Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I want to take a minute to thank Ranking Member Rogers for his tremendous leadership.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the 2022 National Defense Authorization Act. Not only does this bill authorize the necessary investments to maintain our global competitiveness in the face of increasing Chinese and Russian aggression, but it takes critical steps to protect our men and women in uniform.

In particular, this bill authorizes almost $200 million in lifesaving technology to prevent Humvee rollovers. I am honored to represent Red River Army Depot where a significant portion of this work will be done.

The investment will save the American taxpayers $12.8 billion compared to the Army's original plan, and it will save countless lives.

Madam Speaker, I thank the ranking member and all of our colleagues on the Armed Services Committee for their work on this, and I urge final passage of this bill.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 380 on the passage of H.R. 3730, to amend title 38, United States Code, to establish in the Department of Veterans Affairs an Advisory Committee on United States Outlying Areas and Freely Associated States, and for other purposes, my ``yea'' vote was not recorded because I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 380.

Members Recorded Pursuant to House Resolution 8, 117th Congress

Amodei (Balderson)

Bacon (Fitzpatrick)

Barragan (Allred)

Blumenauer (Beyer)

Boyle, Brendan F. (Jeffries)

Burgess (Lucas)

Calvert (Garcia (CA))

Cleaver (Butterfield)

Davids (KS) (Kim (NJ))

DeFazio (Brown (MD))

Dingell (Clark (MA))

Gonzalez (OH) (Armstrong)

Harshbarger (Fleischmann)

Hartzler (Walberg)

Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)

Kelly (IL) (Clarke (NY))

Kirkpatrick (Stanton)

Krishnamoorthi (Levin (CA))

Lawson (FL) (Evans)

Lieu (Raskin)

Lesko (Miller (WV))

Long (Fleischmann)

Lowenthal (Beyer)

Matsui (Thompson (CA))

McEachin (Wexton)

Nunes (Garcia (CA))

Payne (Pallone)

Porter (Wexton)

Reed (Walorski)

Rice (NY) (Murphy (FL))

Roybal-Allard (McCollum)

Rush (Quigley)

Sires (Pallone)

Stauber (Bergman)

Steube (Timmons)

Swalwell (Gomez)

Thompson (MS) (Butterfield)

Thompson (PA) (Meuser)

Tlaib (Bowman)

Trone (Beyer)

Underwood (Casten)

Van Drew (Tenney)

Waltz (Salazar)

Welch (McGovern)

Wilson (FL) (Hayes)

Madam Speaker, I rise today to discuss the unconstitutional overreach shown by this President in his recent vaccine mandate. And don't be fooled, this is nothing more than an attack on frontline workers, small businesses, and the rights of every American.

OSHA's regulatory powers are limited to the workplace and the workplace alone.

Joe Biden is now trying to use OSHA as an instrument in his political game;

mandating a vaccine, and taking away medical freedoms from millions of Americans.

This goes far beyond OSHA's jurisdiction, and it is incomprehensible.

It affects employees' ability to make life-changing, personal healthcare decisions.

This is the textbook definition of ``tyranny,'' and it must be stopped.

The policies this administration continues to hand out are rising prices, bottlenecking our supply chain, and causing a historic labor shortage.

What do they think a draconian fine of $14,000 per employee will do to employers? I will tell you what it will do; it will bury our economy.

Big Government is not the solution. It is the problem.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Dr. Tommy Smith, the Pastor of the First Church of God in Christ in Mt. Pleasant, Texas. Pastor Smith has been in ministry at the same location for over fifty years. He began his ministry as a musician for the church before progressing to a Sunday school teacher and assistant pastor. Pastor Smith is now the District Superintendent of Congregation in Sulphur Springs, Bonham, Commerce, Talco, and Mt. Pleasant areas. He is also the Chief Financial Officer of the Texas Northeast 3rd Jurisdiction of Churches of God in Christ.

