Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my dear friend and colleague from California (Mr. Lowenthal) for his distinguished service. I thank Mr. Curtis for his distinguished service as well. I also thank Mr. Bishop, all the members of the committee, and the staff, of course, for the wonderful work they have done on this.

Mr. Speaker, I rise here to join in support of H.R. 1350.

Basically, as was explained by Mr. Curtis, the bill authorizes a land transfer between the Bureau of Land Management and the National Park Service, a move that would greatly improve the overall land management and efficiency within the Voyageurs National Park in my district in northern Minnesota. I might add, we are very proud of that accomplishment.

Specifically, the bill permits the transfer of 49 acres of land within the park from the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management to the National Park Service, as was originally intended by the original legislation for the park when it was signed into law; but, for a variety of reasons, these 49 acres, including 61 separate tracts of land, were not included in the original Federal legislation that established the park in 1975.

It may interest some of my colleagues to know that I was here in 1975 and was able to, of course, register my support for the establishment of that park.

Now, to be clear, the National Park Service administration already manages the 49 acres; but without a change in the law that permanently transfers the lands, a cumbersome and duplicative renewal process is required every 20 years. The procedure involves a notice, a publication in the Federal Register, and a review of comments, all of which are, essentially, a waste of taxpayers' money and everybody's time within the government who has to deal with it.

So make no mistake about it, as Mr. Curtis pointed out, this bill saves the taxpayers' money and the bureaucracy time.

In addition, the bill would also authorize the National Park Service to acquire and integrate new land into Voyageurs National Park through land exchanges with the State and local governments that own land within or adjacent to the park's boundaries.

In short, Mr. Speaker, this bill would eliminate any future concerns related to the Department of the Interior's ownership and jurisdiction, facilitating the ease of management for the National Park Service, the State, and the county; and it would do so at no cost, in addition, of course, to saving money for the Federal Government as determined by the Congressional Budget Office.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to adopt the measure.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained due to ongoing issues surrounding the health of my youngest daughter in Minnnesota.

Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 14; YEA on Roll Call No. 15; NAY on Roll Call No. 16; and YEA on Roll Call No. 17.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained for voting on Monday, December 18. Had I been present and voting, I would have voted:

Nay on Roll Call No. 685 (On Motion to Fix the Convening Time);

Aye on Roll Call No. 686 (On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 4375, STEM Research and Education Effectiveness and Transparency Act, as amended); and

Aye on Roll Call Vote No. 687 (Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 3979, Keep America's Refuges Operational Act).

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3115, the land exchange between PolyMet Mining Corporation and the Superior National Forest of the U.S. Forest Service.

Let me begin by saying that what the exchange involves is PolyMet giving up approximately 6,550 acres of forestland that is surrounded by old mining sites, with no public access. In return, they are giving us 6,690 acres, or an additional 40 acres, which is a wonderfully good deal for the taxpayers and the concerns of the environment, if people just look at the exchange.

At the end of the day, the taxpayers get more land and more value-- $425,000, to be exact. There is no cost to the taxpayers. The public gets more access to the land. They get more lakeshore property, more timberland, more wild rice land, and more wetlands.

If approved and if the PolyMet Mining project should ultimately go forward--by the way, it has received the highest marks that any mining project has ever received from the EPA, after almost 12 years of review--the simple truth is that this is a good bill for the public.

Let me say it is important to note that there are some things that this bill does not do. I need to say that because there is some terrible misinformation floating around out there.

Number one, it does not authorize a mining project. Let's make that very clear.

Number two, it does not interfere with the State and Federal environmental review processes, procedures, and permitting process.

Most importantly, the preponderance of the information coming into my office is concern for the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness, and rightfully so. I was an original sponsor of that legislation back in the day before I took my little 32-year hiatus. There is no more precious, pristine area in this country--perhaps, the world--that needs to be protected.

Let me show you something. For those of you who weren't paying attention in science class, there is the Continental Divide. The water north of that flows north and water to the south of that flows south.

This project is south of the Continental Divide, so there is physically no way possible, short of a nuclear bomb or getting hit by a planet or something, that that water can flow into and in any way harm or damage the Boundary Waters.

