Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 366, and YEA on Roll Call No. 367.

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

Mr. Chairman, my amendment is very simple. It would bar the United States Postal Service from expanding on its current offerings of financial services and banking products.

I think it is important that the Postal Service focus on its core business of delivering the mail. While the idea of postal banking is nothing new, it is still a terrible idea.

In 2015, the inspector general for the Postal Service took the highly unusual step in proposing that the Postal Service should expand its banking services in areas like prepaid cards, savings products, and money orders. Since then, postal banking advocates have used the report to argue that the Postal Service has the authority to offer more banking products, all without congressional oversight or consent. Recent reports indicate that these efforts include using a pilot program to implement this awful idea. That is the reason why I am offering my amendment.

To make things even worse, rather than proposing the idea legislatively, the current strategy of those advocating for postal banking is to institute the program via behind-the-scenes negotiation between government bureaucrats and liberal special interest groups.

This amendment draws a clear, bright line that says that no taxpayer money shall be used to subsidize these quiet attempts at making postal banking a reality.

Proponents of postal banking argue that it would help the under- banked in this country, but the simple fact is that socialized banking is not the answer.

Instead, we have to focus on working together in a bipartisan way around financial innovation as the pathway toward financial inclusion.

Postal banking is a giant step backward. The Postal Service, as I said, should focus on its core mission of delivering our mail.

Postal banking would simply create yet another government program that fails to solve the underlying problem.

Further, if Congress does not step in and stop this now, we endanger our small community banks and credit unions that are already in trouble, while at the same time putting an additional burden on the American taxpayer, who will be stuck footing the bill for this horrible idea.

This amendment protects the American taxpayers from being forced to finance a terrible idea called postal banking. Its passage would also maintain the role of Congress in determining the fate of the Postal Service and postal banking, not government bureaucrats and interest groups.

Mr. Chair, I urge support of my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I include in the Record a letter from the American Bankers Association, the Credit Union National Association, the Independent Community Bankers of America, and the National Association of Federally Insured Credit Unions in support of this amendment.

July 18, 2018.

Dear Congressman Patrick McHenry: On behalf of our

organizations and the Americans we represent, we write to

express support of your Amendment to Division B, within the

Financial Services and General Government section of H.R.

6147. This amendment would prohibit the use of any taxpayer

funds for postal banking and financial services and prohibit

the creation of any new pilot program that would expand this

business practice through collective bargaining.

While the USPS serves an important role in delivering mail

and packages, we are concerned about expanding the Postal

Service's primary role and allowing the government to compete

with the private sector. This would include lower fees,

subsidized services and even competing based on real estate

and office location.

Consideration of expanding postal operations to engage in

banking and financial services is not a new concept. It has

been touted as a solution to help stabilize the US Postal

Service's financial practices. The cost alone to hire

additional workers and retrain existing employees to offer

banking products would further undermine the Postal Service's

budgetary issues.

Additionally, we have reservations about the ability of the

Postal Service to safeguard customers' identities and

information such as bank accounts and passwords. Regardless

of the federal agency, the government has shown it can be

slow to react to cyber threats, allowing bad actors to access

citizens' private records.

It is clear the US Postal Service's financial health is

troubling. Expanding USPS's operations to compete with

private sector banks and credit unions is not the answer. We,

the undersigned organizations, support your amendment to H.R.

6147 and encourage its inclusion in the final appropriations

legislation.

Sincerely,

Grover G. Norquist, President, Americans for Tax Reform;

Tim Chapman, Executive Director, Heritage Action; Tom

Schatz, President, Council for Citizens Against

Government Waste; Adam Brandon, President,

FreedomWorks; Brandon Arnold, Executive Vice President,

National Taxpayers Union; Kevin Kosar, Vice President

of Policy, R Street Institute; Andrew F. Quinlan,

President, Center for Freedom and Prosperity; Iain

Murray, Vice President for Strategy and Sr. Fellow,

Competitive Enterprise Institute.

Who supports the amendment?

American Bankers Association, Americans for Tax Reform,

Center for Freedom and Prosperity, Citizens Against

Government Waste, Competitive Enterprise Institute, Credit

Union National Association, Freedom Works, Heritage Action,

Independent Community Bankers of American, National

Association of Federally Insured Credit Unions, National

Taxpayers Union, R Street Institute.

