Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding.

Many communities have larger-than-life figures, people who dedicate themselves to the service of others and change countless lives for the better, leaders who touch so many lives that their legacies outlive them. For my community in southern California's Inland Empire, that figure was Jack H. Brown.

Jack was the executive chairman of Stater Bros. Markets, one of the Inland Empire's largest employers. But he will be remembered for far more than his successes as a local community member than as a business leader.

Jack poured himself into our community using his time and resources to make the Inland Empire a better place, especially for children. He helped establish the Boys and Girls Club of San Bernardino to give the children of our community a safe place to learn, live, and grow.

He served as the founding chairman for the Children's Fund of San Bernardino County, a nonprofit organization that has provided assistance to more than 1.4 million children in our region since its inception in 1986.

But Jack's commitment to his community didn't stop there. Each time our region has been rocked by earthquakes, wildfires, floods, or acts of terror, like on December 2, 2015, we knew that Jack Brown would be there for the community and for the brave first responders who ensured that loss of life didn't continue to grow.

When we lost Jack Brown in late 2016, we lost a constant presence in our community. That is why I offered this bill to designate the U.S. Post Office at 390 West 5th Street in San Bernardino as the Jack H. Brown Post Office Building. While I can never truly repay Jack for all that he did for our community, I am hopeful that honoring his name in this way will restore that constant presence and remind the Inland Empire of the contributions of this truly great man.

Jack and I had a great relationship. Although he liked to tell me that I was his mayor in Redlands, Jack was sure to remind everyone that San Bernardino was his hometown. I am proud that this bill will memorialize his name at the center of the hometown that he loved so much.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to pass this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding time.

Mr. Speaker, I am here today to ask every Member who believed in bipartisan, open debate on DACA here in the House to vote ``no'' on the previous question.

Every one of the 216 Members who signed the discharge petition should join me. Why? Because a vote against the previous question is a vote for queen-of-the-hill rule, and because if we defeat the previous question, we will immediately offer the queen-of-the-hill rule and finally start this debate.

There will be no more waiting for the last two signatures on the discharge petition to materialize. There will be no more waiting until the next discharge Monday comes up in the calendar. There will be no more waiting. We will end this process and vote on queen of the hill now.

Today, Republicans are bringing up two partisan, anti-immigrant bills. Democrats were completely cut out of the process that produced these bills, and, as a result, they will not get any bipartisan support. It is questionable if either of these bills can actually pass this House. If that is the case, then what is the point of all of this?

Is the goal to have a fake debate on DACA and have everything fail so we are in the same place as the Senate? What good does that do?

Dreamers are still left wondering when and what Congress will do to help them stay in this country.

Let's end this charade and actually have a bipartisan debate, and let's pass a bipartisan bill to provide a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers.

Mr. Speaker, this has been a crazy week for sure. But one thing is clear: If we want to pass a fix for DACA, then we need to come together and pass a bipartisan bill. This previous question vote gives us the chance to do just that. Vote ``no'' on the previous question and bring up the queen-of-the-hill rule.

Madam Speaker, I don't have any notes in front of me. I just want to speak a little bit to this body about a topic that has been in the news, even as of this evening, and to just let folks know and to remind folks again about why we are pushing so hard to solve a problem that appears so easy to solve: the issue of the DACA

population and the importance of comprehensive immigration reform, but more importantly, of solving this problem for this population of young people who know of no other country but the United States as their home.

Now, the public might hear terms like ``queen of the hill'' and ``discharge petitions,'' and, Madam Speaker, those terms may mean things to you and me, but for the general public, I just want to crystalize what it is we are fighting for. What we are asking for, a bipartisan group of Democrats and Republicans, we are asking for an opportunity to vote on immigration measures that would offer a solution to these young people.

Now, the measure that I support and that many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle support is one that would offer an earned path to citizenship for those individuals who work, go to school, or serve in the military. That doesn't seem like a stretch for the American public.

The American public, over 80 percent, support a solution for these young people. But in this body, it becomes a little more difficult; and in this body, sometimes things get in the way.