To be specific, right here, there already is a 60-year-old mining project, Northshore Mining. They have been mining there 60 years.

And by the way, there is sulfur in that soil, as well. It has never caused any damage to the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness.

This is a good bill for the environment, good for jobs, and it is good for the community. In no way can it harm or damage the Boundary Waters or I wouldn't be standing here today advocating for its purchase.

I urge my colleagues to adopt this important piece of legislation. I remind them that it has good bipartisan support from our Minnesota Senators and the Governor, bipartisan support from our congressional delegation, chambers of commerce, and the trade unions.

It is a good bill, and I urge its adoption.

Mr. Speaker, the simple truth is America has no business involving itself in this Saudi-led civil war in Yemen. That is why I introduced my amendment, which passed the House just last July, declaring that none of the funds in the National Defense Authorization Act will be used to deploy ground troops in Yemen.

But the fact is that the United States is still financially supporting this Saudi-led war, and that is simply wrong for three primary reasons:

First, America's support for this Saudi-led war in Yemen is unauthorized. Congress never approved a declaration of war in Yemen. Nothing could be more clear in the Constitution of the United States as to who has responsibility for declaring wars. It is not the President. It is the Congress of the United States of America. Right now, we are still financially supporting a Saudi air war and blockade in Yemen-- both, acts of war. It is time to put a stop to that.

Second, we are supporting this Saudi-led blockade that is causing horrific starvation, disease, and death in Yemen. This blockade has forced more than 7 million people in Yemen to the brink of starvation. It has sparked the world's largest cholera crisis in recorded history, and more than 8,000 people in Yemen have been killed and nearly 50,000 injured in airstrikes and fighting on the ground. It is unconscionable for us to continue support for this war.

And, finally, I can't say enough, America is already involved in too many endless wars of choice in the Middle East. The President of the United States acknowledged that we have spent $6 trillion just on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and they have acknowledged that we have $2 trillion in expenses going forward taking care of the heroes who served our Nation--lost arms and legs and irreparable damage. That is $8 trillion.

Think about it. For one of those trillion--just one of them--we could have eliminated student debt in America.

Think about it. For another one of those trillion, there is our trillion for our infrastructure.

Think about it. For another one of those trillion, we could have found a cure for cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer's, or any one of a number of things.

These endless wars of choice, where we have inadvertently been on virtually every side of the conflicts one time or another, are so costly in blood and in treasury. It is time to put a stop to spending these trillions on these wars and start reinvesting in America, reinvesting in the American people.

Mr. Speaker, the bottom line: Congress must stand up and bring an end to American involvement in these costly wars and, now, in Yemen, where we have no authorization and we have no business being involved.

Mr. Speaker, the simple truth is that the rich are getting richer in degrees unparalleled in human history in this country, the poor are getting poorer, and the middle class are getting crushed.

And now our Republican colleagues have offered a proposal to the Congress of the United States to make it worse. The fact is that, under the Republican tax bill, the upper 1 percent will be getting a $1.7 trillion tax deduction. At the same time, independent reports tell us the middle class will be getting--millions of them--will be getting an increase in their taxes, and we will be passing on $1.5 trillion in debt to our children and our children's children.

Mr. Speaker, this tax bill is a scam. It is traditional old-fashioned trickle-down economics that has never worked and has been the ruination of every great economy in every great country in the world. We have to oppose it and stop them from succeeding in this tax scam.

Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, I rise in support of the Democratic budget alternative and in opposition to the Republican budget that has been proposed.

It has been often said that gracious living and good politics is all about gratitude. Paying something forward is how you show your gratitude.

Quite frankly, the simple truth about this Republican budget is that it rolls back a century of progress. It sets the stage for the dismantling of Social Security, which lifted more people out of poverty than anything, and for Speaker Ryan's plan to turn it over to Wall Street.

It sets the stage for turning Medicare over to the insurance industry--Medicare that provided our elderly with insurance and life opportunities that heretofore had not existed.