In 2020, Dr. Smith received his Doctor of Theology from Newburgh Theological Institute after battling with cancer. He also attended advanced courses from the Dallas Theological Seminary. In addition, Pastor Smith worked for the Marketplace Ministries in Mt. Pleasant as a chaplain, Titus Regional Medical Center as chaplain, and Mt. Pleasant Police Department as a ride along chaplain. He continues to set excellent examples to others in ministry as a Dean of Ordination for newly licensed ministers in the Great State of Texas. Pastor Smith loves the Lord and will continue this ministry until the Lord calls; ``Well done thy good and faithful servant.''

I have requested the United States flag be flown over our Nation's Capitol to recognize Pastor Smith's devotion to God, Country, and his congregation. Furthermore, Madam Speaker, I extend my personal commendations to Pastor Smith for all he has done in service of the 4th Congressional District of Texas.

Madam Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 287.

Members Recorded Pursuant to House Resolution 8, 117th Congress

Babin (Nehls)

Boyle, Brendan F. (Jeffries)

Carter (TX) (Calvert)

DeFazio (Brown)

DeSaulnier (Thompson (CA))

Escobar (Garcia (TX))

Frankel, Lois (Clark (MA))

Fulcher (Johnson (OH))

Grijalva (Garcia (IL))

Higgins (NY) (Tonko)

Issa (Calvert)

Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)

Kim (NJ) (Underwood)

Kirkpatrick (Levin (CA))

Latta (Walberg)

Lawson (FL) (Evans)

McEachin (Wexton)

McHenry (Banks)

Meng (Jeffries)

Morelle (Tonko)

Napolitano (Correa)

Norman (Timmons)

Payne (Wasserman Schultz)

Porter (Wexton)

Reschenthaler (Meuser)

Rice (SC) (Timmons)

Rush (Underwood)

Ryan (Kildee)

Sewell (Cicilline)

Stanton (Levin (CA))

Stefanik (Miller-Meeks)

Strickland (Torres (NY))

Swalwell (Veasey)

Wagner (Walorski)

Wilson (FL) (Hayes)

Amendments En Bloc No. 2, as Modified, Offered by Mr. Smith of

Washington

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to amendment 35, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

The amendment would establish an online public directory of political appointees at the Office of Personnel Management.

I want to thank Ranking Member Rogers for his extraordinary leadership throughout this process. I want to echo his words from his opening testimony on Monday before the House Rules Committee where he urged the committee to ``keep out superfluous amendments that are not related to the Department of Defense.''

Unfortunately, this advice fell upon deaf ears with regard to this particular amendment. This politically charged amendment is wholly outside HASC's jurisdiction. It does not belong in the NDAA.

This lies solely within the jurisdiction of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, and the reasoning as to why we are debating this as a measure in the NDAA is absolutely beyond me.

The Plum Book is already available online, and as of 2012 has already been published in a more searchable and accessible format. Given that the Plum Book is already accessible online in two separate locations, there is no justification whatsoever for the measure's authorization for $7 million in appropriated taxpayer money to build this new online database.

This amendment goes beyond the original intent of the Plum Book by creating a continuously updated website listing thousands of political appointees and senior government officials, which may dissuade good people from serving in future Presidential administrations and risk abuse by enabling political targeting.

A tool that is updated monthly is not a transitional resource between administrations but, rather, a database that can be readily exploited by political activists to track down and target politically appointed leaders.

Political appointees are already accountable to the duly elected President whom they serve, and the President, of course, is accountable to the American people every 4 years and to Congress each day of his or her term.

Even more concerning is requiring the OPM Director to publish a report containing information on any appointee's demographics, including self-identified data on race, ethnicity, Tribal affiliation, gender, disability, sexual orientation, veteran status, and whether the appointee is over the age of 40.

Although the bill language claims to make the information anonymous, the mere fact that OPM would be in possession of this personal information, which is utterly unrelated and immaterial to the position to which the person is being appointed, could have a chilling effect on future political appointees.

