing this today? Why are we not fast-forwarding this? It is because there is a new headline.

Now, we are going to talk about immigration. Forget about Ebola. That is by the wayside. The election, that is ancient history. It was 2 weeks ago. We

are not going to worry about that, but we are going to worry about immigration today. We are going to turn our backs on a discovery that will save thousands and thousands of lives. We are going to turn our backs on science that we know to be true and on a cure that we know is there. We are at the threshold right now.

I want to read from Dr. Piot's book because there were several things that really struck me. He not only worked on the Ebola virus, he also worked on the AIDS virus.

He said: Perhaps, most important, I have seen over and over and over again how a catastrophe like AIDS brings out the very best and very worst in the human species, regardless of whether a person is well- educated or illiterate. These experiences largely compensated for the numerous--coming to a cure for AIDS.

This is what he said: These experiences largely compensated for the numerous--and just translate Washington into this--brain-killing meetings that I had to endure during my tenure at UNH, where I learned not to be guided by the modern plague, the quarterly result, the short- term view, but to focus on the ultimate goal of saving as many lives as possible.

What he is saying is forget the politics. Keep your eye on where it is you are trying to go. Let's fix this problem. Let's save as many lives as possible.

As I finished up the book, Dr. Piot finishes it this way. He says: Above all, the history of AIDS is one of refusing the inevitability of death because of a lack of treatment, defeat, prejudice, and the institutional obstacles in moving mountains beyond familiar territory. It is perhaps the strongest example of global altruism out of a rational necessity in our evermore interconnected world.

As I talk to you today, H.R. 5746 and a bicameral piece of legislation which is crafted with Senator Rubio from the Senate, all we are asking for is to please wake up. Understand that this is truly a Paul Revere moment for the world.

As I talked to Dr. Piot, he said: Mike, this is a dress rehearsal, and I am going to send you my book so you can see why I feel the way I feel.

The title of his book is ``No Time to Lose.''

How many times in our lives have we looked back and we said, ``If only I had known, I would have fixed it. If only I knew what was going to happen if I didn't act, I would have fixed it''?

My friends, there is truly no time to lose. The vaccine is right on the threshold of being available to us, but it is not just Ebola that I worry about, and it is not just Ebola that this country should worry about, and it is not just Ebola that the world should worry about. It is what is coming.

Believe me, we have not seen the end of infectious disease. We have not seen the end of lethal viruses that will cripple us, as a Nation, and could become the weapon of bioterrorists that would use it at any cost without any regard for human life.

We have the ability right now, within our hands, within our grasp, to develop a vaccine in order to defeat this horrible virus. All that I would ask is that we come together in this House, the American people's House--it is not a Republican House, not a Democrat House, but the American people's House--to once again conquer a disease that could infect not only our own American citizens, but the citizens of the world.

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

I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, this is a jobs bill. It is a jobs bill not only in the House of Representatives, but it is a job bill in the Senate.

Now, in the House of Representatives, Dr. Cassidy's bill is about creating tens of thousands of jobs for hardworking Americans. It is about an $8 billion private investment that will not cost the American taxpayer one cent. It is about energy independence, and it is about America taking the lead in energy.

For 6 years, this House has passed pieces of legislation that would have created the Keystone pipeline. Every one of those pieces of legislation died in the Senate. Now, miraculously--and I will call it a job bill--the Senate now is entertaining this because of one job.

The tens of thousands of jobs of all these Americans, who you turned a deaf ear and a blind eye to, are now being answered by the Senate because of one job, one Senator who has the possibility of losing her seat because of the Keystone pipeline not being able to go through the Senate.

Isn't it ironic that we sit here today and we try to spin this into something it is not? It is truly a jobs bill. It is an American bill. It is a bill that is going to create billions of dollars in revenue.

And I would just ask my friends on the other side: Please look no further than last Tuesday. Last Tuesday's vote was a referendum on incompetency, not on incumbents.

I would like you to please open your eyes and your ears to the American people and let them rise. Let us create jobs. Let us reach the energy independence that we need to succeed in the global economy.

