Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, there are certain phrases that we have learned to grow to accept with great suspicion: The check is in the mail. It is not you; it is me. Don't worry, I will respect you in the morning. I have had just a few drinks; I am fine with driving.

And now we have to add to that: Don't worry. Large tax cuts for the most wealthy will pay for themselves, and I am a fiscally conservative Republican who cares about debt and deficits.

The Joint Committee on Taxation has determined that, with interest payments, this bill will add over $2.3 trillion, with a T, to our national debt over th next 10 years. That is why last week, in committee, I was offering an amendment that would expand the endangered species list to include fiscally conservative Republicans because your vote on this bill will make you extinct.

And what is unfortunate is, unlike past tax cuts that weren't paid for, we have run out of time. We no longer have the luxury of time to recover from a huge fiscal mistake, not with 70 million baby boomers beginning their massive retirement--10,000 a day joining Social Security and Medicare. Those programs and the solvency of Social Security and Medicare will be in jeopardy with another $2.3 trillion of debt over the next 10 years.

And what is unfortunate, it didn't have to be this way. There was bipartisan interest in simplifying the Code, making it more competitive, broadening the base, making it fair for working families and small businesses and family farmers, but doing it in a fiscally responsible way.

Asking 34 million Americans to accept a tax increase to pay for a 43 percent marginal rate reduction to the largest companies is hardly responsible, and it is hardly fair. I encourage my colleagues to let us take a different approach and reject this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I think my good friend and colleague from California is raising a very important point, and it is a point that all of us here this evening on the Ways and Means Committee, with the leadership of Mr. Neal from Massachusetts, have been raising for some time.

Doing tax reform right is tough. There are a lot of moving pieces to it, and there are a lot of traps and unintended consequences if you do it the wrong way. Not having one hearing, not having proper vetting, not taking the time to listen to people back home in our respective States and districts about the consequences of something that is going to affect every American life in this country is legislative malpractice, and that is what we are on the verge of committing leading up to tomorrow's vote.

My friend from California mentioned the $2.3 trillion in additional debt over the next 10 years by the time you add in the interest payments and how devastating that will be, and it is happening at the wrong time.

I mean, we might have gotten away with that with the 1981 tax cuts that weren't paid for back then because there was a little bit of time to recover

from a big fiscal mistake, and from 2001, 2003. We have run out of time as a nation, with 70 million baby boomers beginning their massive retirement, 10,000 a day joining Social Security and Medicare.

But their entire theory is premised on the fact that over two-thirds of the tax cut will be going to large corporations under their bill of this illusory growth that is going to come from it. Part of that is based on this tax holiday, they call it deemed repatriation, where these multinational companies are going to be able to bring dollars back into America at a much lower rate and supposedly reinvesting here that is going to promote growth.

But there was a recent survey by Bank of America and Merrill Lynch of 300 executives of some of the largest U.S. multinational companies asking them what they would do with this deemed repatriated money coming back to the country. Their number one response was paying down debt. Reinvesting in their company, reinvesting in research and development, investing in more jobs and good-paying jobs barely registered in that survey.

But this should not come as a surprise. It is not like we haven't been down this road before. We tried a repatriation bill back in the early 2000s, where these companies were able to bring back a ton of money, and what they used it for was dividend give-outs and stock buybacks. Yet they are refusing to learn the lessons of the past and going on this theory of an illusory growth that none of the major economists see under this tax bill, and it is a huge fiscal gamble that I think i going to leave us in the same place as the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, which was one of the worst decades when it came to job growth in our country.

I appreciate the remarks of my friend from Chicago. He represents a large urban district. I represent a large rural district in Wisconsin. He may be a Bears fan, and I might be a Packers fan, but one thing we agree on is this a bill of goods for both of our constituencies.

I am especially concerned about the economic impact in the large rural congressional district that I represent where production agriculture is still an important part of our economy.

Some of the changes that they are making are going to be devastating to family farmers. They are taking away the 199 tax deduction, which is as important for our domestic manufacturers as it is for our family farmers.

If you want to grow things and invent things and create things, make things in America, the 199 has a proven track record of making it easier for our farmers and manufacturers to do it. Under their bill, that goes away.

That operating loss carryback, which is important for a lot of farmers in order to recoup some of the losses that they have experienced in their business, it goes away.

