Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I am proud to honor the career of Wadena broadcast legend, Mike Danvers, who is retiring after forty years in the radio industry. His last show was today, May 28, 2021.

Mike moved to Wadena, Minnesota in the Fall of 1984 and has been with KWAD-AM, KNSP-AM and the Superstation K106 ever since. Most recently, Mike was the morning show host for the Superstation and grew a strong base of listeners and fans along the way. He is beloved in Wadena and the surrounding communities that make up the Superstation K106 listening area.

However, he is not just known as the man on the morning radio. Mike is especially passionate about high school wrestling and coached wrestling in the Wadena area for 22 years. He has broadcasted live from 23 Minnesota State High School League Wrestling Tournaments and called play-by-play for hundreds of high schools sporting events.

Mike has been a friend and mentor to dozens of young broadcasters, and his legacy will continue through the lives of everyone he has touched throughout his time in the Wadena community.

Mike is the epitome of a true broadcaster. While we will miss him on the airwaves every morning, we wish him nothing but the best in his retirement.

I was recorded as a ``no'' roll-call 140 and intended as a ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Johnson for holding this incredibly important Special Order this evening.

For 23 years, I had the privilege of serving my hometown of Duluth, Minnesota, as a police officer. I know firsthand the sacrifices law enforcement officers make for the safety and security of their communities.

Policing is a noble profession and often a dangerous one. Ninety-one officers have been shot so far in 2021.

Despite this danger, countless men and women still put on the uniform, leave their loved ones behind, and put their own lives on the line every day.

During National Police Week, we celebrate and honor these heroes, but they deserve our respect for more than just 1 week. They deserve it year-round and so do their families.

This past year has been especially challenging for our law enforcement officers. There are some in the media and some in this very Chamber who choose to vilify our police officers for the actions of a few bad apples. Some have even called to defund the police. This reckless and dangerous message has had a chilling effect on our society.

Low morale is causing some officers to retire early. New officer recruitment is strained, and crime is on the rise in many cities.

This irresponsible rhetoric must change, and I call on all of my colleagues to help.

We must all honor the noble profession of policing, which has provided every one of us here in this Chamber with safety and security. We must all encourage the American people to respect the rule of law and those who are entrusted to enforce it.

I, for one, am proud to stand here today, to publicly send my thanks to our dedicated police officers and to honor those who have made the ultimate sacrifice.

To all my brothers and sisters in the blue and brown, please know that you are appreciated, needed, and valued. God bless, and may He protect you all.

Madam Speaker, on day one of this administration, Joe Biden destroyed thousands of jobs at the stroke of a pen.

One of these jobs was held by my constituent, Patrick Thorssen, an operating engineer and a member of Local 49. By stopping the Keystone XL pipeline, Joe Biden devastated countless families and communities.

Madam Speaker, I am asking tonight: Mr. President, where are these 1 million jobs? These families and communities deserve better.

Madam Speaker, when I speak to families back home, they understand that there are individuals and children in the country who were brought here through no fault of their own. They are understanding and compassionate people who want a solution that is fair and just. But something that I also hear from these same families is their concern and fear for providing green cards and paths to citizenship to gang members and criminals.

The text of this bill only compounds those fears--preventing the United States Government from using readily available information to remove gang members who are national security threats and other public safety threats.

This motion to recommit ensures that those individuals whose applications would be denied on the basis of criminal grounds, national security grounds, public safety risks, or as gang members, are considered by the Department of Homeland Security for removal from the United States.

Madam Speaker, under H.R. 6, information provided in an application for a green card may not be used for the purposes of immigration enforcement, even if the DHS denies the application or it is withdrawn. This means that if an applicant has a murder conviction, a rape conviction, or if the applicant is a gang member, and DHS knows about it because of the application, DHS can't even refer that person for removal.

To be clear, this MTR does not direct the DHS to remove an applicant if they are denied on any other basis. Only applicants who are denied on criminal or national security grounds as public safety risks or as gang members would be affected.

As crime rates skyrocket in cities across the country, the American people are asking for serious solutions. They are crying out for help. And this bill only further enables murderers, rapists, and gang members to exploit our system.

If the Democrats see fit to listen to the American people and exclude these criminals and gang members from receiving green cards under H.R. 6, then they should vote for this motion to recommit to ensure dangerous individuals are denied a safe haven here in our neighborhoods and communities where our children go to school and play.

