Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the Pappas, or as it might be, the Pallone 399 amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my dear friend, Mr. Pallone, for being here tonight.

This opportunity for us to speak deserves to be placed within the House Foreign Affairs Committee, which has the jurisdiction on this matter, the jurisdiction that is very important to the United States and to our friends from Greece. But it also is important to our friend Turkey, who stands, as a NATO ally, ready, prepared to help the United States and its NATO allies in the defense of a region of the world that is important.

It is important for us to note that the conversation about this really needs to take place within the Foreign Affairs Committee, and I think the chairman and the ranking member are very able to discuss it.

A report to Congress was made from this last prior administration that directly speaks about exactly the circumstances that Mr. Pallone speaks of. The United States Government sent this Section 211, PL 116- 94, and they said: ``The United States Government is not in a position to provide a list of confirmed violations of Greece's territorial airspace.''

This is a basis of what this amendment is about. First, Greece claims territorial space that extends up to 10 nautical miles from its coastline and its territorial sea up to six nautical miles. Under international law, a country's territorial airspace coincides with its territorial sea space also.

In this instance, Greece treats these differently. Although Greece currently claims up to 6 nautical miles of territorial sea around the many islands that it has, its neighbors have not come to a boundary delineation upon those areas. Thus, Turkey, which stands directly next to many of these islands, looks at international law.

Mr. Speaker, I think it is important for us to recognize at this time, not just with the United States but with the war that is going on between Russia and Ukraine, that NATO be prepared to have its top- flight--not just fighters--but the equipment that would be necessary. I believe this discussion, although I recognize it was made in order by the Rules Committee, should be placed directly within the Foreign Affairs Committee.

There needs to be a discussion to resolve this between America's friends, Turkey and Greece, and depend on them to be able to resolve this matter, not put this into the National Defense Authorization Act, which does not have jurisdiction in this matter. We should not invoke the United States military into this when, in fact, it should be something that is done by the State Department.

I have great respect for the gentleman, Mr. Pallone. I have great respect for the Rules Committee, which I sat on for 20 years. But this issue entirely, from start to finish, belongs upon what might be the foreign sales of assets that are military oriented. That jurisdiction is not in the Armed Services Committee.

I stand in opposition, and I ask that the gentleman withdraw his amendment solely based upon a jurisdictional issue, the need for the United States of America, the need for NATO and Turkey, as a very reliable member, to be able to have those things that it would need.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman for hearing our argument tonight, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to the gentleman.

First of all, the congressional review of all arms exports is done through the Foreign Affairs Committee, not through the Armed Services Committee.

Secondly, it is in America's best interests. One argument could be made perhaps about Ukraine until Russia attacked. It is now a war that the United States is funding to huge numbers of appropriations amounts. There is great concern about not just food shortages but the destabilization of that area of the world.

We, the United States, as a major supporter of NATO, count on all the NATO nations there that are part of that to have the top-flight--not only equipment--but the ability to effectively avoid a further war by them working together.

I would say two points that the gentleman raised. First, the Armed Services Committee does not have jurisdiction, and secondly, it is very much in the United States' best interest to make sure that Turkey has top-line F-16 fighters.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today out of great respect and mourn the loss of Dr. Marcy Zwelling from California.

Dr. Zwelling, since 2012, has headed up the National Physicians Council for Healthcare Policy, which is a group of some 570 independent physicians across the country. Dr. Zwelling not only challenged me but challenged all 570 members of the Physicians Council to please advocate on behalf of not only patients but also physicians. She dedicated her service and life not only to patients, attempting to give them the very best of medical help, but also for physicians. Physicians who many times are faced with innumerable challenges, not just to provide service but also in their own lives.

So it is today I offer to the House of Representatives the great life of Dr. Marcy Zwelling who passed away this last weekend. May she rest in peace. May God bless her life and that which she gave each of us.

Whether she was helping organize one of the over nine conferences of the National Physicians Council for Healthcare Policy nationwide, developing new screening tools for patients with cancer, or supporting her fellow physicians, Dr. Zwelling served as an inspiration and servant leader for myself and so many others in the medical community. I will miss her leadership and inspiration.

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the gentlewoman from Florida.

Madam Speaker, tonight, Members of the Republican Party are standing up to talk about important issues that we believe are not only important to us that we feel very strongly about, but also to America, who is listening for clearness and clarity of issues about ideas.

Tonight, I would like to stand up and talk about the life issue. I want to talk about it a little bit differently. I am the father of a Down's syndrome young man. Many times, Down's syndrome children might be considered, before they are born, as something that might not be as respected or wanted by a family.

Tonight, what I would like to say is that our children are important. Our children that are given to us are gifts of God.

While each of us think of ourselves as being special, we need to think about our children, the next generation of not only this country, but of God's children. My son, who is now 25 years old, Alexander Gregory Sessions, who was born into a family that placed high value on him--not just his life, but his value that he has grown in throughout his life.

Alex, in many instances, has some limitations about him. Alex is an Eagle Scout and a young man who gets up every day prepared and ready for the things that will greet him and the world that he will greet. Many times, so many people are respectable--they respect Alex and not only his willingness to live life, but also to come and be a part of society and to do the things that are important.

So tonight, my message is not just to you, Madam Speaker, but the American people--the American people who need to know that life is so important and the children that many women carry not only will offer solutions to our future, but make our country better.

For those parents that might be facing difficult circumstances, and perhaps uncertainty about what they think or feel about the emotion of having perhaps a disabled child, I want to stand up and say: You will be rewarded. You have been selected by God to be the parent of a special angel, a child who will mean so much to so many people that will bring joy and love and admiration. It will be something that will be a lifelong gift, probably, and something that is to be cherished and important.

On behalf of my Republican colleagues, we do stand up and talk about how important life is and how much we believe these children and others contribute. We also want to say this--thank you to God for selecting us as parents. We are proud of the responsibility that we have and offer our thanks to You.

Madam Speaker, I thank Congressman Johnson for this opportunity.

Madam Speaker, we are here to talk to the American people about ideas that roam across our Nation. They are conversations that take place around every table, and next week at Thanksgiving we will have those conversations at my table and others around the country.

Madam Speaker, you just heard a good discussion about inflation. But part of inflation comes from government spending, and part of government spending comes from policy that this President and this administration's Democratic Party supports.

Madam Speaker, 1.6 million people have come to our borders and come across, and we are doing things that will encourage them to come here. We

are doing things that will encourage them when we give them free education, free healthcare and to pay for them to do those things.