This is tomfoolery, what is going on tonight. Is it really about one job in the Senate or is it about thousands of Americans who have been held hostage by an administration that refuses to move forward a jobs bill in a time when they said we have created thousands or saved jobs?

The one job they are trying to save right now is in the Senate, ladies and gentlemen. It has nothing to do with policy. It is all politics.

I thank the chairman for his great work.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4, and I will tell you why: the world is looking for the next great, emerging economy, and you know where it is? It is right here. It is us. It sits here, in this country.

We talk about the American people. What are they tired of? They are tired of political talk and not policy change that will get them back to work.

This morning, Mr. Speaker, 92 million Americans woke up and decided they weren't even going to go look for a job today because there is no hope in finding a job today. That is 92 million Americans.

Now, I don't know if they vote Republican. I don't know if they vote Democrat. I think they are getting to the point where they don't want to vote for either side because all they are asking is: work together to fix America.

The President of Ukraine came to the United States today to ask for help. He didn't go anywhere else in the world. He came here. Why did he come to the United States? Why did he come to America? Why, for centuries, have people come to America? For opportunity, for jobs, and to make their life better.

We sit and debate a jobs package, and we want to talk about politics. We don't want to talk about the policy of it; we don't want to talk about the opportunity that this country has always presented. Are you kidding me?

If there is dysfunction, it is in the Senate, where 360 pieces of legislation are on a table because one man stands in the way of this legislation, and it is the leader of the Senate.

If the American people--and I am not talking about Republicans or Democrats, I am talking about the American people--are to see what actually takes place in this great House, where so much policy has been driven in the past--please, get away from the politics; we are sick of it as a people.

The opportunity is off the charts. A new day is dawning. The only thing holding it back right now is the cloud cover that comes from Washington, D.C., where we refuse to create opportunity and, instead, create anger and we create dissatisfaction and we create confusion.

The American people sit back and say, ``Why me? Why now? Why here?'' That is the great question, ``Why?'' Does a reelection mean more than the redirection of this country?

After 6 years of waiting to see this great country emerge again with all the assets that we have been given--and they are gifts from God, but we haven't capitalized on them--the American people want something done.

This is a package of jobs bills, my friends. This gets America back to work, my friends. This makes America great again. This makes us who we are. This is the very fabric of who this country has always been, the greatest Nation in the world, always a defender of personal freedoms and liberty, but we can only do it when we have a dynamic and robust company.

It is time to stop talking politics and start talking policy. It is time to get America back to work. A new day is dawning, a new opportunity is waiting for us, and the greatest emerging economy the world has ever seen is sitting right here within our borders, and the only thing it is looking for right now is dynamic leadership and direction.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a truly extraordinary and exceptional American, a man by the name of John Kanzius, and to recognize a major milestone in John's dream to find a better way to treat cancer: that is the completion of the Kanzius Cancer Research Foundation's mission.

When I first came to Washington, I was absolutely amazed by the number of academicians, researchers, thinkers, and intellectuals that work and reside in our Nation's Capitol. You know, you listen to these people and you say, my goodness, we are so blessed, as a country, to have this great wealth of knowledge and the sheer brain power, the collection of brain power around here is incredible.

Then you learn about something even more incredible and even more remarkable, and it happens right in your own home district and in a town that you represent. And you say, wait a minute. In Erie, Pennsylvania, a guy named John Kanzius recognized that there had to be a better way to treat cancer.

Now, John is truly an inspiration, not just to me and to his family, but to the entire country and, especially, to the cancer community.

Let me tell you a little bit about John. John was born in Washington, Pennsylvania, in 1944. John made a living as a radio and TV engineer, and was a onetime station owner.

When he retired, John and his wife, Marianne, they had already completed their successful professional life and had raised two adult children. They headed to Florida like a lot of Americans do to enjoy their retirement. But that is not what was in store for John.

In 2002, John was diagnosed with terminal leukemia and had undergone countless treatments of toxic chemotherapy. And this is the worst kind of luck that put John on a new path, and a miraculous path, because it gave John the idea that maybe you could use radio waves to kill cancer cells.