Mr. Speaker, I stand here today a retired law enforcement officer and the victim of two violent gun crimes.

While off duty, a repeat offender shot me through my car window while I was with my wife, Jodi. While on duty, another violent criminal pointed his gun at me and pulled the trigger. By the grace of God, his gun malfunctioned. Mr. Speaker, I was fighting for my life. I am lucky to be here today to speak to this body.

Criminals who are willing to take someone's life don't care about the gun legislation we debate in Congress. And the bills we are debating this week would not have prevented those two criminals from attempting to take my life.

So let's talk about who is going to be impacted by these bills. The law-abiding citizens who are looking to protect themselves, their families, and their communities from death or great bodily harm. They will be the ones who are penalized for and prevented from exercising their Second Amendment rights.

Defending my constituents' constitutional rights will be something I do until my very last day in office, and I implore my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 1280, the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act.

With something as important as police reform, it is important to garner many perspectives. The JUSTICE Act, legislation Senator Scott and I introduced, is a product of my perspective as a law enforcement officer from Minnesota and Senator Scott's perspective as a Black man from South Carolina.

The JUSTICE Act increases body cameras and implements duty to intervene and deescalation training. It improves hiring and recruitment practices. It reinvigorates the principles of community policing to rebuild the relationships between law enforcement officers and the communities that they serve.

The JUSTICE Act, which received bipartisan support last Congress, includes several critical provisions that are supported by Democrats: the Walter Scott Notification Act, the National Criminal Justice Commission Act, and the Closing the Law Enforcement Consent Loophole Act. It even includes legislation that Vice President Harris introduced, the Justice for Victims of Lynching Act.

Unfortunately, we are not considering the JUSTICE Act today. We are, instead, once again, exploring political gamesmanship through H.R. 1280.

Now, when we voted on this legislation last year, the Democrats knew it was dead upon passage, but my good friends and I in the Problem Solvers Caucus decided that this conversation was too important to let go. So we worked for months with Representatives from both sides of the aisle, with Representatives from the Congressional Black Caucus, with Representatives from law enforcement and legal backgrounds, on areas where we could find compromise between the Justice in Policing Act and my bill, the JUSTICE Act.

We discussed no-knock warrants, the 1033 program, use of force, record retention, and so much more. We were making such great headway. I truly believed that we could have put together a bipartisan package of reforms for our American communities that have been calling for change.

Unfortunately, the other side walked away. As the election drew near, the priorities of my Democratic colleagues shifted. Their fight to retain power became more important than providing police reform for the American people.

So now we are here again, Mr. Speaker, to vote on the exact same bill without a single change; a bill that has zero

input from Republicans, zero input or support from our law enforcement community. And I will repeat that. Zero input or support from our law enforcement community.

Mr. Speaker, this is a bill that will, no doubt, make our communities less safe. We all want police reform and we all want change, but until such time as we work together, this legislation is just another messaging bill from my Democrat colleagues.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a heavy heart to mourn the tragic loss of K-9 Luna, a beloved member of the Duluth Police Department, who was shot and killed in the line of duty last week.

Luna was a 3-year-old Dutch Shepherd who joined the department's K-9 unit less than 2 years ago, after her handler, Officer Aaron Haller, lost his K-9 partner, Haas, in a similar incident.

As a former Duluth police officer with the Duluth Police Department, I know firsthand that our K-9 partners perform their duties bravely and with great loyalty.

To their handlers, a K-9 is more than a dog. They are a partner, protector, and a valued family member. K-9 officers go home with their handlers each night, so their dedication to their handlers and their job does not end after each workday.

K-9 Luna was a guardian of the Duluth community. She died a hero's death, giving her life to protect her partner and fellow officers on the scene.

My heart is with Luna's handler, Officer Aaron Haller, the Haller family, and the entire Duluth Police Department during this time of deep sorrow.

I know it cannot be easy to say goodbye to such a good and loving friend. I speak for the entire Duluth community when I say that we are eternally grateful for Luna's service and sacrifice.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the amendments contained in this en bloc package, which includes three of my own and two I offer on behalf of my good friend and colleague, Mr. Gosar.

The amendments I offer restore control to locals who not only recreate in the areas impacted by the underlying bill, but live and earn their livelihoods there, too. This is about northern Arizona and western Colorado. This is about uranium formations in Representative Gosar's district, and oil and gas in Representatives Lamborn's and Boebert's districts. This is about local governance and listening to those who live and work in the area, not just those who make it a short weekend retreat.