So, Madam Speaker, tonight we want to speak specifically about this thing that is called inflation. Inflation is related to Federal monetary and fiscal policy. Inflation is that thing that occurs in the economy when the price of goods and services rise and rise exponentially.

Normally, an administration would look at about a 2 percent growth, a 2 percent inflation rate, which would be, generally speaking, an acceptable growth for a GDP model as well as inflation rate.

This administration, however, began with President Biden going down and visiting the king of inflation, former President Jimmy Carter, talking to this Nation about how great Jimmy Carter's service was. Well what he really meant to say was I admired his policies, progressive liberal policies that took this country to have 16 and 18 percent interest rates, interest rates that raised prices an excessive amount of money for families for a generation that could not buy homes.

Madam Speaker, the Republican Party is here speaking, just as the American people are, and we recognize that this administration has made dear and great friends with the conditions that create inflationary spiral.

This administration knows exactly--they have smart people there, but it is their policies that they demand to have, and those policies bring about results that end up making friends with inflation: Higher prices for goods and services; more government spending. This is big expensive government spending across the board.

And so the American people will have the most expensive Thanksgiving in years; the highest inflation rate in 30 years. Oh, that would be back to Jimmy Carter. No wonder President Biden visited his favorite-- or second favorite President, Jimmy Carter, because he wants to make friends with the conditions that create inflation: Big government spending, prices rising, government control of the goods and services.

And just like Jimmy Carter, he had a Senate, a House, and a Presidency to be very successful.

Madam Speaker, the American people spoke again last night in local elections down in South Carolina. They spoke a week ago in State elections.

Madam Speaker, the American people deserve better. Better comes from policy, and better comes from adults who will recognize that it is not just politics, it is about the American people who want and need to have more take-home pay and more ability to take care of themselves; not big, expensive socialist government that even breaks the laws of this country.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his service to this conference but, more importantly, for making sure that the American people hear the other side of the story.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Louisiana not only for his leadership to our conference but also speaking up and taking time out of his schedule to speak directly to America and Americans about important issues that face our country today.

Madam Speaker, we hear time after time our colleagues from the Democratic Party talk about all the violence that is taking place in large cities. Murders are up 30 percent last year according to the FBI who talked about this rise. And then we turn around and see where they are the activists who are leading the defunding of police, the destabilization of our cities. The bringing together of illegals into this country with record drug deals and amounts of drugs on our streets, record numbers of death from fentanyl, opioids--misery.

But what does our President do?

He goes off on an aggressive agenda, one which is fueled by the radicals in

his party, one which he fully believes in, one that he is proud of, and one that they sustain and are still pushing. It is not enough just to push and push big spending and Big Government. It is actually an agenda that is in chaos. A chaotic agenda is apparent to the American people.

For a second I would like to have us think back about what we have had previously with Republicans not only in charge in the House and the Senate but in the Presidency leading this great Nation. Our goal as Republicans is to have America to be a land of hope, to have America to be a land of opportunity, to have America to be a land of freedom, for America to be a land of achievement, and for America to be a land of heroes.

For this to happen, Madam Speaker, it means that America needs its ability to go back to work and to have the dignity of work. Madam Speaker, it means that we need to have Americans who go to work not because a government or a political party wants to keep people away from work and is using trillions of dollars of government funds to keep them there.

Madam Speaker, we have an administration and a President who wants to take people's freedom away by requiring them to wear not just masks but to have vaccinations or lose their job.

But, Madam Speaker, the thing that is harming America that is apparent to everyone right now is the cost of items just to live. Inflation and monetary policy are what the Fed is responsible for, the Fed bank. And they are prepared to give hundreds of billions of dollars and trillions of dollars, some $5,000 trillion is what they will be asked to go take loans out on again. That devalues not just the American dollar, but it actually causes a price increase directly at the grocery store where people buy their food and basic elements.

Inflation is at a 40-year high, but we keep hearing about how much money the government is going to put in people's pockets. But it is robbed when they net it out, Madam Speaker.

It is robbed when they net it out because inflation robs not just people who have families, but it robs those who live on a fixed income. It robs the vitality and the ability that we have to be ingenious and to move our country forward.

So, Madam Speaker, please know this, that the Republican Party and our Members who are here tonight are not just speaking about things because we disagree, it is because we love our country. We believe that what was built and available for America and Americans is the greatest country in the history of this world. We believe in Americanism. We believe in American exceptionalism. We believe in the Constitution. We believe in freedom and a right to make our own decisions in our own homes and in our own communities.

Increasingly, we are finding that this new administration, the House and the Senate under Democratic control, are taking away the basic rights and freedoms that would have been enjoyed by free people, but they are not because this administration intends to extend the long arm of the Federal Government into all transportation, to all members of the military, and to free people who want to live their own life.

Madam Speaker, Republicans are on the floor today to offer better ideas, to offer hope and solutions, but perhaps more importantly to say this, that we believe that it is time that this administration get off its radical agenda, radical agenda that is leading America into chaos.

If the President would listen, if the Speaker of the House would listen, and if the Senate majority leader would listen, they would hear even members in their own party saying that a radical agenda will greatly change America to where we would become a socialist Nation.

Madam Speaker, we are here offering the example that we have known that made America great, and it is called capitalism and freedom.

I want to thank Mr. Johnson for taking the time to gather Republicans together on the floor to offer not just our vision but also to highlight to the American people that elections have consequences, and we look forward to next year. I want to thank the gentleman for allowing me this time.

Madam Speaker, I thank Congressman Roy for not only standing in tonight to speak forthrightly to the American people, but also including other Members of the Texas delegation to have conversations with the American people not just about the topic of being woke, but actually the things that are actually happening to the United States of America.

The Congressman is exactly right, there is a crisis in America today. There is a crisis that takes place because of such a rapid and swift transition to the ultraleft. The transition that has taken place began immediately upon President Biden accepting the oath of office and walking, driving, going back to the White House after he had taken an oath of office, where he raised his hand and he repeated, among the other words, to ``well and faithfully execute the laws of the United States.''

Well, there is a little bit more than just ``well and faithfully execute the laws of the United States.'' I believe the American people want and need a stable person who will recognize that they need someone to work in their best interest, in the best interest of their community, in the best interest of their job, in the best interest of safety, in the best interest of trying to give every single person in this country a better opportunity to have a better life. That is what I believe is behind the ``well and faithfully execute the laws of the United States.''

In fact, what has happened is there is a sweeping revolution that is going on in the United States of America by the elected officials. Elected officials who have turned a blind eye to the things in the past that were seen as stable, as reasonable, and something that was in the best interest to protect the people that they represent.