Additionally, there appear to be no safeguards in this amendment protecting this personal information from subsequent disclosure, whether through a FOIA request or a cyber

breach. We have already seen during this Congress the multiple cyber breaches at various Federal agencies.

If we can't secure the information collected by the Federal Government, then the government shouldn't be in possession of that information to begin with.

This provision in and of itself is egregious.

Transparency and accountability are essential to our constitutional government, but this amendment neglects the necessary safeguards to protect Federal employees.

Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues, what protections are in the PLUM Act to ensure that the database cannot be abused by activists to target and harass public officials?

What protections exist in this amendment to protect officials who are serving in sensitive, national security positions?

Why is it truly necessary, given that political appointees are already accountable to the public through their service under an elected President?

Don't you agree that this sensitive, private information this amendment seeks is not appropriate for the government to be collecting from our civil servants?

Shouldn't we instead be concerned about the effectiveness of our government leadership?

This amendment is a slippery slope to requiring, collecting, and publishing the same information about our broader Federal workforce.

Until these questions can be answered with sound policy, and our Federal agencies can guarantee the cybersecurity and other security of this information, I urge my colleagues to oppose this nongermane amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would just urge opposition to this nongermane, intrusive, and overreaching amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution 8, the yeas and nays are ordered.

Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question are postponed.

Amendment No. 36 Offered by Mr. Johnson of Georgia

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the life of my godfather and uncle, William James Leavy--a life very well-lived, he passed away February 16, 2021.

Bill Leavy was married to his wife, my aunt, Gloria, for 67 years. They had three children: Cynthia, Cheryl, and Colleen, and one grandchild, Jonathan.

Bill Leavy served in the United States Army in Korea in combat for two full years, and the horrors that he must have seen.

In his later years, he worked as a letter carrier for the post office and was awarded a 50-year gold membership in the National Association of Letter Carriers.

His favorite pastime was poetry, and he was extremely proud of that; and his family knew him as an ``Irish poet.''

I look back on a life very well-lived. He was my godfather; he was my uncle; and he married the love of his life.

He fought for this country because he loved this country.

And if we could all honor all our veterans, and, tonight, Bill Leavy. Thank you.

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

Madam Speaker, what happened on March 16, 2021, in Atlanta is a senseless tragedy. It is an unconscionable act of irrational violence. We grieve with the victims' families, friends, and loved ones as they now must cope with this tremendous loss.

Justice must prevail, and the perpetrator must be held to account for these atrocious murders. That is why it is so very unfortunate that this resolution that we are discussing and considering tonight on the floor came on a rule when it wasn't even marked up in committee. I want to talk about the process--both the committee process and due process.

Taking the former first, the committee process, I have only spent 4 months here in Washington serving this august Chamber, but I did serve 8 years in the Texas legislature. What I noticed was nearly all legislation becomes better when it goes through the committee process.

So if this issue was so important, as my friends on the other side of the aisle state--and it should be, it is very important--then Members would have been allowed to offer amendments through the proper committee process, which might have, and most likely would have, greatly improved this resolution as it comes to the floor today and helped garner broader support.

Our aim should be to send the strongest message possible to the American people that all bigotry is to be condemned and not tolerated.

We are the most diverse nation on the face of the Earth, and our diversity is our strength. We value the priceless contribution of our American brothers and sisters of Asian descent, and that should be the point, not to make this resolution unnecessarily partisan and eventually become specious political talking points.

To the latter point, due process, this resolution threatens the rule of law by assuming facts in an individual case that have yet to be proven. There is no question that the shootings in Atlanta were horrific, but their motivation has yet to be determined under law.

While all illegal violence will and should be roundly and justifiably condemned, it is inappropriate for the House of Representatives to opine on the facts of an individual case when those facts will be decided by an impaneled jury, a jury that will hear all that evidence. A jury should not be pressured into deciding the facts one way or the other based on political spin and partisan pressure directed by this Chamber.