The amendments I offer today move control of land back to those who govern best. These amendments exempt the bill from taking effect in Arizona's Fourth, Colorado's Third, and Colorado's Fifth Congressional Districts, and require county input. Those who represent these districts were not meaningfully consulted on these bills.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from the Mohave County Board of Supervisors in support of Representative Gosar's amendment No. 7. These are the folks who know best for their families, their neighbors, and their land.

Mohave County Board

of Supervisors,

Kingman, AZ, February 24, 2021.

Hon. Paul Gosar,

Washington, DC.

Congressman Gosar: The Mohave County Board of Supervisors

is writing to offer our support for your amendment to H.R.

803--Colorado Wilderness Act of 2021. As you know, the

passage of this legislation will have a grave effect on

Mohave County, Arizona, and our neighboring counties in Utah.

Uranium mining in the past has been the forefront of our

economic growth in Mohave County and if allowed to continue

will bring in nearly $29 billion to our local economy over a

42 year period. The passage of H.R. 803 would make permanent

a 2012 moratorium on uranium mining in our area. The language

of your amendment would help alleviate the permanent economic

loss we would sustain under the passage of H.R. 803. We

strongly support the passing of this amendment as presented

in the Rules Committee and the House of Representatives.

Without this amendment, the financial stability of our

economy in Mohave County would drastically suffer.

In 2012, the Secretary of the Interior imposed a 20 year

ban on over 1 million acres of land in the Arizona Strip Area

for the purpose of Uranium mining. This ban included both

public lands and National Forest System lands. This ban took

away much needed growth and jobs from our area. Secretary

Salazar at the time issued this withdrawal without complying

with the law requiring coordination with local governments.

The Federal Land Policy Management Act, 43 USC Section 1711

requires that the Secretary and his designees ``coordinate''

with local government as to development and implementation of

any plan or management action. Coordination is defined in the

Act as requiring prior notice of proposed plans and actions

to the local government officials (``prior'' meaning prior to

public announcements, and early enough to provide

``meaningful'' participation by the local officials in the

``development'' of the plan or action.). The congressional

mandate or coordination also requires the Secretary to use

all practicable means to reach consistency between the

federal plan/management action and local policy, plan or law.

All of which Secretary Salazar did not do.

Making this ban permanent based on misinformation will have

lasting effects on Mohave County. We respect and take a

responsibility for protecting the Grand Canyon, but saying

that the Grand Canyon will suffer because of mining is

inaccurate. Secretary Salazar's reasoning behind the

withdrawal was out of concern that it could damage the

region's drinking water and the park's water quality. Bureau

of Land Management officials contradicted those claims by

explaining that their Arizona Strip field office had no

evidence of contamination of water, and had no evidence of

problems with the safe operation of the uranium mines in

operation on the lands.

Uranium mining is important and useful for many reasons.

The lands in the ``Strip'' contain the nation's high grade

uranium deposits and enough uranium to provide power

generation for the state of California for over 20 years.

Uranium is useful in many ways. It is used by our military

for national security and defense. Uranium metal is very

dense and heavy. When it is depleted (DU), uranium is used by

the military as shielding to protect Army tanks, and also in

parts of

bullets and missiles. The military also uses enriched uranium

to power nuclear propelled Navy ships and submarines, and in

nuclear weapons. A permanent withdrawal of uranium mining

from the ``Strip'' harms the American people by removing

between 326-375 million lbs (the equivalent electricity

generating capacity for the entire state of California's 40

million people for 22.4 years) of uranium.

From a national security standpoint, domestic utilities now

import 90% of the uranium used to operate America's 104

nuclear reactors. Thirty years ago, these reactors used U.S.

mined uranium for 100% of electricity production. The nation

cannot be pro-nuclear and anti-nuclear fuel. In sum, these

deposits represent the last available use of our public lands

for economic growth in our region.

The opponents of uranium mining have chosen to ignore the

fact that mining with environmentally sound reclamation was

conducted from the early 1980s until the price of uranium

collapsed in 1993. No mining at all occurred from 1993 until

2010, and the Denison mine which is now operating, is

following and often exceeding all environmental and safety

laws.