Day after day we have watched what happened down at the southern border of this country. I, too, went down. I am no stranger to the border. I previously lived in El Paso, Texas, for a number of years. My father served as the chief judge of the Western District of Texas and had to deal with not just the crime, but some of the circumstances that happened along the border. They came home to roost, so to speak, within the United States of America.

And as a Federal district judge, he tried his best to deal favorably, fairly, with people who violated the law. But where there were people who were criminals, who were not here to serve in the best interest of the United States of America, those who would become enemies of the State because what they did is they would import drugs, drugs which would kill Americans.

We have just been through a terrible epidemic in this country of opioid abuse. Opioid abuse that we all recognize, much of it was inherently begun and started here in the United States, but that has taken hold with other drugs now, fentanyl, methamphetamines, heroin, cocaine.

And in that process, we look to where this comes from. This comes from other countries, by and large, other countries who have people who want to kill and make money off the demise of the American people.

Yet the President of the United States, at the time he served as Vice President--because I know because the Drug Enforcement Administration senior officials have repeatedly said that the intelligence that was given to the then-Vice President, now President of the United States, they understood firsthand the danger that came from an open border.

The dangers that came when we did not have active law enforcement and intelligence would cause the deaths of thousands of Americans because of the illicit drugs. Illicit drugs that not only are addicting, but many times mixed in a way that a user never knew they were taking them. The availability of fentanyl, as an example.

Yet the President of the United States, with this vast knowledge of understanding from his service to the

country as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, as chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, as Vice President of the United States, he already knew the story.

The story that he wanted to project was that he is a kid from Pennsylvania, who knew what real America is. But what has happened is that he personally, and the radical left, have created a circumstance in this country that, we, as Republicans, are talking about tonight. That we are supposed to be woke to understanding the social implications. The enormous implications to people that we represent.

Yet, seemingly, it is the police that are the problem. Seemingly, it is the border that is the problem by enforcing the law. Seemingly, it is the ability that they want for criminals to run rampant throughout not just our neighborhoods, but across this country.

Madam Speaker, I would say to the young Congressman from Texas that we need his voice, his voice of compassion, his voice of common sense that says we need to move this country back to where it was simply a few months ago. Where we respect members of law enforcement, men and women of law enforcement who make house calls because they are asked to come and make dispute resolution many times, and then to take care of the law as it applies to a circumstance.

We need to get back to where we understand that the men and women of not just the U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Border Patrol are back on their job instead of being moved over to take care of 1 million people who, in the first 6 months, have come through illegally.

We need to go back to elected officials who actually understand that the people who elected them aren't for woke. What they are for is this body to come together to where we understand that we have an obligation to protect the men and women and children and seniors and disabled people of this country. We have an obligation to stand behind our law enforcement and to provide them with better training and the things that they need, equipment, to properly do their job.

Instead, we are watching our country, whether it is Chicago or Los Angles or New York City where criminals run rampant because of woke, that says we are supposed to defund the police department. We are supposed to defund those activities that would offer safety and security and opportunity for the most vulnerable of our society, and then blame others when people of color or of different races are harmed by criminals and thugs.

I watched this morning on TV of the murder that took place in Chicago of the young couple that came to a stoplight and were accosted and killed by thugs, criminal thugs.

I watched about a young man walking down the street in broad daylight in New York City and was stabbed repeatedly by a criminal this weekend.

No wonder this happens. We have already run the police out of town. We have already run people out of town who legitimately can stand up and have that obligation.

Madam Speaker, I come here tonight to join my two Texas colleagues to say, woke may be a term that we are supposed to get about enlightenment that we need to be good and better to each other, that we need to understand that there are people who might not agree with me, and I might not agree with them.

But ``woke'' has taken on a different theme. It has taken on a theme of taking on responsibility and respect. It has taken away the ability that we have in this body to effectively even be heard by each other. It has taken away the ability of millions of Americans to where they no longer feel the safety and security of their own home, of their own city street, or even their ability to stand up to those who have a different opinion.

Madam Speaker, I think what Congressman Roy is doing tonight is more than just standing up and expressing an opinion. It actually is an opinion that I believe millions of Americans support and respect by this gentleman doing this Special Order tonight.

I would call on this House of Representatives and all of its Members to understand that this phase we are going through will have a very difficult, difficult conclusion for many people who cannot effectively get through what is happening to them, to people who live in cities where police will no longer be, to small businesses that are burned to the ground, and to judges who are no longer judging based upon the rule of law but rather fear.

Madam Speaker, we as the Republican Party are not standing up and yelling and screaming. We have much resolve to us. But we ask tonight that the American people hear us that we condemned what happened on January the 6th. We condemn what is happening when people take advantage of law enforcement, take advantage of people, and take advantage of this great country.

Let us hope that tonight in our resolve of speaking forthrightly and honestly that we want to be that great country with shining cities on the hill where people work together, where people have a common interest and goals for their communities, and generations of people can work together whether you be a retired senior citizen, Madam Speaker, or whether you be a young child who knows not except that you live in a great country.

We need to speak plainly, but we are not yelling and screaming. We are not blaming someone else for the problems. But we will say this: The Republican Party of this House of Representatives stands for people to be safe in their own homes, for women who are in their own homes with their own children who will not be taken advantage of because they do know they have a backup and that is the police departments, that they know that the rule of law will effectively provide them with the needs that they have to live in the greatest country in the world, that our law enforcement agencies will know that they can continue to evolve into professionalism, that they will be able to effectively heal themselves and make the changes.

I call on law enforcement to continue to make these changes. My Republican Party has these conversations with law enforcement every day. But I call on the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Christopher Wray, just as when my father, Judge William Sessions, was Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, to stand up for law enforcement and expect them and want them to become professional.

Madam Speaker, we must heal what has happened.

Sunday, at church, I heard no less than 50 times the word redemption, the words that we are sinners, that we make mistakes, that we need to look at each other with the faithfulness of a great nation. I heard words of love and respect for those even that we disagree with.

But, Madam Speaker, we are not down pounding on tables tonight. We are simply trying to say what we believe is true, and that is that I believe that there are tens of millions of Americans who want and need this country to be safe. They want and need our elected officials, whether they be Republican or Democrat, that they need their elected officials to understand that their life and their family are important, and that until we get back to the standards of performance of expectations where law enforcement is allowed to effectively and professionally be there as the backup, where our military knows that we are there to support them and that our elected officials will stand on the side of righteousness, we are going to continue to wander through this terrible time that I call chaos.