Mr. Chair, I also include in the Record a letter on behalf of Americans for Tax Reform, Heritage Action for America, Council for Citizens Against Government Waste, FreedomWorks, National Taxpayer Union, R Street, and the Center for Freedom and Prosperity, along with the Competitive Enterprise Institute in support of this amendment.

July 17, 2018.

Hon. Paul Ryan,

Speaker, House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Hon. Nancy Pelosi,

Minority Leader, House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Speaker Ryan and Minority Leader Pelosi: On behalf of

the members of the American Bankers Association, the Credit

Union National Association, the Independent Community Bankers

of America, and the National Association of Federally Insured

Credit Unions, I write to urge the adoption of Congressman

Patrick McHenry's amendment to the Financial Services and

General Government (FSGG) appropriations bill to prohibit the

U.S. Postal Service from providing banking services.

Financial institutions are strongly supportive of the

Postal Service, as one of the largest mailers of any industry

group in America. Physical mail remains an important

communications channel for banks and credit unions. Financial

institutions of all sizes use the mail to communicate with

current and potential customers, to send statements and

receive payments, and to market new products and services to

their customers. Financial companies are also a vital revenue

source for the Postal Service, generating billions of dollars

of annual revenue that supports postal infrastructure. For

these reasons, our members are committed to identifying long-

term solutions to ensure an efficient, self-sustaining, and

affordable U.S. postal system.

Postal banking is not one of those solutions. Although

there have been a number of proposals over the past few years

to turn the U.S. Postal Service into the world's largest

shadow banking system, we are very concerned that allowing

the U.S. Postal Service to provide banking services will be

beyond the Postal Service's core competencies, will raise a

number of serious regulatory and consumer protection

questions, and will present significant competitive issues

for private sector entities. Congress should encourage the

Postal Service to focus on its core business of physical mail

delivery, and not be distracted by expanding the mission to

businesses outside of the Postal Service's area of expertise.

Most significantly, postal banking does not address the

Postal Service's financial challenges, and may well make them

worse. The U.S. Postal Service agrees. The Postal Service has

strongly argued against authority to provide banking

services, noting that providing these products would almost

certainly cause it to lose money:

``The Postal Service's mission is to provide the American

public with trusted, affordable, universal mail service. Our

core function is delivery, not banking . . . Profit margins

on these financial services businesses across the industry

are very low . . . so even if we achieved $1 billion in

revenue and executed well, our cash position would only

increase by an estimated $100-200 million, which will not

materially change our financial condition--we need to focus

on the core delivery business.''

The Postal Service went on to note that to the extent that

more affordable pricing of financial services is a primary

goal of postal banking efforts, ``[m]ore affordable appears

to mean at a lower price level than the free market provides

today . . . Since established financial services firms make a

slim margin on revenue . . . it seems unlikely that there is

any significant room to lower prices without incurring a

loss, and at a minimum, a lower profit margin.''

No doubt, postal reform is a serious topic that Congress

must confront. We encourage Congress to enact legislation

that would reduce costs and increase efficiencies to put the

U.S. Postal Service on a sound and sustainable financial path

over the long run, but the provision of banking services is

not an acceptable solution. We look forward to continuing to

work with you on postal reform efforts in the coming months,

but urge you to support Congressman McHenry's amendment to

the FSGG appropriations bill to ban the Postal Service from

providing banking services when it is on the House Floor this

week.

Sincerely,

American Bankers Association, Credit Union National

Association, Independent Community Bankers of America,

National Association of Federally Insured Credit Unions.

Mr. Chairman, I submit to you that the Postal Service, as my colleagues across the aisle say, is a constitutional function. It is really important that the Postal Service do its mission of delivering the mail.

What we don't think we should do is give a government bureau, through a nonlegislative means, the right to expand into nonessential services for a part of the government that is bleeding money. An institution that cannot balance its own books should not be getting into the offering of credit or the movement of money and funds.

While I am in favor of postal reform, and while I support my letter carriers, I do not favor postal banking. I think it is important for this Congress to put a note down that we are in opposition to that, and that is why I urge my colleagues to vote for this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about the opioid crisis that is devastating families and communities all across our country, including my fair State of North Carolina and my district in western North Carolina.

Like the rest of the country, North Carolina has not escaped the opioid epidemic. My State has seen a terrifying rise in the number of opioid-related deaths. From 1999 to 2016, the number of deaths tied to opioids grew more than 800 percent.