Arizona needs to go back to the roots that led to Arizona

being developed, and that is mining. The strict federal and

state environmental laws already on the books will protect

the public from environmental damage to the Grand Canyon

watershed. The mining of uranium however does not affect

ground water nor destroy the natural resources of the land.

It does not require open pit mining. Upon completion of

mining one Breccia Pipe (4 years) the land is placed back

into its native state.

We want to thank you for putting forward this amendment.

Nuclear energy can be the future of clean energy. We have the

resources in this Country to ensure that happens and we have

the technology and means to ensure mining that energy is both

environmentally safe and protects our natural resources. We

stand in support of the amendment.

Sincerely,

Buster Johnson,

Chairman,

Mohave County Board of Supervisors.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on this en bloc, and a ``no'' on the underlying bill.

Madam Speaker, I am disappointed because we are again on the floor in a closed rule, where zero Republican amendments were made in order because, again, we are here voting on a package that has hundreds of billions of dollars in non-COVID-related spending.

Again, I am down here on the floor, disappointed that the majority disallowed my amendments.

One of my amendments would have reported on the impact the Biden job- killing Keystone XL order would have on small businesses.

My other amendment, which was denied, prevented taxpayer dollars from funding child slave labor. No, you did not hear that wrong. In fact, this is the fifth time the Democrats have blocked this type of amendment from me. What is the issue with being anti-child slave labor?

Like I said, I am not sure how this is controversial, but when faced with the binary decision to source these minerals from human rights abusers in Africa and China or source them from Minnesota under the best labor standards and the best environmental standards in the world, I will take made in America 150 percent of the time.

I join my constituents' disappointment in this process. This is very concerning.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 803, a package of Democrat land-grab bills that were not marked up in the Committee on Natural Resources and are opposed by several members and the constituents they serve.

H.R. 803 is a 330-page partisan package containing 8 different bills. Not one bill or one page was marked up or heard in committee this Congress. Unfortunately, Democrats on the Committee on Natural Resources have waived responsibility. There have been zero markups or committee hearings this Congress.

Mr. Speaker, we have 8 new Republican members on our committee, and 3 on the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources alone, a committee which I lead. Our membership deserves to debate these bills and mark them up. Let's have our new members hear from the stakeholders and make decisions based on the evidence presented. We need to end this practice of just giving away committee jurisdiction and jamming through legislation.

H.R. 803 dovetails with the Biden/Harris agenda and puts America last by outsourcing our supply of critical minerals and endangering our national security. Our submarines and aircraft carriers are powered with clean nuclear energy.

Mr. Speaker, nuclear power is a huge contributor to our electric grid. By withdrawing areas from uranium and other mineral development, it furthers our reliance on Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Russia--who I assure you, do not have the labor or environmental standards that we demand in our country and who do not have our best interests at heart.

Mr. Speaker, I oppose this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Joe Berklich, a World War II veteran and Hibbing, Minnesota, native, who is celebrating his 100th birthday today.

In 1943, Joe enlisted in the Army and courageously served in the Pacific theater until the end of the war. In fact, all four of the Berklich brothers were proud to serve during our country's time of need.

Upon returning home, Joe married the love of his life, Margaret. He still lives in the family home in Hibbing, Minnesota, where they raised their four children: Michael, Danny, Timmy, and Mary. Always a family man, Joe's favorite memories are spending the Fourth of July at their cabin on Bear Lake and spoiling his grandchildren on Christmas Eve.

After the war, Joe worked for U.S. Steel, the Sherman Mine, and Minntac in Mountain Iron. He became a foreman and also traveled the Nation working with vendors of mining equipment.

In his free time, Joe has been an active member of the Hibbing community, serving as a Hibbing city councilor to the president of the Hibbing Curling Club.

Mr. Speaker, members of the Greatest Generation like Joe Berklich are the pride of our communities. As the Hibbing community gathers today for a drive-by past his house to celebrate this major milestone, I am proud to stand here on the House floor to thank Joe for his service and wish him the happiest of birthdays.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on Rollcall No. 35.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for this opportunity.

I rise with my colleagues today out of serious concern for the well- being of America's workers and American energy independence.

Under the Trump administration, America came first. The priority was lowering energy costs for Americans and ending our supply chain dependency, along with supporting high-wage jobs in the energy industry.

Sadly, within just 2 weeks, Joe Biden has started destroying much of that progress and setting our Nation back. President Biden's executive orders have ended high-wage pipeline jobs on Keystone XL. He has banned oil and gas development on Federal lands and forced America to rejoin the unfair Paris climate agreement which gives a free pass to polluters like India and Communist China.