Now, while John didn't have a medical background, he did understand radio waves. And when he was diagnosed with terminal leukemia in 2002, his knowledge of the deficiencies in modern cancer treatment became firsthand.

But it wasn't John's sickness that motivated him. It was the sad and helpless eyes of all those children he would see in the cancer ward when he went in for his chemo and he would see these kids sitting there, their hands bandaged up, their frail bodies, knowing that they couldn't go outside and play the way other children did.

He looked at that and said, there has got to be a better way to treat this horrible disease. And that is what motivated him.

Now, I want you to think about something, because John Kanzius--and anybody who has been through this--my own sister died of pancreatic cancer--as you go through that, as the person, whether it happens to you or somebody in your family, you start to feel what they are going through.

John couldn't sleep at night. And rather than wake Marianne up, you know what he decided to do?

One morning, at 2 a.m. he got up and he went downstairs. So he grabbed some copper wire, some boxes, some antennas, and Marianne's pie pans, and he starts to build a machine.

This is just an average, everyday guy who just got it. He understood that technology. Now, he is weak and weary from his own cancer, but John continued to work. By the spring of 2004, John was feeling a little better and he started to get the word out about his discovery and he started to raise money for more expansive research.

Could radio waves be the key to a nontoxic, noninvasive way to treatment?

If one could find a way to direct metal to cancer cells, could radio waves be the answer to the prayers of countless people, young and old, suffering health failure and an uncertain future on account of this cancer?

Now, confronted with his own battle and the suffering of so many young people, John Kanzius' can-do attitude kicked in, and he set out to demonstrate that radio waves, indeed, could kill cancer cells without harming any other tissue. No collateral damage. And this endeavor became the mission of the Kanzius Cancer Research Foundation in Erie, Pennsylvania.

Now, in the midst of undergoing dozens of rounds of toxic chemotherapy, he encountered so many sick young people facing a similar ordeal. The cancer and the chemo were stealing these children's health, and John was tormented by the reality that was reflected in their faces. He just knew that there had to be a better way, and he went about it.

Last month, on June 30, the Kanzius Cancer Research Foundation announced that the organization would be closing its doors, after raising more than $15 million in donations, a day that John Kanzius had only dreamed about.

And why?

Because the Kanzius research team is now entering into the next phase by submitting up an application to the FDA to initiate human trials to test the possibility of John's vision of curing and treating cancer.

The Kanzius Foundation has funded all the research necessary for the team to demonstrate how the technology works and begin the first phases of these trials, which will target pancreatic and liver cancers, two of the

particularly deadly forms of cancer. If successful, the treatment will be a game-changer for so many of these people with these two types of cancer.

Now, while John is not around to see the culmination of his life work because he passed away in 2009 at the age of 64, I don't only trust, I know that John is seeing what is going on today. And I am so happy to be here and be able to talk about the Kanzius Research Center.

Some of the people are in the gallery actually: my good friend, Mark Neidig, who is the executive director; board president, Maryann Yochim; and D.C. board member, Debra Thornton, to name a few. Again, an exceptional American.

Mr. Speaker, first, let me thank the gentleman from Michigan, Chairman Camp, for bringing this important set of charitable bills, the America Gives More Act, H.R. 4719, to the floor for a vote.

H.R. 3134, the Charitable Giving Extension Act, is a bill I introduced that would make a small change in the Tax Code but make a huge change in the lives of every American. This legislation would extend the yearly deadline for making charitable giving deductions from December 31 to April 15 of the following year so that all Americans can have an extra 3\1/2\ months to give to charity and include those donations in that year's tax returns. No longer would Americans be forced to complete their charitable giving by New Year's Eve.

Let me tell you, this is something that goes far deeper than that, and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Schock) referenced it. According to the World Giving Index, America is the most bighearted nation in the world--in the world. All this is is an affirmation of who we are as Americans. Believe me, my friends, this charitable virtue that we have is not a Republican issue or a Democratic issue. This is who we basically are as Americans.

