Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I hereby remove my name as cosponsor from H.R. 8167.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the ordering of the yeas and nays on motions to suspend the rules be vacated to the end that the motions stand disposed of in accordance with the earlier voice votes thereon, and the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, with respect to the following:

Madam Speaker, I rise today, to honor Chief Richard Howell for 32 years of dedicated service to the City of Fayetteville, located in Tennessee's Fourth Congressional District.

Chief Howell joined the Fayetteville Police Department in January of 1990. He graduated from the Tennessee Law Enforcement Training Academy on April 27, 1990. During his long and successful career, Chief Howell steadily rose in rank, receiving a series of promotions beginning in 1997, when he was named Sergeant, becoming a Lieutenant in 2003, and then a Commander in 2004. The Board of Mayor and Alderman recognized the quality of his work and endorsed his promotion to Fayetteville Police Chief on July 1, 2013. Chief Howell held this position until his well-earned retirement this month.

Chief Howell achieved multiple certifications/specializations during his career that included certified armorer, certified arms instructor, specialized training in homicide investigations, hazardous materials technician and team operations, chemical weapons instructor, and Training Officer. He was the founder and the first Team Commander of the Special Operations Response Team (SORT) established in 2001. Chief Howell developed an active shooter program through SORT that would help train his team members and other departments on active shooter situations. Chief Howell performed the project management oversight, in coordination with the Fayetteville Board of Mayor and Alderman, of the construction of the current Police Headquarters.

Chief Howell is a graduate of the Leadership Lincoln Class of 2003, attended the Huntsville Police Academy for Critical Deployment of Patrol Officers, attended the Tennessee Law Enforcement Development Seminar, and attended the Regional Counterdrug Training Academy. In addition to his work as a member of SORT, Chief Howell was also a member of the Tennessee Law Enforcement Training Officer Association, the TN Association of Chiefs of Police, and FBI Law Enforcement Executive Development Association.

A devoted family man, Chief Howell enjoys spending time with his wife Suzanne and daughters Kaitlyn and Jessica. His decades of dedication to the citizens of Fayetteville and Lincoln County, Tennessee are truly appreciated. I am proud to represent a community that has the utmost respect for all the men and women who serve our communities as members of law enforcement. Chief Howell's professional demeanor and management skills were well respected and have established a standard for service to community. I ask all Members of Congress to join me in congratulating Richard Howell for a job well done and sending well wishes for a happy and healthy retirement.

Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 357, I mistakenly voted No when I intended to vote Yes.

Members Recorded Pursuant to House Resolution 8, 117th Congress

Axne (Spanberger)

Babin (Nehls)

Bilirakis (Fleischmann)

Boebert (Van Drew)

Bowman (Tlaib)

Cardenas (Gomez)

Cawthorn (Nehls)

Doggett (Raskin)

Frankel, Lois (Clark (MA))

Gaetz (Greene (GA))

Gonzalez, Vicente (Gomez)

Gosar (Greene (GA))

Jayapal (Pocan)

Khanna (Auchincloss)

Kirkpatrick (Stanton)

Lawson (FL) (Evans)

Long (McHenry)

Meeks (Kelly (IL))

Meng (Jeffries)

Payne (Pallone)

Pingree (Kuster)

Rush (Underwood)

Sires (Pallone)

Steube (Franklin, C. Scott)

Strickland (Jeffries)

Swalwell (Gomez)

Waltz (Salazar)

Wilson (FL) (Hayes)

Young (Joyce (OH))

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to the Pocan amendment. A 10 percent cut to this budget will leave America vulnerable to our adversaries.

The United States is facing daily threats from China, Iran, Russia, North Korea, and a whole host of other bad actors. We must fully fund our military so the U.S. has every capability necessary to deter those who wish to do us harm.

The fiscal year 2022 National Defense Authorization Act has bipartisan support from the House Armed Services Committee already. With the approved budget on the floor today being $23.9 billion more than the bare-bones budget that originally came through. There is a reason why the improved budget was approved in a bipartisan vote of the committee by an overwhelming 57-2 margin.