It is my hope, as we drop to our knees this evening, that we do offer a prayer for our President, President Biden. I know him, and I know he has been through difficult times in his life. But, Madam Speaker, I would ask tonight that we give respect and prayer and ask that the President please understand that the most vulnerable who are there still need others to be of assistance, and we need to make sure that this country heals itself with love, respect, and admiration for each other.

I want to thank the young Congressman for tonight, for his bringing forth this opportunity to speak about where our country is. I want him to know that I personally admire him, respect him, and appreciate his sound call for a voice of reason and opportunity for America's future.

May God bless our country.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for allowing me to speak.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 51, the Washington, D.C. Admissions Act.

In many respects, America seems to be at the same point we were in the 1930s and 1940s--calling for a single party rule from Washington,

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Baylor University's men's basketball team as the 2021 NCAA National Champions. Eighteen years ago, Coach Scott Drew talked about coming to Baylor ``for a chance to win a national championship,'' A dream vocalized by one man turned reality by a team of men with great faith. A team that played as one. Oh yes, they had individuals and they were outstanding. But it was their teamwork mindset that achieved this victory.

This season, Baylor defeated more top-25 teams than the three other Final Four teams combined. These results prove that hard work, a determined mind, and a willing spirit can conquer any challenge. To say I am proud is an understatement. My hometown Baylor Bears have proved their abilities and I believe this is just the beginning of much more greatness to come. I wish these men as much success in future endeavors as they earned this season.

Congratulations men.

Sic `em.

Madam Speaker, I would like to recognize Sydney Cohen of Hawaiian Springs Water for her substantial efforts in providing life-sustaining resources to Central Texans during a time of great need.

Madam Speaker, I would also like to extend my recognition to Judge Byron Ryder and Judge Linda Grant for their display of servant leadership during Texas' winter freeze. They worked tirelessly for their communities and went to great lengths to secure the water bottles provided by Hawaiian Springs Water. The residents of Leon and Freestone County have strong leaders, and for that, I am grateful.

Madam Speaker, one month ago, the entire State of Texas was blanketed with a polar vortex that plunged temperatures to single digits for over 120 hours. Six inches of ice, combined with nine inches of snow, were common as far south as San Antonio, Texas. Within a day, all 254 counties in Texas were under a State and Federal emergency declaration.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to give thanks to heroes who heard and saw this crisis and did something about it.

Two heroes--Chairman Lew Cohen, and his partner, Magnes Glenn, from Hawaiian Springs Water--sprung into action. A simple call as a result of our friendship resulted in over 8,000 water bottles being shipped to Leon County, Texas; and 8,500 bottles of water being shipped to Freestone County, Texas.

Help they were. Thank you to so many who were just like these two heroes who helped Texas in her time of need.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1180 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Torres), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

Mr. Speaker, thank you and Merry Christmas. It is also Merry Christmastime to the American people, Mr. Speaker, as Congress moves to its final resolution for this term.

Mr. Speaker, we can't forget that there is important work that is still to be done. The American people sent us here to do work and expect us to do that.

Today I lay before the House the Rules Committee Print 115-87, the text of the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 88. Now, that may sound pretty pro forma, just like a normal bill, but, Mr. Speaker, what is in here is not a normal bill.

In fact, it is a compilation of things which we do every year that are called tax extenders because we have been unable, necessarily, to agree on them for a longer term. So, one year to the next year to the next year, we gather together before we leave, and we normally come to an agreement. We have done this virtually every year I have been in Congress.

We say on a bipartisan basis and a bicameral basis: Let's make sure that we take care of the things that have not been taken care of on a longer basis now.

What might that mean, Mr. Speaker? Well, that means that we, as a body, need to be responsible and understand that during the year there have been a number of circumstances also that contributed to people needing tax help. Some of them are fires. Some of them are earthquakes.

Some of them are the changing of the circumstances back home where we are trying to make sure that the Tax Code is updated in this tax year now so that if someone--for instance, if they are in a California wildfire--loses everything they have got, they know that Congress has passed laws that help them as they move forward to rebuild their home, to make decisions about their future.

It could be, Mr. Speaker, that a lot of work that the gentlewoman from Kansas, who is a member of the Ways and Means Committee, one of your colleagues on that committee, had done to make sure that any whistleblower who saw something that was going wrong at work for tax- related matters is protected.

These are important issues. But they are also important because there are broader activities, and they deal with taxation that was put into the Affordable Care Act. It is called ObamaCare, but it is the Affordable Care Act from years back.

What this Republican Congress has done is shielded, protected the American people from many of the devastating effects, notwithstanding that this Congress and the President, President Trump, signed the law that takes away the individual mandate--not the business mandate but the individual mandate.

But, Mr. Speaker, there are still three hugely onerous provisions that still lag on from that piece of legislation. Embedded in that is something called the medical device tax. The medical device tax is a tax on the newest technology--not, Mr. Speaker, on the sale of that to where, okay, Uncle Sam wants a little bit more of that, but the onerous part is it is on the manufacture.

And when you put a tax on the manufacturing piece, that means that that product is not produced in an effective, efficient way. That means that they are produced one at a time because, upon that manufacture, the tax has to be paid, not upon the sale.

It is something we fought on, I thought on a bipartisan basis, but it seems like today it is simply partisan, simply only Republicans, really, when it comes down to it, who are for doing away with the medical device tax.

There is something called the Cadillac tax. That is the Democratic Party's and President Obama's idea of you really shouldn't have better healthcare than somebody else, and if you do, we are going to tax that asset. It is at the heart of the Affordable Care Act.

This Cadillac tax has been, every single year, deferred, stopped, agreed to. We are not going to apply that Cadillac tax, because it is on people, many of them who work for unions, people who have earned the right to have the healthcare that they have but the Democratic Party wants to tax it.

Lastly, the healthcare tax. And that is a tax on every single person that has a healthcare policy. It is about $70. That means that every single American is going to pay an extra tax because they have healthcare.

These are things that the Republican Party had worked on, and we thought we were, on a bipartisan basis, going to take care of these issues. We find out, really, today, that is not true.

But I think we found out around election time the real effort for the Democratic Party. It is called H.R. 676, Medicare for All. Mr. Speaker, to those of us who have looked at the bill, section 102 lays out every single piece part of healthcare that you could think of, from an audiologist, to a dentist, to a person who may provide massage therapy.

Section 104 in that bill outlaws all private health insurance in America if a piece part that was in section 102 is provided or paid for by a health insurer. It outlaws all private insurance. What does that also mean? That means employer-provided insurance under H.R. 676, section 104.