So I don't know the outcome of special meetings this evening or outcomes among discussions that colleagues have in the majority, but what I would remind folks again at home and my colleagues is that there are Democrats and Republicans underneath this dome who are working hard every day to try to offer a permanent solution to these young people-- not a temporary solution that punts this down for another day, but a permanent solution that would allow these young people to come out of the shadows, to continue to work, continue to teach, continue to live in our neighborhoods without fear.

So we don't have a lot of time left, Madam Speaker, and based on what I know today, I don't believe that there are any more signatures signing the discharge petition this evening. But I think what my colleagues and I want to underscore is that, to those young people who feel that this institution let them down once again--or maybe they feel that I let them down--that we are going to continue to work, that we are going to continue to offer our ideas and solutions, that we are going to continue to offer a path to citizenship for those who belong here, who were raised here, who know the United States as their home. That is our responsibility. It is what the Constitution allows us to debate and discuss.

It is unfortunate that, on the other side of Capitol Hill, the Senate had this debate and had this discussion and voted on four bills, some authored by just Republicans, some authored by a bipartisan group. They had an opportunity to debate and discuss what should transpire. We haven't had that opportunity.

Madam Speaker, I know it might not surprise you to know that the last time immigration was discussed on this House floor was in 2010, and it was when the DREAM Act passed, in a bipartisan way, in a lameduck session in December.

So the stakes are incredibly high, and what I would tell folks is that that just shows this isn't easy.

The last time immigration was discussed was 8 years ago on this floor. Since then, folks have felt that burying their head in the sand was a solution enough or just offering a partisan bill was a solution enough.

That is why we decided to engage in discussion and debate and to try to force this Chamber to have a bipartisan discussion and to try to force this Chamber to vote on three or four bills, some a little more conservative, some a little bit more left of center, right of center, but to have an opportunity to vote for one or multiple bills. It is just unfortunate, Madam Speaker, that there isn't enough political will, that there isn't enough strength in this Chamber among the Members to have that conversation.

Now, we could be dejected. We could be upset, and I know folks in our communities will be, but we are going to continue to work. We are going to continue to find a solution. We are going to continue to work in a bipartisan way, as we have done for the past 9 months since the President ended the DACA program. I feel that we owe it to our communities, we owe it to our constituents, we owe it to each other as colleagues to allow this place to do what it should do: debate and discuss bills.

I don't have much more to offer, Madam Speaker, but, I hope that folks at home understand how important this is and that there are some of us who are going to continue to engage in this discussion.

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham).

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her comments and her time. There are few people in this Chamber who have dug in deeper than the gentlewoman from New Mexico, Chairwoman Michelle Lujan Grisham, who actually, when the story of this discussion is told at some point in the future, it was her efforts that really highlighted and started to push us in a bipartisan way when we had conversations among Democrats and Republicans. And one of those early individuals who stood up and said, I am willing to have a real conversation with you if this can genuinely be a bipartisan effort, was the gentleman from Texas, who I have learned a lot from and gained a lot of respect for throughout this process.

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hurd).

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas, not only for calling our attention to the Wired article, but also for his comments about solving this problem in a bipartisan way. He has been a true friend throughout this process, and I think we have all learned a lot from each other.

One of the things that he highlighted on as well was: How do you--how do we--I will speak personally, how do I have a conversation about border security?

My district doesn't touch the border. I can have conversations with individuals. I can go and do my due diligence and talk to Border Patrol, stakeholders, and advocates in the community. But it is going to take having conversations with those Members who represent the border, those Members in Arizona, New Mexico, California, and my colleague in Texas, who has the most mileage of any Member in Congress along the southern border.

We are going to continue to have these conversations because that is the only way we learn, that is the only way we grow, and that is the only way we can chart a course forward, is to do it in a bipartisan way.

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to address this body, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 9 o'clock and 36 minutes p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, June 13, 2018, at 10 a.m. for morning-hour debate.

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

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the chairman of the full committee and the ranking member for their hard work in developing this product.

Mr. Chairman, our nuclear triad and the strategic deterrence it provides helps protect our Nation from the existential threat of nuclear war.

However, the age of its elements must give us pause. Our B-52s, of which we have over 70 in current use, are over 50 years old. Our Ohio- class submarines' lifespan has been extended from 30 years to 42 years, and the first Minuteman III ICBMs were deployed 40 years ago.