In 2016 alone, there were are almost 2,000 opioid deaths in North Carolina. In just one of the counties I represent, Gaston County, the number of dispensed opioid pills rose to more than 20.5 million pills. That is in a county of just over 200,000 people. That same county experienced a thirteenfold jump in heroin deaths, as well.

While I can list facts all day, it is only by talking to the loved ones who have lost family members due to opioid addiction or those who have come through addiction and are on the other side that you can truly understand the devastating effects of this crisis. Take, for example, one of my constituents, Jennifer Kline.

Jennifer lost her brother, Jake, to opioid addiction. Before Jake became an addict, Jennifer and her brother shared a very, very close relationship. But opioid addiction turned him into a person she barely knew. Even though Jake went to rehab and had a family who supported him through this whole process throughout his addiction, he still lost the battle against opioids.

I had the honor of meeting with Jennifer. She helped me and my staff host a workshop for local law enforcement in my district, where she shared the heartbreaking story of Jake's addiction. Jake's and her story is a powerful reminder that we must do more to address this epidemic. We are not doing enough. The human toll of this crisis is very, very real, indeed.

Like Jennifer, I have been working hard to help raise awareness in my district, the 10th District of North Carolina, against the dangers of opioid addiction. I have been working with local businesses, law enforcement officials, and other community leaders to combat this crisis: I have hosted roundtables and helped facilitate discussions between community leaders on different ways we can work together to combat this crisis and this epidemic; I have been there as local municipalities have received funds for tools that enable safe disposal of unused prescriptions, as well.

Over the past 2 years, there have been dozens of bills passed in the House that will help people like Jake and provide support for family members like Jennifer. These bills address this issue from all sides. Some of these bills help with the prevention of addiction; others ensure everyone has access to treatment and help facilitate their recovery; still, others provide important support to communities affected so that they can have the tools and resources they need to combat this epidemic.

Last Friday, these bills were passed in the House of Representatives together in a bill, H.R. 6, the SUPPORT for Patients and Communities Act. It is now headed to the United States Senate and, hopefully, to the President's desk for signature.

This is an important, holistic step that this Chamber has taken on a bipartisan basis to help combat the opioid epidemic and help prevent the tragedy experienced by the Kline family from happening to other families in this country.

We all have stories. We all have loved ones who have been affected by this crisis. Congress must do more. We will continue this fight until we eradicate this epidemic once and for all.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to draw attention to the ongoing plight of Pastor Andrew Brunson, a Christian missionary from my district in western North Carolina who has been held as a prisoner of the Turkish Government for the last 20 months.

Prior to being arrested by the Turkish Government in October of 2016, Pastor Brunson had lived peacefully in Turkey for decades. He had opened a church, raised his family, and made a life in the country.

That all changed in 2016, when the Turkish Government arrested Pastor Brunson on a series of bogus charges. He has been detained ever since.

Last month, I sent a letter to the Turkish President, signed by a bipartisan group of 154 lawmakers, calling on their government to release Pastor Brunson. It is a long time in coming, but I hope and I pray that Pastor Brunson will be released so that he can be reunited with his family here in the United States.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for making this day possible. Without the architecture of the work that the House Financial Services Committee did, the Senate wouldn't be able to come to terms with this major change to Dodd-Frank.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my Democratic colleagues for participating in these bipartisan negotiations that made this day possible.

The long, dark shadow of the financial crisis is over, and policymakers

are now shifting to the much-needed reforms we need in our banking system.

We know that we have fewer community banks now than we did before the financial crisis, we have fewer community banks now than we did 5 years ago, and our communities are more starved for capital now than ever before, especially with the economy changing and economic growth now coming back to communities across this country.

Now, today, Congress is coming to terms with a bipartisan bill, a bipartisan approach to make our banking system more inclusive and more accessible for everyday Americans.

I am proud my provision that I authored, the Supporting America's Innovators Act, is included, which helps small businesses get the investments they need to grow and prosper. Those communities have not been traditionally focused upon by investors.

I am also proud that this bill allows community banks to get into the business of lending to their community, getting back into the business of mortgage lending in their communities. And I am proud that this bill will allow consumers to freeze their credit reports in the event that there is a data breach or identity theft.

These are bipartisan pieces of this very important package. It is high time Congress gets on with it and passes this bill. I look forward to the outcome of today's vote, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the bill's sponsor, the gentlewoman from Kansas (Ms. Jenkins), for her leadership in putting this package together.