Like-kind exchanges for property and heavy machinery in farm country goes away. A lot of my farmers are operating on a margin right now. I am concerned about the impact this is going to have on the rural economy and our family farmers with what they are proposing.

You don't have to be from a city or from a rural district to understand that, again, the work wasn't put into this bill to understand the real consequences of what they are asking for. It is not too late. We can still regroup and work in the bipartisan fashion that tax reform was meant to occur and figure out a way to truly simplify, make us more competitive, but make it fair for working families, small businesses, and family farmers in all of our districts, rather than this rush to judgment just so they can score a political win before the end of the year.

So I think the points that my friend from Chicago raised are very valid, and it is something that I would hope all of us would heed before we reach our final decision tomorrow morning.

Amen.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition of the repeal of the Independent Payment Advisory Board.

This is another classic example of a solution in search of a problem. Of all the things that we should be working on in Congress in a bipartisan fashion to improve and to fix the problems that exist within our healthcare system, we have legislation on the floor before us today that calls for the repeal of a nonexisting commission, based on nonconsistent spending cuts being proposed for Medicare, based on a nonconsistent cost of rate of increase in spending under the Medicare program, all of which is going to add $17.5 billion to the deficit over the next 10 years because this bill isn't paid for. And the irony is they are coming forward with this legislation, which will add another $18 billion to the debt, on the same day they release a tax bill that calls for an additional $1.5 trillion worth of deficit spending because the tax bill hasn't been offset. At some point and at some time, we have got to take a bipartisan stand on fiscal responsibility in this place again because it is not happening today.

Instead, we should be working on short-term, practical solutions to stabilize and bring more certainty to the health insurance marketplace, in light of what the administration is doing to completely undermine the marketplaces today. We ought to be working on delivery system reform proposals that will emphasize the establishment of accountable care organizations and medical homes and value-based purchasing and bundling arrangements and different alternative payment models to get us to a system of value, quality, and outcomes, and away from the fee- for-service payment for the volume of services, regardless of results.

Let's be honest, the real cost driver in our Federal budget--and it is true at the State and local level--has been healthcare costs because we have an aging population. That is the work that we should be working on together, is the delivery system reform and the payment reform, so we are aligning the incentives in the right direction where we are telling our healthcare providers: You will be compensated based on good results, not on how much you do.

There is a lot within the Affordable Care Act giving our providers the very tools in order to accomplish that, and we ought to be enhancing that here today. Instead, we are wasting time on a commission that, according to the CMS's own actuary, says, at the very earliest, it might be comprised in 2021. But, even then, it warrants us, with the mission that we have given it, that: Hey, you have got healthcare spending within the healthcare system that, Congress, you need to deal with. And then come back with recommendations. And then it is up to us to make corrective action at that time.

So all this talk about unelected bureaucrats making these decisions belies what the legislation actually calls for in the establishment of the IPAB. This was, however, another important cost containment tool that was put into the Affordable Care Act to try to restrain the growth of healthcare spending. We need more of those type of ideas, rather than efforts today to remove those tools and then possibly see just unbridled healthcare spending in the future.

What is really disturbing is I know there is a lot of common ground in this area, yet the American people wouldn't know it, with this political ping-pong ball on healthcare reform going back and forth and the chaos and the confusion that it is causing, and that is unfortunate.

So, instead, today, we ought to first take steps to stabilize the insurance exchanges, rather than an administration that is doing everything they can to limit the enrollment during the signup period, which actually started yesterday and lasts until December 15. They have cut by 90 percent funding for marketing of the exchanges. They have cut by almost 50 percent the funding for our navigators back home who are trying to help people get affordable healthcare coverage in their lives. They ended the cost-share payments, which only increases the cost for healthcare for everyone else because of the risk that the insurance plans now face.

The other segment of the population that we should be focused on in helping is that 5 or 6 percent of the population that are in the individual market who don't qualify for premium tax credits because they are getting hammered today. You would think that would be another area of bipartisan commonality that we can come together on

to provide relief for those individuals who are in the individual market experiencing these higher premiums, part of it being done because of the elimination of the cost-sharing reduction payments, but, instead, nothing is being done on that front.