With the number of nuclear-related threats increasing around the globe, a credible, safe, secure, and reliable nuclear deterrent is vital to our national security. But just because the modernization is necessary does not mean that we should fail to track how much this modernization process will cost.

Over the next 30 years, we will be replacing our bombers, ICBMs, and ballistic missile submarines while also sustaining and modernizing our nuclear bombs and warheads. Additionally, the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review called for the development of low-yield nuclear weapons, a nuclear-armed sea-launched cruise missile, and continuation of the Long Range Standoff cruise missile.

Our old requirements, in combination with these new initiatives, make cost estimates even more important if we hope to balance our conventional and nuclear force investments.

My amendment would require the DOD to include a 20-year estimate of the projected lifecycle costs of each type of nuclear weapon and delivery platform in an annual report they already produce.

A CBO report released in October 2017 estimated that over a 30-year span the sustainment and modernization of our nuclear forces will cost $1.2 trillion, which, of course, didn't take into account delays, changes to the weapons systems, or understated estimates.

If Congress hopes to provide proper oversight of these modernization efforts, we must have up-to-date estimates that accurately reflect any updates and changes that impact our nuclear bombs, warheads, and delivery systems.

I reserve the balance of my time, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague for his comments. We have had this discussion a number of times. I served on his committee and have a lot of respect for him. But he called this a bad idea. He said that it is a bargain if we just continue the status quo.

Mr. Chairman, the Department of Energy asked this exact question. The Department of Energy produces a fiscal year stockpile stewardship and management plan. It is a 25-year plan with long-term costs. It is required in Federal code. We are doing this analysis in other areas. Why isn't the Department of Defense doing this?

The majority seeks to say: Why even ask the question? We have to ask ourselves, what is oversight if we don't ask hard questions?

Now, I think that there is a reason why folks like the National Taxpayers Union, who have supported this amendment and have said that they are going to score this amendment, have signed on to support it. It is because we need to ask these tough questions.

If we are going to genuinely offer oversight, we need to ask how much these programs cost, we need to plan, and we need to budget. It seems like a reasonable step to take. I appreciate my colleagues' concerns, and I would ask an ``aye'' vote of my colleagues.

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

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, we have a choice today.

I want to compliment the work that the committees have done to reach an agreement on these funding levels. I am not here to quibble with those funding levels.

What I am here to ask for is a chance. If this is the people's House, we deserve an opportunity to address these issues. I have never said this is a bad deal. I have just said this is an incomplete deal. It is incomplete because we haven't had the commitment that we need to address critical issues that are important to our communities. We have addressed some in this: opioids, community health centers. Those are important issues in all of our communities.

But we haven't addressed issues that are important to everyone. Like Leti Herrera who was my guest to the State of the Union who lost her sister in December, who is scared, who wants to know when her priorities are going to be our priorities. She wants to know when we are going to bring up these issues.

And I can tell her, the Senate has a commitment; they are going to talk about these issues. But the people's House has not said that we are going to talk about these issues. We are going to say, well, when the President signs off, then we will have a conversation. He doesn't have a card that votes in these machines. He has a voice. He should be consulted. He doesn't have a voice in the people's House. He doesn't have a vote here with me and you.

All we want is a commitment to bring up a bipartisan, bicameral bill that addresses these issues. All we want is a chance. All we want is an opportunity to address these issues that are important to our communities.

Please, please, please give us that opportunity to have that conversation.

Mr. Speaker, today it is my distinct privilege to pay tribute to the life of Frances Grice. Frances was a beloved member of my community who committed her life to the people of the Inland Empire. Frances believed whole-heartedly that every person, regardless of skin color, religion or economic status, deserved to be treated equally, and with respect and compassion.

A civil rights leader and longtime advocate for racial equality, Frances led the charge to desegregate public schools in San Bernardino, California. As a cofounder of the Community League of Mothers, Frances became a voice for the African-American community in the San Bernardino region, and used her tenacity and compassion to represent the interests of one of the area's most under-represented populations.