What a week to do it. Now, I firmly believe that God has a sense of humor, and God even has a sense of humor in the collection of our taxes. Because of an electronic filing system glitch at the IRS, because of a technology failure, the American people got a reprieve for 24 hours on filing their taxes. And miracle of miracles, we did not expect this, but a bipartisan bill comes to the floor to address the technology needs of the IRS. God, indeed, has a sense of humor or a deep understanding of public policy. But I think God is in all things, so he certainly is in this.

Now, that glitch of the IRS is just the public acknowledgment of the desperate need that we know this agency has to be modernized. We modernized the Tax Code, now we need to modernize the collection of our taxes as American people. The 21st Century IRS Act is the first comprehensive, bipartisan step to address this problem. Significant reforms are contained in this bill.

Now, take, for instance, my provision in the bill, for example. It is a bicameral, bipartisan piece of legislation that Congressman Blumenauer and I introduced here in the House and Senators Booker and Crapo introduced in the Senate. That section of the bill, section 301, simply says the IRS has to stop using a manual process involving fax machines to verify income.

Now, the fax machine was a fantastic business product that became a consumer product in the 1980s. It is great technology, but it is not modern technology and not the best technology. And so while it may seem laughable that IRS employees are still sitting around using fax machines to process things that in the private sector would be done in an instant, in a second, in less than a second to verify using computer technology, the not-so-funny part is the impact it has had on the hardworking American people who are delayed in getting lending needs or getting their family needs met for financial decisions.

Mortgages, small business loans, student debt refinancing, and consumer debt, generally, those loans have to get a verification from the IRS on how much income they made last year. Now, all we are saying is modernize it, make it the standard of the private sector, and deliver better for the taxpayers.

It is bipartisan. I am grateful that we have initiatives like that in this broader package that we will see across the House floor and hopefully see into law. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes,'' and I thank the leadership on both sides of the aisle for making this day possible.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 129.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my chairman for yielding time today on this important bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Alleviating Stress Test Burdens to Help Investors Act. It rolls off the tongue to some, maybe Bruce Poliquin's, the bill's sponsor, but it is an important thing for us to discuss here today.

Now, hindsight bias is a very dangerous thing. It allows us to overstate our ability to predict an outcome, and it is something that lures us into creating a new system that while excellent at solving the last financial crisis or the last crisis, the last event, it fails to see the next event coming.

Now, it is not something that just fortune tellers use. It is not something that just those with an NCAA pool would use to say that all along they knew UMBC would beat Virginia. It is not just used there. Here in Washington, it is done by bureaucrats that are susceptible to these same fallacies.

So in the wake of the financial crisis, policymakers here in Washington raced to give regulators new tools to help predict future risks so that such a crisis would never happen again.

One of those tools was stress testing. The idea was to provide a method to test financial firms to differentiate between solid institutions that can weather a financial storm and those that would need help. But this crystal ball has flaws. One of the biggest flaws is treating all large financial firms the same, a one-size-fits-all approach, and this includes lumping in nonbank financial firms that don't use leverage with financial firms--bank firms--that do use leverage.

Despite this widely understood concept that capital adequacy standards do not fit neatly into assessing the risks of the asset management industry, for instance, regulators have instead stuck to their rigid methodology to try to square the circle, or circle the square, whatever that phrase is.

Thankfully, Representative Bruce Poliquin has crafted a very solid bill to address this truth and bring it into reality legislatively. The stress tests built after the financial crisis do not work for nonbank financial firms. This is a security show rather than security in fact.

Thus, in a world that constantly throws big and unexpected events our way, understanding the limitations of

predicting risk is one of the most important steps we can take to avoid future harm, and that is what this bill does. I encourage my House colleagues to vote in support of and in favor of it.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of a great American, a messenger for our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and arguably the finest man North Carolina has ever produced: the Reverend Billy Graham.

William Franklin Graham, Jr., was born in 1919 in Charlotte, North Carolina, where he grew up the son of a farmer. In 1939, he was ordained as a minister; thus, beginning what would be his life's calling.

It was in 1949 that Reverend Graham gained the international prominence he is known for today. It was that year that he hosted his Los Angeles Crusade. Originally scheduled to last only 3 weeks, it ended up continuing for over 2 months. Throughout that time, huge crowds came to hear Reverend Graham spread the gospel of Christ.