Do my colleagues on the other side of the aisle understand how this resolution could damage the ideal of legal due process by putting forth an assertion of facts before our justice system has had the ability to function?

The trial for this tragedy in Atlanta isn't over. In fact, it hasn't even started yet. This resolution sets a dangerous precedent at this time the way it is written. It is a possibly reckless path to embark down for such an important legislative body as the United States House of Representatives.

While this resolution threatens some political theater, it is remarkable also for what it seems to be conveniently omitting from this resolution addressing anti-Asian bias.

House Democrats have left out the many ongoing and high-profile lawsuits filed by Asian Americans alleging anti-Asian discrimination in schools' and universities' admissions policies.

So why would our friends across the aisle ignore these allegations in this resolution?

At the same time, this resolution includes the strange statement that references the Wuhan virus as anti-Asian. There are other elements that are clearly anti-Asian that are in this resolution, and should be. But the Wuhan virus is where this virus originated.

Historically, viruses are often named for their place of origin. A case in point is the West Nile virus. It wasn't in Montana. It was in the West Nile district of Uganda.

Zika was named after the Zika Forest in Uganda. Ebola was named after the Ebola River in Zaire, in central Africa.

Here in America, we have the Rocky Mountain spotted fever named after a big mountain chain in the West. A disease in my native New England, Lyme disease, was found in Old Lyme, Connecticut.

So is that going to be geographically prejudiced?

Of course not.

There are no resolutions condemning the use of the words Ebola, Zika, or West Nile. So not only have we not seen resolutions condemning these names, they have also been embodied in the United States Code many times in reference to the very diseases being combated. It is just descriptive. It is not insulting by any stretch.

I could go on, but I think the point is made.

We should be more cautious in this legislative body with the statements we pass as certainty and the procedural precedents we set forth in the context of the judicial system. We should be focused on allowing the due process to play out with justice served, and continue to condemn vile and evil acts of violence against all Americans.

We should say this to our brothers and sisters of Asian descent: We appreciate you, we respect you, we love you, and we grieve with you.

When you break down Americans demographically, Asian Americans are a successful group in our country. Asian Americans, in their journey, epitomize the promise of America.

I thought it was interesting, the U.S. Census Bureau in 2019, the median household income for Asian Americans was $98,174 compared to, for all Americans, $68,703. That is 43 percent higher.

The history of the Asian-American journey is one of prosperity, hope, and promise fulfilled. Our Asian-American brothers and sisters should be congratulated, admired, and emulated.

Our hearts go out to the families of the victims.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Arrington).

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

My colleague just mentioned that it must be nice to be born male and White. I was born both, and I didn't choose it. That is the way it happened. And then he went on to say: Must be nice that no one has ever attacked you because you are male and White.

That is an interesting comment because I have a dear friend who was beaten to within an inch of his life in a section of town that was right outside of Duke University, and he was beaten primarily because he didn't ``belong in that neighborhood.'' And do you know who is at fault for that? The very people who beat him. No one else. Unfortunately, hate occasionally fills all hearts, regardless of someone's shape, size, or shade.

And that comment in and of itself was divisive. On this solemn occasion, when we are discussing condemning hate, I just find that unfortunate and disturbing, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleague that no one, no American, should live in fear, Asian American, African American, European American, Hispanic American, or otherwise. No one. Because if you are not safe, then you are not free.

That is what we are here for, to guarantee equal protection under the law. Safety and freedom are our most solemn tasks while serving in this Chamber.

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, I will close with a statement of principle that no House resolution can come close to matching in its compelling moral clarity. It is the statement of one of the greatest Americans who ever lived, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

I will be honest, it gave me goose bumps as a child and it gives me goose bumps every time I hear it or if I say it.

To quote this great man: ``I have a dream my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.''

Asian Americans certainly have demonstrated great character with their numerous and countless contributions to this American experiment.

We all mourn the victims of this attack, including the family members and community they leave behind.