My friend from Michigan also pointed out that we should be having hearings about the cost of prescription drugs in committee. That is one of the main cost drivers within the healthcare system, yet there is deafening silence in the Halls of Congress when it comes to taking measure on that front, even though President Trump promised during the course of his campaign and even earlier this year to try to take some action in a bipartisan way to address drug costs.

It was an initiative that the President was even interested in trying to address. Yet, again, nothing is being done.

So this legislation is much ado about nothing because there is nothing pending. In fact, nothing would be pending, according to the CMS actuary, until, at the earliest, 2021. Instead, we are wasting time and opportunity to address the real problems and finding the real fixes that are needed in the healthcare system. There I am confident there is a lot of bipartisan overlap, having worked with many of my colleagues on the committee and across the aisle, on many of these measures that I just mentioned here today.

So I encourage my colleagues to vote ``no'' and allow this to go forward, because it does keep an eye on rising costs and it keeps the pressure where it belongs--right here in Congress--to take future action if the rate of growth starts spinning out of control.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Massachusetts for yielding me the time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this rule because I rise in opposition to the underlying budget--a budget which is really a budget buster that could be before the full House for consideration tomorrow.

It calls for an additional $1.5 trillion worth of debt accumulated over the next 10 years. They call for that, I fear, in order to clear the path for unpaid-for tax cuts. There is a bipartisan path to move forward on tax reform. It has been 31 years since we have taken a serious run at the Federal code. It is long overdue. It is one that would simplify the code, that would broaden the base and lower the rates and make us more competitive at home, but especially abroad, in light of what the rest of the world has done.

That can also help promote economic growth, but I fear that that is not the direction that the opposing party is taking with their tax reform proposal. I say fear because we haven't seen the details yet. So we can't say with certainty just what exactly will be offered over the next couple of weeks. But if history is any guide, there is a proclivity to pass large tax cuts that are not paid for.

If history is a guide, we have been down this road before, in the 1981 tax cuts, the 2001, the 2003, that promised to bring a boon of economic growth that would offset and pay for the lost revenue. It didn't materialize. Instead, we had huge budget deficits. Unfortunately, today, we don't have the luxury of time to help us recover from a huge fiscal mistake. Because today, 70 million baby boomers are beginning their massive retirement and joining Social Security and Medicare--10,000 a day.

If we go down this route of going with massive tax breaks that aren't paid for, we are going to jeopardize the long-term solvency of Social Security and Medicare at exactly the wrong moment in our Nation's history. The folks back home tell me they would like to see tax reform along the lines that I just described, but they are not telling me that they are more interested in trickle-down economics where the predominant relief goes to the most wealthy, hoping that it somehow benefits everyone else.

Now, they would like to see it a little fairer for working families, for small businesses, for family farmers so that they can share in the economic growth and the prosperity that could be offered if we do this the correct way in a bipartisan fashion.

But instead, I fear that we are going to be witnessing history repeat itself. But unlike the time of the past, we don't have the luxury of time going forward without jeopardizing Social Security and Medicare, and without leaving a legacy of debt once again for our children and grandchildren to inherit.

So let's regroup. Let's do a budget that makes sense for the long- term fiscal solvency of important programs, but especially our children's future. This budget doesn't get us there.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to reject the rule and reject the budget if it comes up tomorrow.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Dr. Chris Kirkpatrick Whistleblower Protection Act, which will enhance whistleblower protections for employees at the VA and lead to better care for our Nation's veterans.

This bill is named in honor of Dr. Chris Kirkpatrick, a Wisconsinite, who tragically took his own life after being fired from the Tomah VA Medical Center in my congressional district in Tomah, Wisconsin.

Dr. Kirkpatrick was a clinical psychologist who specialized in treating some of the toughest and most pressing issues our veterans face today: PTSD, substance abuse, and chronic pain.

During his time at Tomah, Dr. Kirkpatrick noticed a disturbing trend of overprescribing of opioids to patients.

Dr. Kirkpatrick had the courage to blow the whistle to his superiors about what he rightly saw as dangerous pain management practices at the time. Sadly, the overprescribing issues that Dr. Kirkpatrick tried to warn about continued to occur at Tomah VA.

In 2015, a Wisconsin veteran named Jason Simcakoski tragically lost his life at the facility due to the dangerous pain management practices at the Tomah VA. Last year, I worked with the Simcakoski family to pass the bipartisan Jason Simcakoski PROMISE Act to improve pain management practices at the VA so that no other veterans and their families have to go through what the Simcakoski family had to.