In the years following the Los Angeles Crusade, Reverend Graham's stature only grew. He traveled across the United States and around the world to spread the good word and encourage his fellow men and women to find salvation with Christ and in Christ. He would fill everything from small churches to massive football stadiums.

According to the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, Reverend Graham preached to over 215 million people in over 185 countries and territories around the world during his life. But his influence did not stop there.

Throughout his ministry, Reverend Graham became known as America's Pastor, serving as a moral compass for our Nation. He served as a spiritual adviser to countless American and international political leaders and civic leaders, including every American President since Harry Truman.

In the 1950s and 1960s, he joined with Martin Luther King, Jr., for integrated crusades, a powerful statement from a White southerner at that time. He delivered invocations at the inaugurations of four American Presidents. In 1983, he was awarded our Nation's highest civilian honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom, by President Ronald Reagan.

Following the horrific attacks on our Nation on September 11, 2001, it was Reverend Graham who comforted our Nation from the pulpit of Washington's National Cathedral.

While best known for his work as America's Pastor, there is much more to Reverend Graham. Foremost among those was his marriage to his beloved wife, Ruth. Reverend Graham and Ruth met at Illinois' Wheaton College, but it was Ruth's hometown of Montreat, a small town in western North Carolina's Swannanoa Valley, which I am honored to represent in North Carolina, that they chose to call home. It is a small town, a humble town.

It was at the Gaither Chapel on the campus of Montreat College where Reverend Graham and Ruth were married in 1943. From there, the Grahams built a home on Montreat's Little Piney Ridge. It was at that home that the Graham's raised their five children: Virginia, Anne, Ruth, Franklin, and Nelson. Certainly, Reverend Graham's public works were extraordinary, but what he and Ruth built as a family is enduring, indeed.

While an international icon for his work spreading the gospel of Christ, Reverend Graham and his family were simply great neighbors to the American people of Montreat and the nearby town of Black Mountain. According to a story in the Black Mountain News, Reverend Graham was known to occasionally attend services at Swannanoa's First Baptist Church, play golf at the Black Mountain Golf Course, and grab lunch at the Coach House restaurant in town.

One of the finest moments of my career was having the opportunity to serve as Reverend Graham's Representative in Washington when his home in Montreat was placed in the 10th District. It was then that I had the honor of traveling up Little Piney Ridge to visit Reverend Graham in his home. The personal kindness and hospitality he showed in inviting me into his home is something that I will never forget.

I extend my deepest condolences to each of Reverend Graham's five children, to all their grandchildren and great-grandchildren who have lost a mentor and a friend. As a nation, we are forever indebted to Reverend Graham for his years of service to our State, our Nation, and to this world. It is only befitting that tomorrow Reverend Graham will return here to Washington one final time to lie in honor in the rotunda of this great building.

Mr. Speaker, I conclude by noting that Reverend Graham has passed on from this world, but he has moved into the kingdom he preached about for so many years. He has rejoined his beloved wife, Ruth, and has finally been called home to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ following a life well lived.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chairman for his kindness in working with me and my team on bringing this bill to the floor today, and I want to thank his staff as well.

What we have today is the Protecting Consumers' Access to Credit Act, a bipartisan piece of legislation that we have both Republicans and the Democrats in the Senate in support of as well as Democrats and Republicans here in the House of Representatives supportive of.

The issue we are dealing with is one of the biggest challenges facing our country, which is the decline of lending to consumers and small businesses in small towns and rural communities like the ones I represent in western North Carolina. It is the same issue facing so many in urban settings as well. This touches all of America.

But the story in rural America is bleak. Community banks are closing at a rapid pace, and small businesses are struggling to find loans. Many Americans don't have the savings to cover a common $1,000 emergency like a car repair. That is not just a rural issue; that touches all American communities.

The good news is, after the financial crisis, innovative companies and banks partnered together to find new ways to help hardworking Americans and small-business owners. They call it fintech.

These innovative companies partner with banks to help small businesses get a loan. They help young people get out of student debt. They help everyday Americans find the financing they need to lead better lives.

Now, this should be something heralded by both parties. It shouldn't be a partisan issue. It shouldn't be left or right, conservative or liberal. It is a good thing that is happening with innovation and different modes of lending and borrowing in this country.

And while this era of financial innovation is brand-new, the actual structure supporting fintech is based on one of the oldest bedrock principles in American law. The fundamental concept is called valid when made.