We look at what happens. I want to you think about any time there is any kind of a crisis or tragedy in the world. Who is the first responder? America, always America. It is just who we are. It is the very fabric of this Nation and what has been given to us.

We have been so blessed by God. And then the question becomes: Well, I would like to give a little bit more, but I didn't know by the end of the year that I was going to have that little bit extra to work with.

I am talking about guys and gals who get up every morning, the alarm goes off, they throw their feet out over the bed, and they want to do it for one reason: to put a roof over their family, food on their table, clothes on their backs, and prepare for their future.

Then they say at the end of that day: I have a little bit left over. I want to be able to give that to a charitable organization.

Is there anyplace else in the world where we see that happen, and happen on a regular basis, day in and day out?

Now this is not just thumping, ``I am proud of America.'' This is a humble pride that says, I thank our Lord and God for putting us in the position where we can actually share that which we have.

``From everyone who has been given much, much will be required.'' I understand that, but please don't turn this into a political argument when it comes to good policy. You know in the depths of your hearts where the American people are. You know what they have done year after year, in good times and in bad times. And we turn this into political theater when we talk about policy that is good, not just for every single American, but for every person they help.

Now, please, on the floor that sometimes seems so divided and wants to pick sides on who is doing the best job, I came here for one reason, and that was to serve the people from Pennsylvania's Third District who sent me here--both Republicans and Democrats, some that vote and some that don't vote--and to serve the needs of the American people.

Have we gone so far from those goals that we decide to make everything political? It is not just enough to agree with every single thing that comes forward, but then we use the hypocrisy, ``But wait a minute. This is not paid for,'' and the idea to pay for it is taxing people more.

I would hate to be in the position where I tell every American: You know what? We know how to spend the money better than you. We will make the decisions of how it gets doled out. In your heart of hearts, when you want to give to a charitable organization, forget it. We will make that decision. Send the money to Washington, because we have done such a wonderful job with it.

No, my friends, that is not America. That is not who we are. That is not who we will ever be. That is not the fabric of this great Nation.

So I ask you to look past your political ambitions and beating each other up, and look at what is good policy for every single American. I urge the passage of this bill.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 405, had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment simply requires that the harbor maintenance funding provided in this Appropriations bill comply with the recently enacted WRRDA law and that the 10 percent funding requirement for the Great Lakes to be met.

The Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014, which this body passed by a 412-4 vote, includes an allocation for the Great Lakes navigation system of 10 percent of harbor maintenance funding provided above the fiscal 2012 baseline, but this amendment is more than about that. This is a bill that really dwells on the Great Lakes.

What a great gift from God this Nation was given with the Great Lakes. One-fifth of the world's freshwater--not one-fifth of Pennsylvania's freshwater and certainly not one-fifth of America's freshwater--but one-fifth of the world's freshwater is in our Great Lakes. There is also a commerce element there.

Now, where does that fit in, and why do we talk about that? Here is why: we are talking about jobs. We are talking about jobs at our Great Lakes. We are talking about 128,000 American jobs, over $33.6 billion in annual revenue, and it is 3 percent of our Nation's gross domestic product.

This commonsense amendment just directs the Army Corps of Engineers to use the allocated funds as directed.

We talk about the Great Lakes, and we talk about it an awful lot. I think that, sometimes, we forget how great this gift is and what our responsibility is.

Sure, it is a gift from God, but it is up to men to maintain it. This great body is looking at this opportunity that we have right now to actually direct the funding that makes sure that we can still navigate through our Great Lakes--that we can dredge our harbors, that we can do breakwater maintenance, and that we can do jetties, which are all of those things that are necessary to keep that line open.

The Great Lakes are truly our door to the world. It is our responsibility, and it falls on our shoulders right now to support that.

I appreciate the chairman and the ranking member's willingness to consider this amendment, and I appreciate their support for our Great Lakes. I would also like to thank Representative Candice Miller for her great work on the WRRDA bill on behalf of our Great Lakes.

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and keep open our Great Lakes to the world.

I yield back the balance of my time.