Although Dr. Kirkpatrick is no longer with us today, his dedication to serving veterans and his courage to stand up for what was right is why we are here today. This act will ensure that no one is retaliated against for coming forward with concerns about waste, fraud, abuse, and malpractice at the VA. The bill offers a number of new protections for whistleblowers and will help ensure that supervisors found guilty of retaliation are held responsible for their actions.

Dr. Kirkpatrick was dedicated to improving lives and serving our Nation's veterans. The bill before us today will honor the memory of Dr. Kirkpatrick by helping to make sure no one has to go through what he did.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate Southwest Wisconsin Technical College for providing opportunities for success through education for 50 years.

Before the first shovel of dirt was unearthed in a cornfield outside of Fennimore no one could have imagined what would someday stand there almost 50 years later; Wisconsin's No. 1 and the nation's No. 3 rated two-year college in 2017.

Founded in 1967, Southwest Tech is located in Fennimore, Wisconsin. Reflecting the job demand of the time, degree programs started with Auto-Tractor Mechanics and Welding programs, as well as Account Clerk and Clerk-Typists classes. As the economy changed, the college added degrees in Criminal Justice, Nursing, Physical Therapy Assistant, Midwifery, Web and Graphic Design, and Network Specialist.

The first graduation was in May 1969, with 104 graduates representing six programs. The May 2017 graduation had 366 graduates representing 41 programs. Southwest Tech has graduated 26,000 students in its history.

Southwest Tech is also a major employer in Grant County employing 324 people and working with numerous businesses in a nine county area. It is one of 16 two-year public open access institutions within the Wisconsin Technical College System. The college serves 3,800 square miles including 30 school districts in a five-county district of Crawford, Grant, Iowa, Lafayette, Richland and portions of Dane, Green, Sauk and Vernon Counties.

The college is currently under the leadership of President, Dr. Jason Wood. The first president of the college was Conrad Mayer, followed by Ronald Anderson, Dr. Richard Rogers, Dr. Karen Knox and Dr. Duane Ford.

Now, in 2017, Southwest Tech is proud to celebrate the many ways the College's mission and its graduates positively impact southwest Wisconsin. Thousands of Southwest Tech employees, partners, and supporters deliver excellence to their students, businesses, and communities. Because of their tireless efforts, they have forever changed the lives of those the college serves. Southwest Tech's 50th Anniversary is an exciting opportunity to reflect on the past, celebrate the present and move forward with a renewed dedication to students and southwest Wisconsin.

I extend my heartfelt congratulations to all the past and present faculty, staff, and students on 50 years of valuable and skillful higher education. Thanks to the efforts of current administration and those that have come before, Southwest Tech will continue to lead the way into the future.

Mr. Speaker, I honor the 100th Anniversary of the 88th Regional Support Command (RSC) celebrated at Fort McCoy on Saturday August 19, 2017.

The 88th RSC has a proud and storied history whose lineage and honors transferred from the 88th Infantry Division (ID). The streamers earned by the 88th ID in World War I and II are now flown with the 88th RSC flag. The 88th ID was organized on 25 August 1917, at Camp Dodge, IA. During World War I, the men of the ``Cloverleaf Division", as they were called, earned a streamer for the Alsace Campaign. The Division returned to Camp Dodge and was demobilized on 10 June 1919.

On 24 June 1921, the 88th ID was reconstituted in the Organized Reserve with its headquarters in Minneapolis, MN, and with subordinate units in Minnesota, Iowa and North Dakota. After reorganization in February 1942, the 88th ID was ordered to active service on 15 July 1942, at Camp Gruber, OK. After training in several locations in the United States and overseas, the 88th ID entered the front line on 27 February 1944 in the Italian Campaign. For its service in Italy, the 88th ID was awarded campaign streamers for the Rome-Arno, North Apennines, and Po Valley Campaigns. The 88th ID earned a reputation as a well-trained and effective division, earning the nickname ``Blue Devils'' from the Germans. The 88th ID was inactivated at Leghorn, Italy on October 24, 1947.