I join my colleagues in seeking the fullest expression of justice that our system is designed to deliver.

That gets back to culture, the culture of this Chamber. Sometimes you hear from the mouth of babes. Well, I am a rookie and a freshman. I have only been here 4 months. This is the most hyperpartisan legislative body in this country, and it is awful. I am not saying that my party may not have done something similar in the past. I don't know; I wasn't here.

I served in the Texas Legislature, both the House and the Senate, and I was very proud of the fact that almost 99 percent of the things we passed in that body had at least some bipartisan support because we worked together, for the betterment of our State, to make Texas better.

Why can't we do that here, for the betterment of our country?

Not everything has to be partisan. I know it is now, but it doesn't have to be. We need to work together to change that culture.

I am a back-benching freshman. I don't have a lot of say. My voice isn't really heard here yet. That is okay. But if there is ever a day where it is, I pledge to do everything I can to work, when possible, on a bipartisan basis because it is better for this country.

We don't always have to score cheap political points, looking down the road for the next fundraiser or the next election. We can really do what is best for the country. Not red America, not blue America. America.

We had that opportunity here with this resolution. It could have been written if we had the committee process. The minority party could have contributed to it. We could have worked together on it. We could have pretty much guaranteed a 435-to-nothing vote. Because, at the end of the day, what I can recall in the Rules Committee was talking about sending a strong message that hate will not be tolerated, bigotry will not be tolerated.

Yes, this country has had an ugly past. It disgusts me. But when you are raised the right way, you see it for what it is: evil, unacceptable.

We are the greatest country history has ever known. By working together, we can ensure that our children and their children enjoy the fruits and the benefits and the labor and the bounty of this country. I wish that were the case with this resolution, because it could have been.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, making D.C. a city-state is unconstitutional, it is impractical, and it flies in the face of the Founders' intent. James Madison said it himself in the Federalist Papers. Unfortunately, our colleagues across the aisle are trying to make this about race. I thought that was inevitable. It is sad and unfortunate.

But let's look at data. In 1800, this city was a White majority, 10,600 and 4,000 African-American residents. Then 150 years later, in 1950, 517,000 White residents to 280,000 African-American residents. For 150 years, this was a White-majority city, and there was no serious effort to make it a State.

But there is a way we can solve this issue because one core argument is a pretty good one, no taxation without representation. It is flawed because there is local government, and they have a Delegate here. But with retrocession, putting Washington back into Maryland, that would give them that added seat and would address that very issue. The GOP is acting in good faith because we know that that seat will be a Democratic seat, but it is the right thing to do.

Madam Speaker, the Biden infrastructure plan is another classic example of the old bait-and-switch. Much like the COVID relief bill, where only 9 percent of the $1.9 trillion price tag actually went to COVID relief, this plan has very little to do with infrastructure.

The definition of the word in the Cambridge Dictionary is: The basic system and services, such as transport and power supplies, that a country or organization uses in order to work effectively.

So we know what it really means: roads, bridges; and, in the 21st century, broadband internet would qualify.

How much of the $2.2 trillion is actually going to infrastructure?

$115 billion is set aside for bridges, roads, and highways; just 5 percent. And under a more broad definition, if we include public transportation and broadband, the total grows to $405 billion, which is still just 18 percent of the new spending.

So where does the other 82 percent go?

Democrats across the country have said their definition of infrastructure includes universal pre-K, climate action, climate justice, eradicating right-to-work environments, caregiving, affordable housing, police accountability, and paid leave.

This ain't infrastructure.

So we all know what this is: The largest corporate welfare slush fund in American history.

Joe Biden will have virtual carte blanche to nepotistically dole out hundreds of billions of dollars to curry favor with allies, supporters, friends, and family.

This isn't the hallmark of innovation, but it will ensure that the D.C. swamp continues to be a festering pool of corruption.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the honorable life and work of a beloved Texan, Mr. Richard Morris Biggs. Mr. Biggs passed away on February 14, 2021, after a full life of almost 77 years.