Modernization is an important part of our military strategy. Our military leaders have spent the past year sounding the alarm and testimony before Congress that our top competitors, Russia and China, are working at a startling pace to close the gap between themselves and the U.S. in areas like

nuclear modernization. In other areas, like hypersonic capabilities, they may have already surpassed us.

This budget is absolutely necessary in order to maintain advantages over our enemies as technology continues to evolve and change rapidly. Now is not the time to recklessly cut what we must spend to protect our country and provide for our men and women in uniform.

We must ensure our brave men and women in the armed services have every resource necessary to keep the American people safe.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to express my support for the National Defense Authorization Act. The bill before us today represents a much-improved effort over the Biden-Harris administration's proposed budget.

There is no more important job than providing for the defense of our Nation. The specter of threats from an aggressive China, a revitalized Russia, and radical Islamic terrorist states demand that we maintain a strong national defense readiness and posture.

This NDAA will give a much-deserved and needed pay raise and expanded benefits to members of our armed services. We are making investments to ensure our military is the best equipped and trained in the world, with a focus on American jobs and our domestic manufacturing base.

We are also investing in important new technologies like quantum computing, hypersonic weapons, and autonomous systems.

I am proud to say that Arnold Air Force Base, the University of Tennessee Space Institute, Vanderbilt University, Fort Campbell Army Base, Oak

Ridge National Laboratory, and other Tennessee stakeholders will receive the funds that they need to carry out vital operations for our United States military.

That said, the bill is not perfect. I am disappointed in House Democrats for preventing my ``no first use'' amendment from coming to the floor for a vote. In hearings before our committee, our military leadership emphasized that a ``no first use'' policy is a limiting strategic mistake, and a number of our allies have expressed these concerns directly to me as well. We should never tip our strategic plans to our adversaries.

It is also disappointing that those on the other side of the aisle have taken a bill intended to improve our military and muddled it with attempts to score political points.

While I don't support these poison pills, I am hopeful that my colleagues will remove them during conference before its final passage.

That said, we must move forward with this legislation. I support making it stronger, avoiding nongermane political issues, and getting it signed into law for our brave men and women in uniform.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to today's impeachment resolution, H. Res. 24, against President Trump.

First, it is a tragedy that we are here once again with this body, the United States House of Representatives, moving forward with impeaching President Trump.

This body impeached the president during the 116th Congress which resulted in his acquittal in the Senate. Before President Trump, there have only been two presidents impeached by the House of Representatives.

Now, after the majority party in the House did not get what they wanted the first time with impeachment, they are at it again a second time.

Their blind hatred of the President and four years of denying the results of the election have led them to one final moment of doing this again.

This impeachment is being held in the court of public opinion. I have found no constitutional grounding for President Trump's impeachment.

If Democratic leadership wanted us to take their stunt seriously, the least they could have done was attempted to present some sort of evidence in a formal trial.

Make no mistake, this is not the way the House should be conducting business.

The nation and world have been through a global pandemic this past year which has destroyed many small businesses and jobs across our county.

Yet, the House majority leadership could not be bothered to compromise on much-needed relief. They focused on playing politics with people's lives and making sure the president had one less accomplishment on his record ahead of the November 2020 election.

So why is the House spending its time on impeachment with H. Res. 24? Simply there are many who never liked President Trump, never gave him a chance, and have only sought to remove him from office since day one.

With just days left before the president leaves office, House Democrats have decided to implement their double standard yet again.

Many of my House colleagues from the other side of the aisle have spent an incredible amount of energy on fanning the flames of political unrest. They have called for riots and said peaceful protests are not enough.

President Trump called for his supporters to protest peacefully. When things got out of hand, he called on them to stand down and listen to law enforcement officials.

When violent protests got out of hand across the country this past summer you did not see the same type of condemnation from the Democratic Party.

President Trump has already said there will be an orderly transition on January 20, 2021. We need to move forward and help to ensure that the incoming Biden-Harris administration has everything they need to assume office on day one.

We are deeply divided in this country right now. Impeachment without constitutional grounding does nothing but disenfranchise the 74 million people that voted for President Trump.