So, Mr. Speaker, sometimes you have got to read to the end of the book or watch the end of the movie to see exactly what the plot and the theme is.

Mr. Speaker, we have, for the last 8 years, been going down a pathway of thinking that what we were doing was really bipartisan, that our colleagues on the Democratic Party were really opposed to the Cadillac tax because they consented and agreed to it, voted for it, that the medical device tax was something that they understood would cause great harm and increase prices and deny people to get the best technology.

We thought they were going along with this. We thought they understood how important it was not to tax medical devices, the latest technology that saves lives. And we thought that they understood that the healthcare tax of $70 on every single health insurance plan in this country was probably a bad idea after we already had the Affordable Care Act signed into law.

I find out now I was wrong. I was wrong, and I think the American people were fooled. The medical device tax, the Cadillac tax, and the healthcare tax are in this package, along with the ability to help the people in California and on the West Coast and other people who were a part of natural disasters, people who are seeking help where they are finding an employer doing something wrong, to give them that needed opportunity to protect themselves, a safe harbor.

So much is being done in here at the end of the year, but that is not the

story that was told at the Rules Committee. The story that was told is: Oh, this is just about the top 1 percent. This is just about a special deal.

Mr. Speaker, that is a long way from, not just the facts of the case, but the truth. So I am here, as chairman of the Rules Committee, bringing to the floor an opportunity to, once again, do as we have done in the past to say the healthcare tax, the medical device tax, the Cadillac tax--we are asking my colleagues to join with us.

It is a very genuine offer. It is an offer that has been extended and accepted for the past few years, since the Affordable Care Act passed. It is the right thing to do.

So I will ask each of the Members of this body to pay attention, to see what is in there, help the people who have been a part of natural disasters this year. Let's get this package done. It is the right thing to do.

And I can sincerely look at you, Mr. Speaker, and say thank you. Thank you for your years of service, but thank you for making sure that we were faithful to the end. Even though it is starting to look a lot like Christmas, we still have to do our work.

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

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

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

Mr. Speaker, the argument that we are involved in today is whether we are going to, as this body, on a bipartisan, bicameral basis, understand that it is about hundreds of billions of dollars. It is about hundreds of billions of dollars that the American people have been spared from.

Mr. Speaker, we are not undertaxed. We spend too much money. But that is not what this is about. What this is about is control. This is about the control that some in this body want over people's lives.

This is not about whether we are going to arbitrarily cause the Federal Government to be in trouble over a Cadillac tax, a medical device tax, a healthcare tax and blame that on greedy people back home who, by virtue of them wanting to have healthcare and robust healthcare and better healthcare but somebody in Washington does not want them to have it and blames them on being greedy for what might be billions of dollars when you add up everybody across the country; this is about control. This is about controlling people's lives.

And, Mr. Speaker, I will once again say it. I had thought, during these years, we came to an agreement that the Cadillac tax, the medical device tax, the healthcare tax, things that happened during the year, whether they be tornadoes, whether they be wildfires, whether they be other circumstances, would still be able to be reached on a bipartisan, bicameral basis.

After all, President Obama signed these into law.

After all, the American people understood that their gift for being gracious and working and doing the right thing shouldn't be an onerous tax.

After all, many people who live, as an example, in Minnesota could look up and see where their two Democratic Senators fought hard to make sure this medical device tax that was the lynchpin for tens of thousands of jobs in medical innovation, that we could get together and work together.

Now we find out, no, that is wrong. That is wrong. What we want is we want that $180 billion. We want that. You can't have that, and we are going to tax you because we can, because we can control your life and the outcome of your healthcare; because, actually, those who have great healthcare, yours is greedy, so we are going to tax it.

So, Mr. Speaker, that is why the Republican Party in the House of Representatives is here today, as stalwarts of not just the middle class of this country but stalwarts of people who understand people get up and go to work--yes, the union worker, too.

That union worker will find out, loud and clear, the party that was for taxing their healthcare, their working healthcare.

The people in these States, where medical devices are robust and made America at the top of the world, they will understand.

And the people, who are average families like those in Dallas, Texas, which I proudly represent, they will understand somebody was for taxing them further and somebody tried to continue what we have done now for years and not tax them on their healthcare.

So it is about control, and I am sure we will find out, as the new year comes around, about H.R. 676, Medicare for All, that will outlaw all employer-provided private healthcare in this country. That is what the bill says. It is very plain. Section 104 gets right to it. That is what this is about.

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

Mr. Speaker, I do not.

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

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the distinguished gentlewoman from California, not only her comments and her ideas--I know they are well represented by the Democratic Party.

I would say to her that the people who vote against this bill will turn their back on the people who had the wildfires in California, the tornadoes in Georgia, the opportunities to help provide proper instructive help on their taxes this year as they enter next year. After all, it did happen this year.

But perhaps, more than that, Mr. Speaker, we recognize now more about shifting the blame for 8 years and $9 trillion worth of spending. They called it investment.

This Republican Congress, 1 year ago, almost to the day, passed a tax bill that has created the greatest economy in the history of this country. More revenue is coming in today than has ever come in in the history of the country. More people are working today because of that tax bill done 1 year ago. More people, more African Americans, more women, more families have an opportunity to enjoy the benefits of a job and the creation therein that they come home at night a little bit more satisfied, and their children, in the next generation, see work as a positive attribute, and communities are turning the corner.

Mr. Speaker, gas is $1.82 in Dallas, Texas. What a far cry from when it was almost $5 at the same time in President Obama's administration when the Democrats were running the place: the House, the Senate, and the Presidency. Oh, Mr. Speaker, we have not forgotten what a difference it makes, but the finger-pointing still continues.

Mr. Speaker, let the Record reflect, itself, that we have more revenue than ever coming in, more people working than ever, more opportunity for people, and part of that success has been because Republicans chose not to have a healthcare tax, a medical device tax, a Cadillac tax, choose not to make in order H.R. 676, Medicare for All, that would outlaw all employer-provided healthcare in this country.

Mr. Speaker, the differences between our ideas really find themselves at the center point of what we do today.

Last night in the Rules Committee, the distinguished gentleman from Lewisville, Texas, Dr. Michael Burgess, a retired physician who has delivered more than 3,000 babies, said that he had sat through, for years, these arguments at the Energy and Commerce Committee, and he lamented how the story really is not told about some 3 million people who now have jobs in this country, that a number of them that is undefined also got employer-provided healthcare; and that while there may be 1 million out of that 3 million who went to a larger company, it is their families that benefited because there was maybe a spouse behind that and a child or two who had previously been without employer-provided healthcare.