Frances later founded Operation Second Chance, a training program to help young people in the Inland Empire gain work experience and become economically independent. Her students still remember her fondly, and her dedication to those who were in need made a lasting difference in the lives of countless young people across the Inland Empire.

Sadly, Frances passed away last month. I speak on behalf of the entire Inland Empire community when I say our region is devastated by this loss, and that her contributions to making our community a better place to live will never be forgotten.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, far too often our brave servicemembers return to civilian life only to find that the skills they have gained in military service do not easily transfer to the job market. These brave men and women who have worked tirelessly to keep their country safe deserve to know that they can thrive here after their service is complete.

For that reason, Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Jobs for Our Heroes Act. Among other critical initiatives to help our servicemembers find civilian employment, this legislation contains my bill, the ADVANCE Act.

The ADVANCE Act will allow Active-Duty servicemembers, reservists, and National Guardsmen to access the same unique testing standards for commercial driver's licenses granted to veterans by the latest surface transportation bill.

This commonsense legislation will allow those serving our country to begin the process of finding civilian employment before they finish their term of service, allowing them to hit the ground running upon reentering civilian life. Our Nation's heroes deserve to know that the process of transitioning out of the military will be seamless, and this bipartisan legislation will help ensure that is the case.

I want to thank the ranking member, the chairman for their leadership. I also want to thank Senators Warren, Cornyn, and Tillis for guiding this bill through the Senate. I urge my colleagues here in the House to vote in favor of this today.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, today I must ask a question of this Chamber: What makes America great?

Do we measure greatness by the strength of our economy or by the size of our military?

Is greatness defined by export prices and profits of corporations?

You see, Mr. Speaker, I don't think that is the case. I believe that we are a nation built upon a set of unshakable values. It is our ability to uphold these values, not the rise and fall of the stock market, that will ultimately define our greatness.

One of our values is this: if you work hard, set goals, and refuse to give up, you can fulfill your dreams. As Americans, this value is engrained into all of us. We repeat it each and every day, and we tell our kids to follow their dreams, or tell them that they can be anything that they want when they grow up.

We say these things, Mr. Speaker, because we believe them. We believe that hard work pays off. We believe that dreams can come true.

Yet, on September 5 of this year, President Trump ignored these American beliefs when he ended the DACA program. That decision told nearly 800,000 young people in this country that their hard work didn't matter and that their dreams of pursuing success might not pay off in the end.

These young DREAMers, who are as American as any of us, go to school here, they have jobs here, they raise families in our communities, and they serve in our military.

This is why each and every day we fail to pass the Dream Act, we call the values that make our country great into question. If we fail to pass this bipartisan legislation, then we are no longer a nation where hard work pays off.

I will be forced to explain that to DREAMers in my district. I will have to tell Minerva, who paid her way through college, that she will have to give up her dream of medical school. I will have to explain to Leticia that, despite becoming the first in her family to attend college, she will not be able to fulfill her dream of serving others as a social worker.

You see, Mr. Speaker, these are real young people with real dreams. They deserve a real answer. They put in the work, they have done everything they can to build lives in this country, and we need to come together to make sure that we uphold our values and allow them to continue those lives here.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against the previous question so that we can bring the Dream Act to the floor for a vote immediately. This country is great because we uphold our values. Mr. Speaker, it is time that we prove that.

Madam Speaker, today, I rise to honor the life of someone I was lucky to call a colleague and mentor--Redlands City Council member Pat Gilbreath.

I was heartbroken to learn of Pat's passing in early October, but I will always be grateful for her countless contributions to our community. Her imprint can be seen throughout the city of Redlands and our region. She was the earliest advocate for Redlands' passenger rail, supported the Healthy Communities Initiative and Open Space Initiative to honor our citrus heritage.

When I was just starting out on the city council, Pat's leadership and poise helped shape the type of public servant that I aim to be. She was pragmatic, measured, and listened intently to the public.

I will always be thankful for everything that she taught me, not the least of which was how to hide the chocolate in the city council dais so we could eat it during our late night council meetings.

A loving mother and grandmother, she was always proud to beam about her family. I know that when they look at her legacy and the impact she made in the community, her family can be just as proud of her.

Pat will always be remembered in our region for her thoughtfulness, her dedication, and her problem-solving ability. I will always remember her for her friendship.