This century of progress that this budget rolls back includes clean air and water. It includes healthy, safe working places and conditions. It includes an opportunity society that invests in our people.

And guess what? In a little over a century, we doubled life expectancies. Wow, what a marvelous accomplishment.

We created the best and biggest middle class in the history of the world. We became a model for the world; jobs with living wages and healthcare benefits and pension benefits.

This Republican budget proposes to roll back that entire century of progress. It is nothing about paying it forward. It is nothing about paying things back. It is about rolling back a century of progress, and we can not let that happen.

That is what the Democratic budget is really all about, investing in people, investing in infrastructure, investing in America, and investing in people's jobs and living wages, and in their benefits. That is how you show your gratitude, and we have got a lot to be grateful for.

Let's vote and enact this Democratic budget proposal which invests in America, which invests in people, which invests in opportunities. That is what this debate is really all about.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today as Co-Chair of the Congressional Friends of Finland Caucus to extend a warm welcome to Finnish President Sauli Niinisto, who is visiting Minnesota to celebrate Finland's upcoming 100th Independence Day, and attending FinnFest, an annual festival celebrating Finnish heritage and culture. FinnFest is held in cities across the U.S. and Canada, and this year Minnesota is especially honored to welcome the Finnish delegation in preparation for the 100th anniversary of Finland's independence later this year.

Minnesota is home to more than 60,000 Finnish-Americans, and our state's culture is enriched with many proud Finnish traditions and customs. Finnish Americans have established many Minnesota cities including Hibbing, Mountain Iron, Tower, Eveleth, and Virginia. Today, Finnish Americans continue to contribute to our state as leaders of industry, education, and local government.

It is truly an honor to represent so many proud Finnish-Americans in Congress, and to support our Nation's warm diplomatic relationship with Finland. Trade and tourism between our Nations continues to be mutually beneficial, with thousands of American's visiting Finland every year to experience Finnish culture firsthand, and explore Finland's many historic and beautiful sights.

Thank you President Niinisto for visiting our state and helping us celebrate Finnish heritage and culture during this very special year for your great Nation.

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

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

Mr. Chairman, as co-chairman of the bipartisan Congressional Lung Cancer Caucus, I want to first express my appreciation for allowing my amendment to be made here in order and for the work of the committee.

Make no mistake, these extra funds that are in my measure, the $3.8 million for cancer research at the National Cancer Institute, are urging that it be spent on lung cancer, in particular. Those extra funds will make an enormous difference in battling lung cancer, which is, as you all know, the most deadly of all the cancers.

As many of you know, my daughter, Katherine, was diagnosed with stage IV nonsmoking small cell lung cancer almost 2 years ago. Thanks to medical research and the daily prayers of so many of my colleagues here in the House, Katherine is still with us.

But like so many thousands of others, she is still courageously and desperately fighting for her future. We can provide those people with some real hope and support for their determination through additional research dollars that are so desperately needed.

As you know--or may not know--we have made little or no progress in the last 20 years in combating lung cancer. There is still a survival rate of something less than 1 or 2 percent.

But make no mistake, the money that this committee and this Congress and this House has provided for research not just in cancer, but many of the other fields, has played a critically important role in increasing our life expectancies--played the lead role in increasing our life expectancies in this country. In my grandfather's time it was 47, and now it is almost 80.

But one of the areas where we just haven't been able to make any progress at all is in lung cancer research. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this modest request for a modest amount of money to be added to helping us make some progress in lung cancer research in the way that we have done for so many other forms of the disease.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I express my thanks and gratitude, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R. 3440, the DREAM Act, to protect a young woman from the Midwest like Amy, who works as a user experience designer in a technology company in Illinois.

Mr. Chairman, my first amendment simply declares that none of the funds authorized to be appropriated in this bill can be used to deploy members of the Armed Forces to participate in the ongoing civil war in Yemen.

By passing this amendment, we ensure that no hero, no patriot in a U.S. military uniform will be put in harm's way in a conflict that can only be settled by the parties involved.

My second amendment simply cuts off funds to any so-called friendly rebels in Iraq or Syria who make a mockery of our good intentions by misusing American arms and resources, and, in far too many instances, using them against us.