Now we are going to find out that Grinch showed up at Christmas, this rush to get out the door where we failed to secure the door, where we were so eager to get home rather than do our work.

Mr. Speaker, I can't imagine that somebody would just want to say, ``It is okay; it is Christmastime; let's get home,'' and then stick coal in each of the stockings of the American people who have healthcare, stick coal in the stockings of the medical device employees and employers, stick coal into the stockings of the medical community for doctors who had been providing these leading-edge ideas in medical devices, stick coal in the stockings of the workers of America who might have great healthcare only to find out that somebody who had voted for it for years turned their back. So that is why we are here.

Mr. Speaker, here is the bill right here, pretty easy to do. We have seen it a number of times. Nobody complained they didn't have time to read the bill. They actually know what is in it this time.

They actually know what they would not be supporting. They are going to put their vote and be on the line, and we are going to find out where people really are.

So, Mr. Speaker, that is the debate, whether we are going to step up and do our job; whether we are willing to complete the task; whether we are willing to be consistent for the things that we have stood for; or whether we are willing to make excuses about, well, it is just Christmastime, and we have got to get home.

Mr. Speaker, I want to say that my party believes that we should not have a white flag in our backpack, that we should not yield and just say, well, the timing was difficult. We should stand on our two feet, not beg on our knees.

We should move forward and do our job for the American people, and that is what I am proud to say my party and myself and the Rules Committee stand for. We are men and women who can stay to get the job done, not want to get home and not have performed our duties.

So that is the story. That is the story that we are going to tell. So I urge my colleagues to support this rule

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.

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

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

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 1 o'clock and 19 minutes a.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until today, Thursday, December 20, 2018, at 9 a.m.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the distinguished gentleman, Mr. Newhouse, for giving me the time.

Mr. Speaker, it is true that, from time to time, the Rules Committee does need to take the authority and the responsibility that they have, and the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts will soon learn this next year as I assume he will assume that role as the new chairman of the Rules Committee.

In fact, the arguments that are being made today relate to the substance of the bill. The bill that is at hand is very important, and that is the farm bill, the farm bill that we know has a 10-year window, that is net neutral, that protects the balances that we have talked about.

But it updates not only the opportunities for people who were in rural areas to update that policy, but it reinvigorates our establishment by this House, and the United States Senate, that has already handled this bill, and the President, to reassert that which they believe is important; and that is, the men and women who live in the rural areas, the men and women who get up at 4 o'clock in the morning; men and women who are there protecting the grass roots, the soil, the topsoil of this country. We need them to serve not only this Nation but the world.

It is true that hemp was added. Mr. Comer, who is a Member of Congress from Kentucky, last year began engaging me on this issue. We agreed that we would put it in. It is an important agricultural product and will aid and help very much so, not only a marketplace, but farmers in Kentucky and other places.

As it relates to the Authorization for Use of Military Force, AUMF, I would like to tell my colleagues that, in fact, I did make that decision that we would include by not allowing, not debate, but a vote that would take place on this floor.

Mr. Speaker, so what we are going to do is, we are going to have a classified briefing tomorrow that will further allow debate based upon the facts of the case. Mr. Speaker, I assure you that we will be here all next week, and if the facts of the case warrant, we will address the issue then.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a poem by Albert Carey Caswell:

Our tears are deep

In hearts of the love which speak

As no longer upon this earth to keep

You, as its for you Timber Wolf we now so weep

With sadness and tears of joy so sweet

For heaven is full of such men of grace

Who stand strong in all of their love and courage, and in all

their service and faith, in what they've faced

And for whom our Nation have so bled, for that old Red,

White, and Blue each day they wake in how they've led

Who give, not take

For you George,

America Son our Lord holds so a place

As an Angel who will watch over us, because of your service

and faith

``A Patriot's plane was shot from the sky''

``Would this brave heart live or die?''

``What was to be?''

``When, the Lord reached down and pulled this man from the

sea''

George, Rise

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1160 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), the ranking member, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this rule and the underlying legislation. The rule provides for consideration of the Senate amendment to H.R. 88, showing the text of the Retirement Savings and Other Tax Relief Act of 2018 and the Taxpayer First Act of 2018.

This past December, Congress passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in the interests of the American people. It was done around December 18, this last year.

The legislation was a bold, pro-growth bill that helped overhaul our Tax Code, and I believe it has unleashed the free enterprise system all across this great Nation.

Mr. Speaker, this was done because 8 years of anemic economic growth is what America had been working through. We had been working through high taxes, high rules, high regulations that were taking American jobs away from Americans and moving them elsewhere. It was limiting the future of not only America, but also Americans: the newest Americans in the job market, whether they be high school graduates, whether they be college graduates, or whether they be those that entered and finished professional school.

The bottom line, Mr. Speaker, is that for too long, for some 8 years, we had had a circumstance where the American Dream for so many fathers and mothers became to get their child out of the house after college, and that became an American Dream if a job was possible.

No longer, as a result of this tax act, do we find America in that sort of circumstance.

Today we find not only are there jobs aplenty, but the market is rising, wages are being increased, and the opportunity for all Americans is bright again. That is because Republicans and President Trump worked together to pass not only a jobs and tax bill, but we had a bill that would increase the amount of revenue that is flowing into the United States coffers and Treasury right now.

Despite what is being told by many in the marketplace, that we are simply running at a huge deficit, more money is coming into the Treasury supporting not only America, but the American Dream, and more people have money in their pockets.

So growth and competition have always been keys to an expanding economy, more jobs, increased wages. And in my home city of Dallas, Texas, and across the country, it is seen by people every single day.

Now, does that create new responsibilities and new issues? Yes, it does. And I will tell you that we must be prepared as a Nation to tackle those issues also.

But today, this legislation is about the person that goes to work. This bill today is about the entrepreneur, the family, the small business owner, the American people.

And also, as we will soon learn as we work through this debate, people who were impacted by disaster, whether it be floods, typhoons, tornados, fires, or other things that have occurred in this great Nation, we are turning the attention to ask for people back home to help and to help more, and we are going to do that through encouraging them as a part of the Tax Code.

We are going to do much more. We are going to help the soldier and the soldier's family. We are going to help the people who are those that see tax cheats and tax fraud, and protect the whistleblower.

We are going to take what is 300 pages of a small bill that can easily be read in a short period of time and understood, this is all about, not helping any one person or persons, it is helping millions across the country for an extension of their taxes and tax relief for yet one more year.