I strongly oppose these impeachment efforts in the House and do not wish to create a further divide in our country.

Madam Speaker, I rise to voice my concerns about the certification of the Electoral College vote.

First, I think it is imperative to highlight the importance of how our nation's elections are conducted. I have received many calls, emails, letters, and I have spoken to many of my constituents who are concerned about the irregularities in the 2020 election cycle.

Today, I have many concerns about our most recent election, but my objection is focused on one primary constitutional question around changes to election laws made by state officials without the approval of their state legislatures. This is, of course, a legal question, concerning the constitutionality of last-minute election law changes made by executive orders without the approval of the state legislatures. Article II, Section 1 includes the ``Electors Clause,'' stating:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature

thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole

Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may

be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or

Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or

Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an

Elector.

There is no question that changes in state election laws were made by executive orders without legislative approval (usually under the guise of COVID) to allow for ballots to be allowed after deadlines had passed and mail-ins and absentees to be allowed under far more liberal circumstances which created an environment that allowed ``vote harvesting'' and thousands of ballots to be counted days and weeks after the election--without the requisite standards of verification that we should expect for a secure election.

It is a valid constitutional question and I note a recent observation by Justice Gorsuch in an unrelated recently decided case between the Brooklyn diocese and Governor Andrew Cuomo in New York on unlawful forced shutdowns:

``Government is not free to disregard the [Constitution] in

times of crisis. . . . Yet recently, during the COVID

pandemic, certain States seem to have ignored these long-

settled principles.''

All of these issues are just some of the concerns and questions regarding the 2020 election and were not limited to these three states. Many other concerns of voting irregularities have been reported across the country including fraud and government officials changing state laws without legislature approval.

These are serious concerns and allegations. It should be the state legislatures, and not government officials or judges, making changes to election laws.

The timing of these election law changes is also problematic. In some states, changes were made to state election laws during the year of the election. These last-minute changes only allow for confusion and chaos, as we have seen since November 2020.

From a global pandemic to one of the most consequential Presidential elections in our lifetimes, 2020 was a year of many unknowns.

What should not be an unknown are the laws and rules states have on implementing our elections. However, the actions by many state officials and judges, along with improper voting activities, have allowed the 2020 Presidential election to be called into question.

It is because of these questions and irregularities, that I object to today's certification process and today, our challenge asks for a simple remedy--an appointment of an electoral commission that can hear the claims of election irregularities, review the evidence, and decide as to what the facts are and whether or not election laws were followed. I do not believe that to be an unreasonable demand.

I am proud to represent the state of Tennessee--a state that gets the election process done right and should be a role model for the nation. In addition to our open Election Day procedures, Tennessee provides a generous early voting process of 2 weeks in order for people to choose a day and time convenient to their schedule. In unique circumstances, there are also a number of statutory reasons where a citizen can request a mail-in or absentee ballot by mail and have their votes counted as well.

It is a process that works and is fair and equitable to everyone in the state. It is not unfair, it does not suppress voting, and it provides an orderly, secure method for conducting elections and counting votes in a timely fashion. Everyone has the ability to do their civic duty with a minimum amount of effort--no drama, no long lines and waits, and a process that is free and fair to all candidates. Votes are tabulated, and results are provided in a timely fashion on election night. It's not complicated, we have done this for many election cycles now, and we did not change our procedures on the fly in 2020.

We are very fortunate to do things the right way in Tennessee and we did once again in 2020. Sadly, there were a few states that got it wrong and call into question the integrity of the Presidential election. It is ridiculous and unacceptable in the 21st Century that other states have processes that lead to a situation where it took weeks to have votes tabulated, vote totals remaining uncertain, and the numbers of uncounted votes being uncertain for days--and weeks--after Election Day.

I respectfully and vigorously disagree with people who suggest that the processes that were opened and expanded in 2020 in many states are not subject to fraud and abuse--under these new standards ballots are mailed on behalf of people, ballots are sent to the wrong addresses, and ballot harvesting is encouraged. And again, one of the biggest problems with mail-in ballots is managing this process in a way that allows votes to be counted and winners to be determined in a timely fashion. It should not take weeks to determine a winner in state and federal races, and the prospects of all future Presidential elections being undecided for weeks on end leads to uncertainty and a lack of confidence in the results and the fairness of the process.