We have already spent trillions of dollars, lost thousands of precious lives in these endless wars of choice in the Middle East. It is time to put a stop to it, time to start investing in America and the American people. So I urge the adoption of these amendments en bloc.

I would only add that the President, in his last campaign, had a message that we need to embrace, and I think the en bloc group of amendments takes us in that direction. He pointed out we spend $6 trillion in Iraq and Afghanistan alone. For one of those trillion, we could have graduated every kid in America from college debt-free. For another one of those trillion, there is your trillion dollars for infrastructure to fix the trains that are coming off the track and the bridges that are falling down. For another one of those trillion, we could have found a cure for cancer or Alzheimer's or diabetes, and we still would have had $3 trillion for deficit reduction.

I applaud this committee for all the work that they are doing and the direction that they are taking us back to in getting us out of these endless wars of choice and start reinvesting in America, the American people, and the American infrastructure. That creates good jobs and the quality of life that we embrace.

To be sure, we must have a strong national security. There are evil people and evil forces out there that we need to protect ourselves against, but that doesn't mean we have to get involved in every civil war and every war of choice in the world.

Mr. Speaker, I, too, rise in support of the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act.

I would be remiss if I didn't compliment my colleagues on both sides of the aisle and all of their respective staffs who have worked so hard to bring this really good, strong bipartisan measure here before the Congress for the benefit of the American people.

I have got to tell you: everywhere I go back in Minnesota and around the country, I hear two things when I am talking to businesspeople. And they say, you know, the people who are trained under this career and technical education program are the best employees that we have. The other thing I hear is that we need more of them.

So, again, thanks to my colleagues for bringing this bill forward. There are some good, new provisions in it that gives States an opportunity to focus better on what the needs are in their particular region. There are some other tools to help communities, the program itself, and the businesses to form partnerships to expand the program.

At the end of the day, it is all about creating good, strong jobs with living wages and strong futures. It is about creating opportunities for the working men and women in this country and for the businesses that are at the heart of our economy. And is it about creating a dynamic economy where people can grow and prosper in the 21st century.

It is a good bill for workers. It is a good bill for business. It is a good bill for our economy. And it is a good bill for our national security.

Mr. Speaker, I urge its adoption in the strongest language possible.

Mr. Speaker, I was unable to be present at recorded votes due to medical reasons.

Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on rollcall No. 283, YEA on rollcall No. 284, and YEA on rollcall No. 285.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a significant milestone achieved by a great American company and one of the largest employers in my district, Cliffs Natural Resources Inc. In 2017, Cliffs is celebrating its 170th year as an independent mining company specializing in the extraction and processing of iron ore--or taconite as it is known on Minnesota's Mesabi Iron Range.

Cliffs Natural Resources was founded in 1847 in Cleveland, Ohio and first began operating on the Mesabi Iron Range in 1905 at the former Crosby Mine located near Nashwauk, Minnesota. Today, Cliffs is the oldest metals and mining company traded on the New York Stock Exchange and the largest independent producer of iron ore pellets in the United States. As a company that was founded prior to the industrial revolution, Cliffs has weathered the ups and downs of the American economy and the cyclical nature of the steel business for 170 years. This achievement is nothing short of remarkable.

Throughout its long history, Cliffs has been an integral supplier of raw materials to the domestic steel industry, providing the iron ore used in the production of steel that supports our American way of life and provides for the defense of this great country. Cliffs stands at the very foundation of our steel industry and America's manufacturing economy.

Just as notable is Cliffs' commitment to Northeastern Minnesota. Overall Cliffs employs approximately 2,900 people in the United States, with over 1,700 family-sustaining jobs across its three Minnesota iron ore operations--United Taconite, Northshore Mining Company and Hibbing Taconite. In 2016, Cliffs' economic impact in the state of Minnesota was nearly $900 million. Furthermore, Cliffs has shown itself to be a tremendous supporter of its home communities, with the company and its employees contributing over $575,000 to charitable organizations in Minnesota last year alone.