This is simply a jump-start to make sure that the economy looks forward, not backwards, does not look to one year, but looks to two in the relief that we are going to have.

Mr. Speaker, the question is, how is it going in America today?

Well, the answer is we have the lowest number of people who are searching for jobs and entering the jobless market to about the same number since 1996.

The annual skyrocketing amount that we have of business investment, of people who are taking jobs, people who are reinvesting in America is at a high level.

This package today will build upon that, it will build upon the successes that we are presently having and will make sure that we are doing the right thing.

We know that America is still hurting. We know that not all of America has recovered. As a matter of fact, we know that about 40 percent of Americans would not be able to cover an emergency expense of $400 or more without having to take out a loan. We know that half of American working age adults say they do not still have enough savings to be prepared for their retirement.

That is why Republicans are here, once again at the end of the year, to say we need to look at the aggregate, the whole country, and to make sure that we are looking at the effects of a year. We are trying to make sure that we continue making sure that the American family has a chance with an opportunity, not just to save, but to be able to use the Tax Code to their advantage.

Mr. Speaker, what this is about is continuing economic success, economic development, the ability that we have to continue giving the American worker, the American who is out of perhaps work, the newest student, or someone who was deeply impacted by a natural disaster, or a person who serves in the United States military, or for a person who sees a tax fraud or tax cheat to have a fair and equal footing to continue to call out those that take advantage of our system rather than using it properly.

That is what this small bill is about. It is about trying to end the year to give the American people the advantage that they need.

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

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

Yesterday, we had an opportunity in the Rules Committee to hear many of the same words, words certainly of very kind and sincere remarks. I appreciate the distinguished gentleman. He and I personally get along very well and have enjoyed my time during the some, I guess, 18 years or so that we have worked together in the Rules Committee.

But, Mr. Speaker, I also would say to you that there is kind of a different story to be told, and the different story is the actual bill. That is what we are going to focus on today.

I had a chance to read the bill--I actually read it--and there was a conversation yesterday about that. I actually read it for comprehension to understand what is in it rather than to read it with the viewpoint of opposing it--actually, read it to learn more about it, to learn the business behind a lot of work that had been taking place by the Ways and Means Committee, a lot of work that had been public debate and public discussion for a long time.

For instance, if we were to talk about those seniors who are required to begin taking part of their IRA at 70\1/2\ and start spending down that money that they have saved hard for over the years, government coming and telling them how they are going to become less able to support themselves by diminishing, taxing, using their IRA when they may not want to, that is a policy discussion. That is not related to millionaires and our GOP friends. That is related to some common sense and some policy.

Perhaps, page 73, as an example, Mr. Speaker, disaster-related tax relief, providing for people who were in hurricanes, tornadoes, typhoons, and wildfires, it says here the Camp and Woolsey wildfire disaster area. These were declared disasters that had become national priorities, not only people from my home State of Texas, my home city of Dallas going to help our neighbors to the west, but actually getting this in legislation quickly to make sure that people who live there are able to give more charitable deductions and get credit not just for that, but doing the right thing.

Mr. Speaker, it goes on and on, treatment of payments to Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

It is undeniable, as you read the bill, that you do this with an idea of understanding, comprehension. This isn't about special interests. This is about everybody who lived in these areas.

The deferral of people who are in the military, for reservists of the armed services. For the American people, Mr. Speaker, and you, page 131 of the bill, this is what we are attempting to get across, that this is for the American people.

Mr. Speaker, page 203, the IRS Free File Program, this is something that came from lots of work with one of my colleagues, Lynn Jenkins. Ms. Jenkins from Kansas, as a member of the Ways and Means Committee, worked carefully for a long period of time with a large group of people who were involved in this program.

We were able to upgrade not just tax law, but also to look at retaliation when people see tax cheats, tax frauds. They were given on page 238, Mr. Speaker, antiretaliation whistleblower protection for employees who see this.

Mr. Speaker, I could keep going and might in a few minutes. That is what this bill is about.

This bill is not as you have heard, but, as advertised, it is a year- end extension to make sure that the things during the year that needed to be addressed are getting addressed.

I read for comprehension to find a good deal, and, Mr. Speaker, I found one.

The Ways and Means Committee, our young chairman, Kevin Brady, his membership, these hardworking people, this is done for the American people. This is not done, as we have heard, for special interests, rich people, or millionaires. It is done for the right reason.

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

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

I appreciate the feedback from the gentleman from Wisconsin, a very dear and very good friend of mine, and I appreciate the differences between our parties.

The differences between the philosophies of the parties and the differences of the direction are apparent. But what is also apparent, Mr. Speaker, is that what these dadgum Republicans did is working: more money is coming into the Treasury; millions more people have a job.

The opportunity that happened--a result of the Tax Code changes--have brought, at minimum, $50 billion back into America in less than about 9 months, money flowing back in, which is the reverse of what was described in the nineties with that sucking sound of jobs leaving America. It is now the rush of the beautiful breeze of jobs coming back in, manufacturers not just in Wisconsin, but all through the Midwest, down even as far as Dallas, Texas.

Mr. Speaker, there was one point where I held a meeting and a press conference at a manufacturer, and that manufacturer said that this is the most robust period of time he had had in the history of the company and actually challenged the TV stations to say he was looking for 12 more workers. He found two the next day, people who called who were looking for jobs.

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about things that work, not axioms of these feel-good things: Oh, we can do better.

Well, for 8 years, they didn't do better. For 8 years, the philosophy was tax, spend, regulate, overregulate, move jobs overseas, blame somebody else for their problem.

That is not a winning hand. A winning hand is more people having jobs. Today, the highest numbers of people ever are working in America. The facts of the case are: more African Americans today work than ever, more Hispanics, more women, more opportunity, better chances for you to get a higher paying job, better opportunities.

Mr. Speaker, I wouldn't have to say too much, but these same policies that they talk about here today are the same policies that you would get out of the State of California that has 125,000 homeless people, 55,000 homeless people in Los Angeles. How can that be?

Well, it is easy to understand. The same policies that they want for us in Washington are the same policies they

have in Los Angeles and in California. That is called overregulate, overtax, and run them the heck out of town.

That is why there are so many unemployed people. That is why there are 55,000 homeless people in Los Angeles. Friends of mine who visit the beautiful, coveted city of San Francisco come back and tell the story of heartbreaking demise of people living on the streets of San Francisco, a drug-ridden, crime-ridden, despicable opportunity for people to see a great city in despair, in ruin.