Richard Biggs was born in Garden City, Michigan on February 15, 1944 to the late Albert and Mae Smallwood Biggs. One of Mr. Biggs' proudest moments was playing basketball for Weatherford College and East Texas State University. He was the owner of Autumn Homes, and held an office with the Realtor Association. Richard is survived by his wife, Helen Biggs; children, Brenna Smith and husband Dave Jr., Brian Biggs and wife Karen and Anissa Smith and husband James; 10 grandchildren and 10 great-grandchildren. He will be dearly missed.

Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the life of Mr. Richard Biggs. His life was one of service and love for his family and friends. He will be missed by all he came across, and his legacy will be remembered for years to come.

Madam Speaker, Clyde Moody Siebman--a purveyor of Texas history, self-anointed Cowboy, avid gun enthusiast, legendary lawyer, loving husband, father, grandfather, son, brother, uncle, cousin, and friend--died March 4, 2021. Though his sudden departure leaves a profound void across many spectrums, it was in keeping with Clyde's lifelong wish to ``break and not rust'' when his time came for the Lord to call him home.

Born November 26, 1958, in Sherman, Texas, Clyde spent his early years in the nearby town of Pottsboro. His family then moved to Plano, Texas, for his father's employment before Clyde graduated from Plano Senior High School in 1977. He attended Southern Methodist University (SMU), where he earned a dual undergraduate degree in Business Administration and Psychology in 3\1/2\ years and then a Juris Doctor in 1984 on a full scholarship. He earned many distinctions during college and law school, including a Departmental Distinction in Psychology for his work to address mental competency and the law.

While in law school, Clyde met Carol Ann Mumm, a fellow SMU law student. They married the year after graduation and were blessed with a beautiful 35-year marriage. They practiced law together before Carol became a judge and were the proud parents of beloved daughter, Elizabeth Forrest, who followed in their footsteps, became a lawyer, and is now a named partner in the firm her father co-founded--Siebman Forrest LLP. Clyde's niece, Becca Skupin, joined the firm in 2019.

Clyde's 35-year legal career earned him the well-deserved recognition of being one of the top lawyers in the state of Texas. Board Certified in Civil Trial Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, Clyde had been included in the annual Texas Super Lawyers list published by Thomson Reuters legal division in Texas Monthly magazine since the list debuted in 2003. He maintained an ``AV'' Peer Reviewed ranking (very high to exemplary) by Martindale-Hubbell for over two decades, and he earned selection to The Best Lawyers in America based on his expertise in Patent, Trademark, Copyright and Commercial Litigation. Clyde was named the 2018 Lawyer of the Year for Patent Litigation and 2020 Lawyer of the Year for Copyright Litigation in Dallas-Fort Worth in The Best Lawyers in America.

Clyde began his federal practice serving as a law clerk to the late United States District Judge Paul Brown. He traveled throughout the district alongside Judge Brown while serving the Sherman, Texarkana, and Beaumont Divisions of the Eastern District of Texas. Clyde has appeared as counsel in more than 500 Eastern District of Texas cases. In addition to maintaining a robust state court practice throughout his career, he regularly represented clients in the Northern and Western Districts of Texas and before the Federal Circuit and 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Clyde was a frequent lecturer on a variety of legal topics and regularly participated in prominent programs and initiatives, including the Eastern District of Texas Bar Association, New York Intellectual Property Law Association, the Sedona Conference, and the Leahy Institute of Advanced Patent Studies. He was also a member of the delegation of attorneys and judges that presented the first patent mock trial at Beijing University in China in 2012 where he delivered a presentation on U.S. trial practices at Southwestern University School of Law and Political Science in Chongqing, China. Clyde served as the current Chairman of the Bench Bar Conference of the Eastern District of Texas and as Chairman of the Advisory Committee for the Institute for Law and Technology of the Center for American and International Law in Plano (formerly Southwestern Legal Foundation).