On 26 December 1967, the 88th Army Reserve Command (ARCOM) was activated in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and had Command of USAR units in North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Minnesota, and Iowa. The 88th ARCOM sent units to the Republic of Vietnam (1968-1969), Desert Shield/ Storm (1990-1991), and Bosnia-Herzegovina in the former country of Yugoslavia (1995).

On 16 April 1996, the 88th ARCOM was redesignated and reorganized as the 8th RSC with Command of USAR units in Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota. The 88th RSC mobilized units for Bosnia and Kosovo, Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) and Iraqi Freedom (OIF). On 16 July 2003, the 88th RSC was redesignated as the 88th Regional Readiness Command (RRC), and was inactivated 1 July 2009. The 88th RSC was activated 17 September 2008, and today supports USAR units in 19 states from Ohio to Washington.

I am honored that the 88th RSC is headquartered in my congressional district. I

commend and thank the command leadership and staff for the service and support they provide to ensure that the Army Reserve remains a shining star in the nation's military training infrastructure.

On behalf of my constituents in Wisconsin and a grateful nation, I would like to wish a happy 100th anniversary to the command leadership and staff at the 88th RSC.

Mr. Chair, I will vote against H.R. 3219, the Make America Secure Appropriations Act, because it is not a responsible way to spend taxpayer money. The bill blows through the spending limits in the Budget Control Act. Responsible governing means making hard choices and spending taxpayer money wisely. This bill did not serve either of those goals.

I am particularly concerned about the $1.57 billion included in this bill to pay for the border wall between the United States and Mexico. For that much money, we could pay for over 94,000 students to get their four-year degrees at a UW-System school. Instead, we are spending that money on a project that will only balloon in price and cost even more to maintain. We need to make smart decisions about how to spend our limited resources. We should be investing in ourselves.

There are plenty of opportunities to pay for important defense priorities by eliminating waste in the Defense Department. In January of 2015, the non-partisan Defense Business Board released a report outlining opportunities for reform that would save $125 billion in defense spending. That report is now collecting dust. That is money we could be spending on important defense priorities like troop readiness, training, and equipment. This spending bill is another missed opportunity at reform.

Despite voting against the bill, I was happy to see $55 million provided to the VA to implement the Jason Simcakoski PROMISE Act. The funding will assist in increasing programs to help medical professionals and patients understand the risks associated with pain medication and examine alternative treatments. This will help address the opioid epidemic and give veterans and their families the tools they need and the accountability they deserve.

I understand how important it is to provide ample support for our military, which is why I recently voted in favor of the National Defense Authorization Act. Supporting the brave men and women who defend this nation is of paramount importance. We should not be inserting partisan riders into bills that should be bipartisan. I will continue to work with my colleagues to support our military and pursue fiscally responsible policies that invest in Americans.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in celebration of the 150th Anniversary of the Jacob Leinenkugel Brewing Company. As every Wisconsinite knows, Leinenkugel's is a staple of our state's economy and has been for 150 years.

In my district, Chippewa Falls, WI is home to one of the original Leinenkugel breweries and is still proudly producing union made Leinenkugel beer today. In fact, Leinenkugel's is not only one of the oldest continuously operating breweries in the United States; it is also the 4th largest craft brewer in our country.

Leinenkugel Brewing Company has also been a dynamic driver of tourism in my district and across the state of Wisconsin. The brewery's visitor center, the Leinie Lodge, draws over 125,000 visitors annually making it one of the most prominent tourist destinations in our great state of Wisconsin.

Leinenkugel's success, however, is not only because they manufacture great tasting beer, but it's also because they embody the Wisconsin notion of service to others. The Leinenkugel family has a long history of public service, dating back to World War II when Bill Leinenkugel served as a United States Marine in the South Pacific. It was this same passion for service that propelled Bill's 40-year career with the brewing company. Two of Bill's sons, the fifth generation of the family to work for the brewery, Jake and Dick also served as officers in the United States Marine Corps. In addition to their service as Marines, Dick Leinenkugel served as a County Board Supervisor in Waukesha County, WI and as Wisconsin's Secretary of Commerce from 2008 until 2010. Jake Leinenkugel is retired from the company but continues to honor the Leinenkugel tradition of service as a Senior White House Advisor to the Veterans Administration. The dedication for community involvement and support has been passed down through generations and continues to shape the way in which the Leinenkugel family does business in western Wisconsin today.