The domestic iron ore and steel industries have confronted grave challenges in recent years as historic levels of illegally-dumped steel flooded U.S. shores. These trade law violations led to the idling of iron ore mines, steel mills and the lay-off of thousands of workers, including 2,000 Minnesota iron ore miners. In 2015, at the height of the steel import crisis, I found a friend and partner in Cliffs' Chairman, President and CEO, Mr. Lourenco Goncalves. This was not the first trade-induced steel disaster that Cliffs had endured and Mr. Goncalves understood that it would take the support and engagement of the White House to fully address and remedy the threat posed by record levels of illegal steel imports. Lourenco pledged to me that, if the federal government would commit to prosecuting the trade cases to the full extent of our U.S. trade laws, he would bring back workers at Cliffs' idled Minnesota mines. In conjunction with Minnesota's other elected officials, we were able to capture the attention of President Obama's Administration, resulting in tariffs and duties assessed in excess of 500 percent on steel products from certain countries, namely China. Mr. Goncalves followed through on his commitment to put nearly 1,000 Minnesota miners back to work and it was my pleasure to join Cliffs in August of 2016 as the company broke ground on a $75 million capital investment in new pellet-making capabilities at United Taconite in Forbes, Minnesota.

I commend Cliffs Natural Resources, Mr. Goncalves and all of Cliffs' employees for stewarding Cliffs through the latest challenging chapter in your company's long and storied history. This 170-year anniversary stands as a testament to the hard work and dedication of past and present Cliffs' employees, from haul truck drivers and millwrights to the company's most senior executives. I am pleased to recognize the monumental contributions of this great company, both to the communities of Minnesota's Iron Range as well as to the prosperity and defense of the United States. In closing, I extend my best wishes for the continued success of Cliffs Natural Resources.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for that introduction.

I want to thank my colleagues for presenting their profound thoughts on this most important legislation that we will consider tomorrow. The simple truth is that what this bill does is it removes 24 million people and takes them away from having affordable health care and health insurance, while, at the same time, giving $600 billion in tax cuts for the richest people in America. Some pundits have described it as one of the biggest transfers of wealth and travesties perpetuated upon the American people in American history.

I am calling upon the Republicans here in this Chamber and President Trump to withdraw this legislation, sit down in a bipartisan way--the way this Congress operated for several hundred years under open rules-- and see what we can do to fix what is wrong with the American healthcare system, not do away with it and scrap it in the devastating manner that they have chosen to do so.

The simple truth is, as I said, this guts Medicaid, and it guts health care. Under this $600 billion tax break, think about it, if you make $1 million a year, every year you are going to get a $67,000 a year tax cut. Imagine that. That is more money than the average person makes in America in a year, and they are going to get that every year going forward in perpetuity, while we are saying to a young family who is struggling maybe because someone in the family has cancer or maybe somebody got hurt or injured in an accident, oh, that is going to cost too much money to insure you, you are one of the 24 million who we are getting rid of.

What kind of a country is it that would do something like that? My colleague, Mr. Kennedy, I thought, stated it so well. We are all in this together. That is what insurance does. Life is perilous at best. We don't know who is going to get sick. We don't know who is going to have an accident. It may be when you are elderly; it may be when you are young. That is what health care and health insurance is all about, coming together and making sure that we all are cared for and get the care that we need when we need it.

Senator Kennedy talked about preventive care. If you can catch prostate cancer or if you can catch lung cancer at a stage I or a stage II level, you save a life. But you have to have insurance to go do that and see your doctor. If you don't have insurance, guess what? You don't get a diagnosis until it is at the third or fourth stage level, at which point it is too late, costs tremendous amounts of money to treat, and, most likely, the prospects for survival are not good.

Mr. Speaker, I call on the President and my colleagues, please, the President in particular, honor the promise that you made to the American people in your campaign which resonated with enough people to get you elected President of the United States. Stand up for the elderly, stand up for urban and rural, stand up for all Americans, stand up for rural communities, and rural hospitals. Do the right thing, and let's open this process up so we can fix what needs fixing and stop this devastating attack by repealing and so-called replacing the Affordable Care Act.