It is absurd. Even if you accept that everything is above board, no one should sit here and say that this process doesn't stink. Election reform is needed and the mail-in process will always be vulnerable to delays and the suggestion that foul play is involved--especially with the evidence being presented. Widespread mail in balloting with undefined rules and limitations is a solution in search of a problem and is unnecessary to conduct a fair election in this country. We need a defined in-person voting process that includes early voting. We need voter ID requirements. We need a limited mail in ballot process that allows for absentee votes for military personnel serving overseas or away from their homes, people traveling abroad for extended periods, and those that have serious health issues that would legitimately keep them from being able to make it to the polls. Beyond that, people should take a brief moment out of their lives to show up and make an informed vote for the candidates and issues on the ballot.

Since the disputed Presidential election in 2000, this nation has spent billions upon billions of dollars for updated machines and processes, and 20 years later we are arguably in a worse position in terms of having a transparent process. There is no reason--NONE--that we can't have a procedure in this day and time to have almost all votes accounted for on Election Day.

We cannot keep conducting our elections in a way that does not provide surety and confidence in its results. We need uniform processes for our federal elections, and we need laws in place to ensure that all legal voters are given their constitutionally protected rights to participate in civic engagement, but not through a process in which votes are gathered and harvested without their participation in the process. Tennesseans demand this fair process, and I will always fight for it.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for yielding.

Mr. Chair, I rise to express my concern and frustration with this bill in its current form. While I appreciate the work done on this NDAA, the legislation simply doesn't provide our military men and women with the resources needed to adequately protect the homeland and could negatively impact facilities in and around the Fourth District of Tennessee, including Arnold Air Force Base, Redstone Arsenal, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and the Y-12 National Security Complex.

Whether it be refusing to deploy the W76-2 tactical nuclear weapon to deter Russian aggression or underprioritizing funding for research and development of next-generation capabilities, such as hypersonic weapons and directed energy, this NDAA does not adequately meet the requirements for addressing challenges posed from our adversaries.

Finally, this NDAA highlights my colleagues' continuing disregard for the national emergency occurring at our southern border. This bill prevents the DOD from playing a role in addressing the crisis. Our military's number one responsibility is to protect the homeland. If my Democratic colleagues refuse to provide funding for DHS to secure the border, then the military must have a role.

Mr. Chairman, this bill, from its funding top line to its policy, does not support our military or our security appropriately. For that reason, I cannot support this bill, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Madam Speaker, I rise today to deliver a simple message: It is time to bring the United States-Mexico-Canada trade deal to the House floor for a vote.

The USMCA is a big improvement over NAFTA, the old North American Free Trade Agreement. This deal is fairer to American workers and companies in a variety of industries. Farmers and ranchers get wider access to foreign markets, and new rules make U.S. manufacturing more competitive. The USMCA is the first trade deal to help small businesses cut through international red tape.

The President has negotiated a deal that benefits not only large employers, but also small businesses and middle-class families in Republican and Democratic districts across the country.

The USMCA is important to successful negotiations with our other trading partners. This and future trade deals will continue the strong economic and job growth that tax reforms, smart regulations, and more domestic energy production have already helped to create.

I urge Congress to pass the USMCA quickly.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize an outstanding patriot and advocate for Tennessee veterans, James Patterson of Columbia, Tennessee, who recently passed away.

James was a Vietnam veteran who earned medals for his service. He had a 35-year career at Union Carbide, but locals know him best for his many volunteer affiliations in life. He was the true embodiment of what makes America great.

James was an American Legion commander and Legionnaire of the Year, also a member of the Disabled American Veterans and Veterans of Foreign Wars.

He was Maury County's veterans services director, and every week, as sergeant at arms, he led the Pledge of Allegiance at Columbia's Rotary Club.

James loved his country and loved, most of all, the men and women who fight for it. My staff and I have worked with him often to help Tennessee veterans receive the benefits and honors they deserve.

We were saddened to learn of his passing. The entire community lost a friend.