Whether it's brewing Leinenkugel beer in Chippewa Falls, WI or serving our country in the Marines, the Leinenkugel family consistently represents the hardworking values of all Wisconsinites. With this in mind, I'd like to raise a Summer Shandy and congratulate the Jacob Leinenkugel Brewing Company and Leinenkugel family on 150 years of dedicated service to western Wisconsin.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to bring to the attention of my colleagues the good work of Grace Jones, who is retiring on July 14th as the executive director for the past 31 years of Couleecap. The people, families, and communities of western Wisconsin are better off as a result of her work and leadership.

As a community action agency, Couleecap serves low-income people and families in Vernon, La Crosse, Crawford, and Monroe counties, with programs that help people with housing, including home ownership and rehabilitation; weatherization and other energy efficiency measures; employment and training; transportation; food and clothing; and drug use prevention. However, under Grace's leadership, Couleecap continues to evolve with the needs of the community. Many people attribute Couleecap's success to Grace's ability to recognize and understand the needs and the challenges ofthe people that she and the agency serves.

Trained as a teacher, Grace began her work with Couleecap as a specialist working with at-risk youngsters. ``As a teacher, I tried to instill in very student the hope and belief that they could achieve their dreams with hard work and persistence,'' Grace told the La Crosse Tribune. With her work at Couleecap, she has been able to help people grow, better themselves, and improve countless lives and families along the way.

Over the years, Grace has received a number of awards for her work. While appreciative of the attention, she has never forgotten the reason for her work, telling the La Crosse Tribune, ``At Couleecap, we are so glad that we can help families with encouragement, hope and the tools that they need.'' She continues, ``we prefer to believe we live in a land of great opportunity equally available to everyone. This is not true. Discrimination and poverty still exist--and too many people have talents that are quickly buried under poverty's crushing weight. For these talents to flourish, there must be equal opportunity for all.''

I thank Grace Jones for her work at Couleecap. Her work has made a real and lasting impression to the people and communities she served.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to bring to the attention of my colleagues the work of Lee Rasch, who is retiring at the end of this month as president of Western Technical College in Wisconsin. There is an old saying, ``Think Globally, Act Locally.'' No saying better reflects the work of Lee.

For twenty-eight years, Lee has led Western, working in a collective manner with governmental and business leaders in the eleven (11) county, three campus region to expand workforce development opportunities and enhance job skills training to students who were comprised of recent high school graduates to those who were recently unemployed. With a mannerism of respect and understanding, Lee led the college with a style that emphasized listening, learning and collaboration. Under his leadership, Western continued to grow and evolve, working with employers to identify programs and courses that grow the economies of our region and state, while also ensuring that the students have the skills they need to meet the ever-changing demands of the workplace.

Lee's leadership at Western emphasized community engagement. As such, he contributed a significant amount of his time and effort to improve the economic vitality of downtown La Crosse and the greater Coulee Region. La Crosse and western Wisconsin were not the only communities where Lee made an impact. As the La Crosse Tribune wrote in an article in December 2016 when they named him the 2016 Tribune Person of the Year: ``He has been instrumental in building the sister city relationship between La Crosse and Kumbo, Cameroon, after a chance encounter with a member of the Tertiary Sisters of St. Francis at Western.'' His efforts have led to greater educational training and the improvement of nearly a dozen rural schools near Kumbo. Lee's love of education has improved the lives of people at the local and global level.

I congratulate Lee Rasch for his work. I wish him and his wife, Susan Fox, much joy and happiness in a well-deserved retirement. The people, businesses and communities in western Wisconsin, Kumbo, Cameroon, and countless others are better off as a result of your work.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in honor of the career of La Crosse Fire Chief Gregg Cleveland, who will be retiring in June of 2017. He has served as a firefighter for more than 36 years, including 11 years as the La Crosse Fire Chief.

Chief Cleveland's years of service as a firefighter are exemplary in every respect. He earned an Associate Degree in Fire Protection from Fox Valley Technical College, a Bachelor's degree in Business Administration from Lakeland College, and a Master's Degree in Public Administration from the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh. He is also a graduate of the Executive Fire Officer's program.