As he did in the legal arena, Clyde made a profound impact in public affairs. He was a Texas Elector in 2000, serving as a member of the Presidential Electoral College in one of the closest presidential races in American history. Clyde also served by way of Gubernatorial appointment as Chairman of the Grayson County Regional Mobility Authority, Commissioner of the Red River Interstate Compact Commission, Member of the Board of Directors for the Red River Authority of Texas, and as Commissioner of the Red River Boundary Commission, where he played a key role in resolving the long-time boundary dispute between Texas and Oklahoma. Clyde also holds the unique distinction of being named as Conservator of the Riverbend Water Resources District by the 82nd Texas Legislature, helping to settle a decades-long legal battle over water issues in East Texas and Southwest Arkansas. He also played a pivotal role in the transition of both Grayson County and the state of Texas from Democrat to Republican-held majorities. Though a life- long conservative, Clyde was also respected for working across the political aisle when it served the public interest.

Despite his many prominent roles, Clyde is probably best known for his personal generosity, fun-loving spirit, and willingness to help others, both great and small. His greatest pleasures were hosting gatherings for family and friends, barbecuing, stomping around the woods, shooting guns, collecting Texas historical memorabilia, and travel adventures, whether planned or spontaneous. He and Carol gave generously to countless charitable organizations, including the Christian Global Missions, True Options Pregnancy Center, and Preston EMS, among others. They were also long-time members of the Church of Christ in Sherman and in Pottsboro.

Clyde is survived by his wife, Carol Siebman, daughter Elizabeth Siebman Forrest and her husband, John Forrest, and granddaughter Kendall Adele. He is also survived by his mother, Carol Sue Siebman, mother-in-law Florence Mumm, sister Annette Siebman Skupin, whom he loved very much, and her husband Jon Skupin, nieces and nephew Becca, Katie and Sam Skupin, nephews Joseph and Jake Mumm and their respective spouses Kristin and Jessi and children Parker and Joy, Aunt and Uncle James and Clydene Short, and a host of cousins who he remained close with through his life--CB Pippin, Jim Pippin, Robin Towery, Melanie Qualls, Randy Short, and a host of friends and colleagues who will miss him very much. He is preceded in death by his father Newell Siebman and brother-in-law John Mumm.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to call up H.R. 682, the Reopen Schools Act, to get our kids out from behind screens and back in the classroom.

Mr. Speaker, I have only been here 2 months, and in that

time, I have seen some bad legislation. To date, this is one of the worst that I have seen.

The age of consent has always coincided with the franchise. For nearly 200 years, it was 21. Then, in the 1970s, they changed it to 18. Our society has agreed since then, for 50 years, that 18 is when a child becomes an adult. I find it interesting that our friends across the aisle don't want to have 16- and 17-year-olds tried as adults when they commit violent adult crimes, yet they want those 16- and 17-year- olds to have the franchise. Some even, believe it or not, want 16- and 17-year-olds who are convicted of murder to be able to vote while they are in prison after they have been convicted.

Mr. Speaker, this is a horrible amendment, and I respectfully request that all of our Members join us in voting ``no.''

Madam Speaker, the COVID relief bill, which Democrats want to pass and spend $1.9 trillion, is not about COVID or relief. Sadly, it is just another massive waste of taxpayer dollars.

Here is the proof: 91 percent of this money doesn't even go to fighting COVID, and the bill isn't bipartisan. There were 229 amendments by Republicans, 99 percent of which were rejected.

This so-called American Rescue Plan includes $750 million for global health activities outside our country. It also includes $135 million for the National Endowment for the Arts, $135 million for the National Endowment for the Humanities, $50 million for an increase in Planned Parenthood, $60 billion for union pension bailout, and a $350 billion bailout for mismanaged Democratic-controlled States that have run out of money and people to tax.

This $1.9 trillion proposal, which incidentally is $1,900,000 millions, is a colossal waste of money. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting ``no.''