My condolences to the Patterson family. Here in the Capitol and in my home State of Tennessee, I will do my best to carry on James' work on behalf of the brave men and women who risk their lives to defend the United States of America. He set an example for all of us.

Thank you for your service, James.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support President Trump's declaration of a national emergency at the U.S.-Mexico border.

Sophisticated cartels--some of the most dangerous criminals and terrorist organizations in the world--are partnering with foreign adversaries, including Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, and China smuggling drugs, as well as human beings, into our country.

Mexican cartels produce or distribute the most heroin, fentanyl, cocaine, and methamphetamine here, killing tens of thousands of Americans annually.

My constituents are suffering from the opioid epidemic.

MS-13 and other violent gangs have infiltrated recent migrant caravans; however, the equivalent of a migrant caravan crosses the border almost weekly.

These forces are destabilizing and deadly to people on both sides, particularly for the less fortunate among us.

Under legal authority Congress has granted the executive branch-- which Barack Obama also used to combat cartels and illegal immigration--the President, the power to declare a national emergency to fund construction of the new border barriers at dangerous weak points.

As a fiscal conservative, constitutionalist, and strong advocate for the

military, I believe the need is clear and pressing, the law supports immediate action, and ample funding exists to address this crisis.

Madam Speaker, today I would like to take a moment to honor the well-served career in public service of Gwen Shelton. Gwen is stepping away from her role as Fayetteville city alderman after a 20- year career of holding public office and serving in several roles for the city of Fayetteville.

Since 1998, she has served as an elected official on the city school board, twice as city alderman (First from 2004 to 2006, then again from 2012 to 2018), and as Mayor from 2006 to 2010. Along with these duties, Gwen has also served as the Industrial Development Board director for Fayetteville-Lincoln County, in which she led many efforts to increase investment and job growth within the community.

Perhaps the best thing you can say of Gwen's time as a public official in Fayetteville is that whether you agreed with her positions and policies or you didn't, you always knew where she stood on an issue and you always knew she was working to do what she felt was in the best interest of the city of Fayetteville and its people. That trust in her as a leader provides understanding as to the secret of her success and gives all elected officials a standard to strive for.

Gwen Shelton has served her family and her community well, and while she will be deeply missed in Fayetteville, her success will not stop here. She and her husband, Scott, have both been presented with promising new opportunities in Huntsville, Alabama and I am confident that the next chapter for these two will be just as good if not better than the last. We wish her and her family the absolute best, and again, I would like to personally thank her for her outstanding service to the city of Fayetteville, Lincoln County and the state of Tennessee.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs be discharged from further consideration of the bill (H.R. 2634) to designate the Mental Health Residential Rehabilitation Treatment Facility Expansion of the Department of Veterans Affairs Alvin C. York Medical Center in Murfreesboro, Tennessee, as the ``Sergeant John Toombs Residential Rehabilitation Treatment Facility'', and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, today I would like to recognize the recent retirement of director of the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, a native of Tennessee's Fourth District, Mark Gwyn. Throughout Mark's 30-year career, he served as the standard for Tennessee law enforcement.

Beginning as a patrol officer for the McMinnville Police Department in 1985, Gwyn quickly joined the TBI as a special agent, where he showed superb investigative ability, leadership skills, and work ethic.

Eight years later, he was promoted to executive officer, then to assistant director, overseeing the forensic services division, and, finally, to director of the TBI in 2004.

Serving longer than any of his predecessors, Gwyn implemented many policies and programs that helped the bureau evolve over the past several years. He steered the bureau's fight to combat illegal methamphetamine production in the State and took great steps in combating human trafficking.

He oversaw the development of Tennessee's nationally recognized fusion center, which provides numerous services that help link local, State, and Federal resources together to improve the safety of all Tennesseeans.

As we look ahead, there will almost certainly be new challenges that TBI will face and difficulties that its future leaders will have to overcome. But with the foundation built during his tenure, I am certain that TBI will face these challenges with the same professionalism, efficiency, and grace that Director Gwyn has exhibited.

I thank Mark Gwyn for his service and wish him well in his retirement.