Mr. Speaker, we live in the land of opportunity where, if you are willing to set goals, work hard, and give back to your community, anything can be done.

This idea is the grandest of American traditions and is sewn into the fabric of everything that we do, yet we are failing to live up to our ideals.

A few weeks ago I met a college student in my district named Beatriz. Beatriz moved to the United States with her family when she was 3 years old. And while she wasn't born here, she told me: ``Today, I couldn't even tell you what my homeland looks like, Congressman.''

A good student, Beatriz earned good grades to get into college, but would not be able to afford it, except that she received financial aid from the State because she is ineligible from the Federal Government.

But her life was changed when she applied for DACA in high school. Beatriz was able to attend Cal State San Bernardino with the help of financial aid and is now on her way to becoming the first in her family to earn a college degree.

She said it is the most exciting experience to make progress and contribute to the economy. This is her home, Mr. Speaker. It is time that we pass the Dream Act.

Mr. Speaker, last week, when I was home in my district, I hosted an event called DREAMers Demand Answers. It was an opportunity for DREAMers in my community to come and have a conversation with me in the wake of the President's decision to rescind DACA, to let me know what questions and concerns they had so that I could come back here and pass those concerns along to my colleagues here in Congress.

Of all the questions, one really stood out to me: Can you help us? I was especially struck by this question because the answer is yes. Yes, I can help them; and, yes, we in this body can help them.

By passing the bipartisan Dream Act, we can help these young people. We help them stay in their homes. We can help them keep their jobs. We can help them keep their families together. This is not a hard question to answer.

These are young people who grew up here that are as American as any one of us in this room, and they aren't asking for much. Mr. Speaker, I am on the floor today to ask my colleagues on the other side: Please help them. Join me in supporting the bipartisan Dream Act.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank my colleague from Nevada.

I would like to just take a moment to weigh in on the amendment that my colleague, Mr. Amodei, and I introduced that would maintain the NCUA's current funding structure.

The NCUA is funded, as he said, through fees paid by credit unions. Subjecting them to the annual appropriations process unnecessarily involves Congress in a process that functions fine the way it is.

The NCUA is not synonymous with big, for-profit institutions. The NCUA is a not-for-profit structure and plays a critical role in communities throughout this country. If they are forced to go through the appropriations process, then local buy-in is trumped by the Federal Government. If anything, this would further complicate the funding process and decrease, not increase, transparency.

Forcing the NCUA into this process is an attempt to fix a problem that doesn't exist. They are one of the only regulatory bodies that is both an insurer and regulator, and its unique

structure should be reflected in the way that the operations are funded.

Mr. Speaker, today is not a good day for our Nation. Today, 800,000 young people across this country are living in fear. They fear being ripped apart from the only home they have ever known. They fear being separated from their families, from their friends, and from the lives they have built here.

They fear deportation, Mr. Speaker, and they live with this fear because President Trump has decided that the Federal Government is going to break its promise and turn its back on DREAMers.

These are young men and women who did not break the law--they were brought to this country as children--who went to school here, who work here, and who pay taxes here.

The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program brought these young people out of the shadows and offered them some relief. It gave kids who grew up here and who truly believe that America is their home a chance to lead normal lives and chase their dreams.

The fact of the matter is, though, Mr. Speaker, that DACA did not go quite far enough. DREAMers are American by every measure except for their paperwork, and it is time that we offer them a path to citizenship.

That is why I am here today to call upon my colleagues to bring the Dream Act back to the floor for a vote--no policy riders, no packages, just a straight up-or-down vote. Because if there are Members of this Chamber who still believe that DREAMers should remain in the shadows and that they should not have a chance to join our Nation as citizens, then they should stand up and be counted.

Many of my colleagues here come from all walks of life. They have charted their own path, however difficult it may be to join this House. DREAMers have earned that chance to carve their own path, too. They have earned the right to live without fear and in peace as Americans. Passing the Dream Act is the right thing to do, it is the moral thing to do, and, quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, it is the American thing to do.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R. 3440, the DREAM Act, to protect DREAMers like Maria, who is the coordinator of the DREAMers Resource Success Center at Cal State San Bernardino.