His actions have serious consequences for my rural district and districts like mine.

In my district, gas prices have started to dramatically increase as Joe Biden keeps punishing American families with executive order after executive order.

In fact, since November 30, the gas prices have already risen $0.32 and counting. A 60-mile round trip for work is not uncommon in northern Minnesota. Already, that is a $244 a year increase per driver. Imagine what it will be like for middle class families if these increases continue.

Furthermore, Joe Biden's executive order canceling critical projects like the Keystone XL pipeline sends a chilling message to union members nationwide, including in my district where many are currently working to replace the Line 3 pipeline.

Many workers are asking themselves: Will Joe Biden cancel their job next? And what about those individuals who were employed with a good- paying, high-quality job working on pipelines or in oil fields on our Federal lands?

Because of Joe Biden's anti-jobs agenda, these individuals are not only being denied a living wage, but the dignity of work. Meanwhile, they will still need to put gas in their vehicles.

Prices will keep rising and the gas they use won't be produced by hardworking Americans any longer. Instead, they will be purchasing gas for their trucks from hostile countries like Russia, Venezuela, and China, all of which signed the Paris climate agreement, but not one of these countries has met their obligation.

Madam Speaker, Joe Biden's unilateral executive orders are harmful. It may not be understood here in the Beltway, but my constituents know that these executive orders mean job loss and higher energy costs for the American family.

It has been less than a month and Joe Biden has already made his agenda very, very clear. American jobs, American families, and American energy independence are no longer first.

At this time of economic uncertainty, I urge the Biden administration to change their reckless course. I urge the Biden administration to abandon the failed Obama-era policies and support an all-of-the-above energy strategy that will create jobs, keep energy costs low, and maintain our energy independence which will enhance our national security.

And by working together to support energy jobs and reduced dependence on foreign nations, we have the chance to create a tomorrow with unimaginable potential.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Ranking Member Chabot for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, my bill, H.R. 2345, the Clarifying the Small Business Runway Extension Act, is a bill that does exactly what it says: makes clear the intent of the Small Business Runway Extension Act of 2018. The Small Business Runway Extension Act of 2018 was simple, straightforward, and unambiguous. It simply extended the Small Business Administration's receipts-based size calculation from a 3-year average to 5 years. Recognizing the significance of this bill for small businesses, the Small Business Runway Extension Act of 2018 easily passed through both the House and Senate and became law on December 17, 2018.

Within 4 days of the law's passage, the SBA stalled its implementation, issuing an information notice that effectively contradicted the Small Business Runway Extension Act of 2018 by maintaining the 3-year calculation until the agency could go through the rulemaking process. Coincidentally, or perhaps because of the pressure exerted by Congress and the public, the SBA issued its proposed rule for the Small Business Runway Extension Act of 2018 mere days before Chairman Golden and I held a hearing in the Subcommittee on Contracting and Infrastructure to hold the SBA accountable for its delay. Unfortunately, the proposed rule still maintains the current 3- year standard in SBA regulations.

During this hearing, we highlighted how this conflict in law versus SBA regulation imposes significant, real-world challenges for small businesses that may be teetering on the edge between small and other- than-small business status. The need for clarity was a constant and recurring theme, and this bill provides that clarity.

First, H.R. 2345 makes clear that the Small Business Runway Extension Act of 2018 does, in fact, apply to the SBA and, therefore, should have become effective on the date it was signed into law. Thus, businesses relying on the 5-year average to remain in their small business status were correct in their assessment and may continue to hold this status.

Second, the bill requires the Small Business Administration to develop a transition plan for small businesses and Federal agencies as they shift to the 5-year rule. The transition plan shall include a buffer period in which firms that benefit from the old 3-year calculation may continue to rely on that formula for a set amount of time as they prepare for the eventual shift to the 5-year average calculation.

In short, H.R. 2345 restates the intent of Congress as written in the Small Business Runway Extension Act of 2018 and adopts solutions that will create a smooth transition for all parties involved. This will allow more businesses to retain access to SBA benefits, including loans and contracts, that have allowed our small businesses to grow, thrive, and greatly contribute to our economy.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Golden for his leadership on this act. It was and is a privilege to work with him on the Small Business Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2345, the Clarifying the Small Business Runway Extension Act.