Valid when made, or what the Supreme Court referred to in 1833 as ``the cardinal rule'' of American interest rate laws, provides the legal foundation for how fintech companies partner with banks.

I don't have to share with the ranking member or other Members of our Chamber that banks are heavily regulated; and if they even partner with another firm, that, too, is a regulated thing. Yet all that changed when the Supreme Court declined to hear the case of Madden v. Midland Funding.

In Madden, activist judges on a Federal appeals court broke with a longstanding legal precedent of valid when made and, instead, held that the 1864 National Bank Act did not have a preemptive effect on loans created under this fintech bank partnership.

Now the legal framework has been around almost for 200 years, and the particular law that we are dealing with has been around for 150 years, roughly speaking. This decision, though, has created uncertainty for fintech companies, financial institutions, and credit markets generally.

According to a study from Columbia University and Stanford University, Madden significantly reduced credit availability in that affected region, and this matters for all Americans because of the effect it is having.

What we saw is loan volumes declined and the average FICO score for borrowers to get a loan increased. That means that, if you are on the margins of society, it got harder and more expensive for you to get lending. So it is a bad case. Simply put, this should not be happening, and if we are serious about financial inclusion for all Americans, we need this bill today. A bipartisan bill, we need it.

And if we are serious about modernizing our financial system, we need this bill passed into law. And if we are serious about helping everyday Americans, not just the fortunate few with unblemished credit, we need to pass this bill.

I am pleased this legislation enjoys support from my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. I want to thank Representative Meeks, Democrat, of New York; Senator Mark Warner, Democrat, of Virginia; and Senator Pat Toomey, Republican, of Pennsylvania, who worked hard on this bipartisan, bicameral legislation. It is important. It is needed. It will have a positive impact on people's lives.

All arguments that have been made against this bill on the floor don't actually focus on what is important and necessary about this legislation. They are straw men that don't have anything to do with the contents of this very simple, bipartisan piece of legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to vote for this.

Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Speaker, is the gentleman asserting there is no law or Federal regulation against federally chartered banks giving loans to people?

Mr. Speaker, that is not simply the case.

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, it is a special pleasure to come and speak to the career of a great public servant, Matt Bravo.

Matt has worked here in the House for 11 years in various roles. He started off as body guy for Leader Cantor when Leader Cantor served as chief deputy whip. In addition to that, he has held various roles in the whip operation, in the leader's office on the Republican side of the aisle, as well as important work on the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Matt Bravo has a great sense of humor, a great love for the game of golf. He is much better at the game of golf than he is at his jokes. We love Matt Bravo. We love teasing him. We love giving him a hard time, but we know his true character. We know how he works intensely to see things through, to grind out the votes to get 218 to pass our agenda.

Mr. Speaker, we know Matt will be successful in this next phase of his career. We thank him for his friendship. We thank him for his service to this House. On both sides of the aisle, the respect that he has gained is immense, and we congratulate him on this next phase.

Mr. Speaker, we thank Matt for his service in the people's House, to his government, to the United States of America's people. We will miss him.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee for his hard work and effort, his staff's effort, and his committee members' effort to put this great bill on the floor today.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is a vitally important bill. This will help all Americans' lives for the better. The name fits for this bill as well. It truly is a tax cut for American working families, and it creates good-paying jobs.

The bill is the result of over 3 years of hard work here in the House of Representatives. It has been clear for years that our Tax Code is broken. We all agree on that. Simply put, it does not work for the vast majority of the American people.

What we do is simplify the Tax Code. More Americans will be able to take a standard deduction, file on a postcard their tax return, simplifying the process. Importantly, it makes us more competitive internationally so we don't lose jobs to overseas companies. That makes us stronger as a nation.

At the same time, it helps small businesses compete with those large businesses, with those global businesses, and makes sure that our Main Streets are strong in America.

This is a very good bill. It is a very good bill, well contemplated, and will have a great impact on working families.

The bill helps families in my district in particular. The Tax Foundation says that average middle class families in my district in western North Carolina are going to see a $2,400 increase in their take-home pay. That is real money for working Americans. It is real money for North Carolinians as well.

The bill also helps small businesses by reducing their tax rates and allowing them to create more good-paying jobs. We need that. Small businesses are the lifeblood of western North Carolina's communities. We need them strengthened.

The same Tax Foundation study estimates that this bill will create nearly a million new jobs nationwide, including more than 30,000 in North Carolina alone.