Chief Cleveland began his career more than three decades ago with the Menasha Fire Department. He then served as Chief of the Marshfield Fire Department for 15 years, and later took over as chief of the La Crosse Fire Department in 2006. In addition to this service in fire departments, Chief Cleveland has also been active in other firefighting organizations, including the Wisconsin State Fire Chiefs Association, where he served as President and advocated for the organization on numerous issues. He also served with the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), where he was a member of NFPA's North Central Regional Fire Code Development Committee, and served as Secretary of NFPA's Fire Service Section.

Under Chief Cleveland's leadership, the City of La Crosse has seen numerous changes for the better in the fire service industry. In 2014, the La Crosse Fire Department received international accreditation, demonstrating the quality of the Department. That same year, he was instrumental in consolidating the La Crosse Building and Inspection Department into the Fire Department, which created a new Division of Fire Prevention and Building Safety. He also helped the Department lead the way on health issues, making the Department one of the first in the state to carry an opioid overdose antidote.

Chief Cleveland's leadership was crucial to the City of La Crosse when the city faced emergency situations and natural disasters. These included an EF2 tornado that struck the south side of La Crosse in 2011 and a building explosion on the north side of the city in 2014. Thanks to Chief Cleveland's leadership, the City of La Crosse has been able to recover from these situations and continue to grow and prosper.

It has been an honor for me to serve as U.S. Representative for Wisconsin's Third Congressional District during Chief Cleveland's tenure in La Crosse. He will be greatly missed by the La Crosse Fire Department and the people he helped throughout his career. On behalf of my constituents in Wisconsin and a grateful nation, I would like to thank and commend Chief Cleveland for his years of service in the fire service industry. I wish him and his family all the best in his retirement.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Massachusetts for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the VETERAN Act, the legislation before us today, and I do so for a very simple reason: This merely codifies what is already existing law under the Affordable Care Act, or so-called ObamaCare, something that was done through rulemaking that I presume has bipartisan support.

Yes, it is important to protect the veterans, but the reason we are on the floor today is another example of one of the greatest legislative malpractice acts ever committed in Congress: trying to pass a Republican healthcare bill with no oversight, with no hearing, no public input, and no experts testifying to run the traps for us as far as the intended and the unintended consequences.

The reason we are on the floor now 1 month after passage of that bill is to try to correct just one of the deficiencies that exist in it.

I say it is a so-called healthcare bill because what it really is is a $900 billion tax break to the most wealthy individuals in our country, including insurance companies and drug companies, under the guise of healthcare reform and asking 23 million Americans, including 2 million veterans, as my friend from Massachusetts just pointed out, in Medicaid to give up their healthcare coverage to pay for that massive tax cut.

It also will discriminate against older Americans in a rural congressional district, such as mine in western and north central Wisconsin, by allowing insurance companies to charge them higher premiums. It will also allow insurance companies to once again discriminate against individuals that have preexisting conditions.

It does absolutely nothing to control the costs of healthcare--which have been rising--especially prescription drug costs that are affecting all Americans, and it was done in a way to jam this Congress and jam the American people about the consequences of this so-called healthcare bill.

So, yes, let's fix and make sure that we are protecting veterans who are getting their healthcare outside the VA medical center so that they, too, qualify for premium tax credits, which this legislation allows.

But let's do healthcare the right way by studying the implications of what will affect one-fifth of the entire U.S. economy and almost one- half of all Federal spending. Let's regroup and do it the right way, through normal legislative process. That is having bipartisan discussions, committee hearings, and talking to the experts--consumers and patients alike--so we know what we are getting into when we are trying to take a run at the importance of healthcare in our country.

One area that I think we can reach bipartisan agreement on or should be focused on are further steps to reduce the cost of healthcare to make it more affordable for all Americans. Again, we are missing that opportunity because of the lack of hearings and because of how this legislation was rushed through this Chamber just a month ago.

We on this side didn't even get to see the language of it until late the night before it was on the House floor. That is no way to legislate healthcare policy.

Mr. Speaker, let's fix it today with this one small piece of legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I was unable to have my votes recorded on the House floor on Monday, May 22, 2017. Had I been present, I would have voted in favor of H.R. 1862 and H.R. 1842.

Mr. Speaker, I was unable to have my votes recorded on the House Floor on Monday, April 3, 2017. Weather across the Midwest delayed my flight to Washington, D.C. until after votes had been called. Had I been present, I would have voted in favor of H. Res. 92 and H.R. 479.