That is what you get when you raise taxes, when you don't give opportunity, and when America fails to be able to look forward for the best opportunity.

Mr. Speaker, I get what they want. They don't want this bill that gives opportunity. They don't want the opportunity for people to have a fighting chance, and then they will blame it on somebody else.

Mr. Speaker, we are going to stand behind this bill, and we are going to pass it. I think there will be some Democrats who will vote for it. We are going to be proud to have them.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the distinguished gentleman who will, presumptively, be the new chairman of the Budget Committee.

I think what is interesting is, he said that Republicans promised more investment. Yes, that happened. Republicans promised more jobs. He said thousands. It is millions, Mr. Speaker, not thousands. We promised millions more jobs. He then said we promised thousands.

Mr. Speaker, then he went to a very interesting perspective, and that was: all companies really use this money just to buy back their own stock. Mr. Speaker, investment in a company is great, and while that might not be necessarily one of the greatest ways to do it, it buoyed the stock market up 40 percent.

It buoyed the stock market up to where every senior, every person that would have a stock market account, a savings account, a saving for their future, saving for their children, it buoyed that opportunity with value.

That is what we promised, and it worked, and they don't like that. They don't like the success of the stock market. They don't like the success, and so they act like it didn't even happen.

Mr. Speaker, the difference between thousands and millions is literally a thousand times difference. I spoke about this earlier when we were talking about this bill right here.

Oh, it is full of giveaways, they say, to millionaires and GOP fat cats.

It is extenders. It is continuing the success. It is doing the right thing. It is about people who had fire ravaging their homes and their areas, not just the Republican houses. It was about helping members of the military. It was about good policy from the Ways and Means Committee that was equally known as bipartisan with the work that was done there to make sure that we acknowledged tax cheats and let the employees who saw that get a better footing.

There were lots of hearings, lots of information. But if you simply read to have a jaundiced view of the world and to oppose it, as opposed to reading for substance, I see how you could get it wrong, Mr. Speaker. I see clearly how you could get it wrong if you don't read for comprehension.

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

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

Once again, I will reiterate that this bill is about doing great things for events that have happened in this country. I really can't imagine that Members would want to simply take the things that the leadership class of people from Mrs. Pelosi want to vote against-- disaster tax relief for people all across California, all across the Mariana Islands, and all across the country--except just to say that I do know that people in their party oppose the tax bill. I get that.

But there is more money coming in today than there was yesterday. There are millions of more people who have a job today than yesterday. I do know the numbers that were expressed are numbers that they want to tout, but that is not the way it worked. That was what the CBO said. But the reality of the circumstance is some 4 million people today have a job who did not have one and had been looking.

Mr. Speaker, just a few years ago, the major newspapers and major magazines across America said:

We are going to just have to get used to this is the way

the world is now--high unemployment, higher taxation.

Newsweek magazine had on its cover: ``Is America Really Turning Socialist?''

The answer came back that the American people disagree with unemployment. The American people disagree with high taxes. The American people see what is happening in California, 55,000 homeless people in Los Angeles. That is not an accident. That is policy in action; 125,000 homeless people in California, that is not an accident, that is policy directly from the Democratic Party that ran jobs out of the State so that the average family there didn't have a job.

That is what they are pushing right here. We are not going to do that. We are going to stand up and say: We read the bill. We read the bill. That is what it is here for. That is why we can stand up and tout this.

By the way, Mr. Speaker, when you are from Texas, if there is one riot, all it takes is one Ranger.

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

Just one Ranger, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining on my side?

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

I, of course, want to acknowledge and thank the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts. His time in the committee has been forthright, honest, and straightforward. The opportunity that he has to serve in the minority will be reflected with an opportunity for him to serve in the majority.

I think the Rules Committee is also headed for a bright future with an opportunity to fully vet ideas, the opportunity to talk, and to hear dialogue. I must say I have been through a number of chairmen, several at least, and I attempted to craft my own way for the committee.

I appreciate and respect the gentleman. I think it is also important to state that it extended to his young wife and his daughter who visited the committee several times. His wife, who, in a most genuine, professional and straightforward spousal context, to my wife, Karen, enjoyed a relationship and they found common interests, not only in working with cancer, but Jim's wife sent me a gracious letter acknowledging the work that I personally have done in cancer and in the areas of the FDA and dealing with cancer research and trials. That professionalism extended not just from Jim but to his young bride who was most genuine in her remarks.

Mr. Speaker, the opportunity for us to close today is a chance to reflect upon not just the ideas that we represent, but really our commitment to the American people. The American people do deserve a right to see a better process, and that I acknowledge. They have a right to know that the forthrightness of a committee, whether they are up at 2 in the morning or 8 in the morning because we had not completed necessarily our work the night before, the Rules Committee did its service. It did its service to this body on a bipartisan basis. It did it from professional content of a professional staff, not only from the minority that was led at the very top with Don Sisson, who did an awesome job, but also Steve Cote, the staff director. It was a relationship that has been successful for this body.

Mr. Speaker, I do want to say this, that just as the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts, the soon-to-be chairman--I assume chairman of the Rules Committee--as he has asked his side to look at and how they would vote, I would also ask you, Mr. Speaker, and the team, which today is in the majority, to make sure they read this bill with content orientation to the needs of the American people, to look at the real successes as we walk outside today to see that the booming economy that is taking place in America where people who did not have jobs do; for those who have been on our TV sets and in our prayers where some natural disaster has claimed them, whether it be through a mistake or through necessarily Mother Nature, that we as America are better when we work to solve problems together.

We are better in America when we believe there is no problem bigger than a solution, where we in America want to put our best foot forward and can work together.

Mr. Speaker, we are all better, all of us, than any one of us. My party is better with the Democratic Party than without the Democratic Party. My ideas are better to be vetted and even challenged. That way, the American people have a chance to see not only the possibility and probability, but also to vet the ideas that have made this Nation a great nation for so many years.

While it is true my service to this body will be coming to a close after 22 years, I would say to you, Mr. Speaker, that your service, too, to this great Nation has made our country better.

For those who are on the floor today, I would thank the distinguished gentleman from Texas. I would thank the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts. I would thank the distinguished gentleman from Florida, one of my fraternity brothers, who has brought forth ideas on this for other colleagues of Texas, like Mr. Green, who might be in attendance today.

I would say that we have tried to make this work as evidence that the

American people can see, and I think they can see it today. Mr. Speaker, I end my statement with a focus on this innovation and entrepreneurship.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.