Now, there is a great debate in this body about the approach we took on this bill. There is a fundamental disagreement between the two parties here.

My colleagues on the left want more power, more expenditures from government, and want to take more from the American people in order to pay for that.

We believe, on the Republican side of the aisle, that American families should be able to keep more of what they earn, make more decisions for themselves, empower communities, empower small businesses, make us more competitive and make us stronger.

I urge my colleagues to vote for this bill, to send a strong message that we in the House of Representatives have a strong tax package for the American people. I look forward to getting this bill signed into law before Christmas.

Mr. Speaker, this morning I rise to celebrate a truly great American and one of the finest men North Carolina has ever produced, the Reverend Billy Graham, who, yesterday, celebrated his 99th birthday.

Born November 7, 1918, in Charlotte, North Carolina, Reverend Graham has devoted his life to spreading the Gospel of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

While Reverend Graham was ordained as a minister in 1939, it was not until 1949 that he gained the international recognition he is known for today. It was that year that he hosted the Los Angeles Crusade. The Crusade was originally scheduled to last only 3 weeks, but it ended up going on for over 2 months as huge crowds came to hear Reverend Graham spread the Gospel.

In the years since the Los Angeles Crusade, Reverend Graham has traveled across the United States and around the world to spread the Gospel. According to the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, in his life, Reverend Graham has preached to nearly 215 million people in over 185 countries and territories around the world.

Reverend Graham has served as a spiritual adviser to political and faith leaders here in the United States and throughout the world. In the 1950s and 1960s, he joined Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., for integrated crusades. In later years, he delivered invocations at the inaugurations of four American Presidents. In 1983, President Ronald Reagan awarded Reverend Graham the Presidential Medal of Freedom, which is our Nation's highest civilian honor.

Reverend Graham now resides where he has resided most of his life, in Montreat, North Carolina, where I have the honor of serving as his Representative here in Congress. While, physically, he has slowed in recent years, the power of his work over eight decades is still felt by us all. Through the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, his life's mission continues around the world. In fact, his family's mission has continued around the world.

Perhaps the greatest testament to Reverend Graham's dedication to the Gospel is how he has chosen to spend his centennial year. Rather than celebrate his work, Reverend Graham is devoting this year to celebrating the work God has done through him.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of everyone in western North Carolina, all Americans, and so many people around the world, I would like to wish Reverend Graham a happy first day to his 100th year.

I thank Reverend Graham for serving as a role model and spiritual guide for generations of Americans. I thank Reverend Graham for all he has done to help those in times of need, and, most importantly, I thank him personally for what he has done for me.

Mr. Speaker, here in Washington, we are in the midst of a major debate on tax reform, tax simplification, and tax cuts.

The plan unveiled by House Republicans today is a tax cut plan for middle-income, middle class families in America. If you are a family of four making $59,000, which is the median family income in America, you will receive a $1,200 tax cut as a result of the plan that we unveiled today.

That is real money for middle class families in North Carolina. Maybe it is not real money in Washington, D.C., but it is real money in western North Carolina.

We need tax cuts. We need tax simplification. We need economic growth, more American jobs, and a more competitive environment in America so that we can keep jobs here in the United States and not offshore those jobs. We need middle class families to win. Our plan does that.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support our efforts.

Mr. Speaker, the Tenth District of North Carolina is home to many excellent schools that develop and inspire our young people to become leaders in their communities. This year marked the 50th anniversary of one of these institutions, Gaston Day School. The school was founded by families and community leaders in Gaston County who were seeking to offer an educational alternative to the area's parents and children. In an article from The Gastonia Gazette published in 1967 the first Head of School, J.B. Davis, lays out Gaston Day's mission when he says, ``We are not interested in teaching only the excellent student. We are interested in teaching the youngster who can achieve.'' Gaston Day has realized this mission since its very first class. In fact, Gaston Day's current Head Master, Richard Rankin, was a student in Gaston Day's very first class.

Although the school may have moved on from its humble beginnings in the former First Presbyterian Church building and is now established in the Gaston County community, it has not forgotten its roots. Over the past fifty years Gaston Day School has graduated students who have not only become leaders in the Gaston County community but in many other parts of the world as well. Today, the school continues to expand and evolve so it can continue to teach its students to succeed in our constantly changing world.

Congratulations to Gaston Day School on fifty years of teaching students and developing leaders.