Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 419, the ``Public Safety Officers' Benefits Improvement Act of 2017''.

The Public Safety Officers' Benefits program or PSOB Program provides death, disability, and education benefits to public safety officers and their survivors.

The PSOB Program is administered by the Bureau of Justice Assistance, or BJA, which is a component of the Department of Justice.

Under the Program, the death benefit is provided to eligible survivors of public safety officers whose death was a direct and proximate result of a traumatic injury sustained in the line of duty or certain work-related heart attacks or strokes.

The Program provides a disability benefit to public safety officers who have been permanently and totally disabled as the direct and proximate result of a catastrophic injury sustained in the line of duty, if that injury permanently prevents the officer from performing any gainful employment.

The education benefit provides assistance to spouses and children of public safety officers killed or disabled in the line of duty who attend an educational program at an eligible education institution.

All too often, these first responders and their families needlessly suffer months and years of uncertainty after experiencing a loss of life or a traumatic injury.

This bill is a show of appreciation for the brave men and women who have made the ultimate sacrifice while serving in the line of duty as well as an expression of appreciation and support to the families of these first responders.

S. 419 improves how the Department of Justice processes claims under the PSOB Program.

The measure authorizes the Bureau of Justice Assistance to establish rules based on standards for the PSOB Program and it requires the Bureau of Justice Assistance to give substantial weight to evidence and facts

presented by a federal, state, or local agency when determining eligibility for death or disability benefits.

These two requirements will decrease the time in which claims are processed, thereby reducing the backlog of families awaiting a decision on their benefits claim.

S. 419 also increases the level of transparency regarding claims processed by requiring the Bureau of Justice Assistance to publish and update information on the status of pending claims.

By requiring that updates on pending benefits claims be posted on public websites, the public will be able to evaluate the performance of the Bureau of Justice Assistance in timely processing claims.

As we honor our fallen heroes this week during National Police Week, I think now is as greater a time as any to ensure that we remove barriers that hinder their families from obtaining benefits we promised them when we enacted the Public Safety Officers' Benefits Act.

Accordingly, I strongly support S. 419.

Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Homeland Security Committee, I rise in support of H.R. 2169. the ``Improving Fusion Centers Access to Information Act of 2017,'' which would enhance information sharing in the Department of Homeland Security State, Local and Regional Fusion Center Initiative.

This bill requires outreach to be conducted to fusion centers in order to identify gaps in information sharing and consultation with other Federal agencies to develop methods to address such gaps.

Additionally, it requires the DHS Secretary to coordinate with the heads of other federal departments and agencies to provide operational and intelligence advice to fusion centers and support their efforts to operate efficiently and effectively.

H.R. 2169 requires the Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) to ensure fusion centers have access to Homeland Security information sharing centers and that DHS personnel are deployed to support fusion centers in a manner consistent with the department's mission and statutory limits.

Fusion centers provide the means to local, state, and tribal law enforcement to bring together information from distributed federal and private sector sources for the purpose of collection, retention, analysis, and dissemination. The term fusion centers first coined by the Department of Defense (DOD) refer to the fusing of information for analysis purposes.

The Houston Regional Intelligence Service Center is a Fusion Center.

The mission of the Houston Regional Intelligence Service Center is to provide security to the Houston area by gathering, developing and sharing intelligence regarding the capabilities, intentions, and actions of terrorist groups and individuals which pose threats.

Houston hosted the 51st Super Bowl earlier this year and the Houston Regional Intelligence Service Center was on duty for this major national event.

This year's Super Bowl had:

10,000--volunteers;

140,000--visitors; and

1 million--people who participated in at least one Super Bowl event.

The Super Bowl took place free of incidents, which is a testament to the collaborative work of federal, state, and local law enforcement through the Houston Fusion Center.

Mr. Speaker, this bill is not only good for our country, but it also will greatly benefit the citizens of Houston, Texas.

If local law enforcement is given the proper resources, information, and intelligence, they will know how to properly handle terrorism threats.

H.R. 2169 will strengthen our economy while keeping our fellow citizens safe.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in supporting H.R. 2169 because the safety of citizens from potential threats is critical to the security of the homeland and strength of our economy.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2281 the ``Border Enforcement Security Task Force Reauthorization Act of 2017.''

As a Senior Member on the House Committee on Homeland Security; and former Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security, I know well the importance of protecting our nation's borders.

I thank my colleague Congressman Vela for sponsoring this bipartisan legislation, which reauthorizes the Border Enforcement Security Task Force (BEST) program.

An escalation in drug trafficking and transnational criminal activity along our nation's southern border has led to record levels of violence and drug trafficking-related homicides.

Despite significant efforts to combat the drug trade, many governments in the region suffer from overwhelmed criminal justice systems and law enforcement agencies.

There must be a multi-pronged approach to solving the drug crisis in the United States, it must include treatment upon demand; education; increase resources for border interdiction and seizure of illicit drugs and advanced technology to detect and track those who may be engaged in illegal activity along the border.

The Border Enforcement Security Task Force is accomplishing the important law enforcement component of border security.

The Border Enforcement Security Task Force achieves its goal of border security enhancement by facilitating collaboration among federal, state, local, tribal, and foreign law enforcement agencies to execute coordinated activities in furtherance of border security and homeland security; and enhancing information-sharing, including the dissemination of homeland security information among such agencies.

The BEST program is currently administered by DHS, and involves information sharing and law-enforcement operations between personnel from federal, state, local, tribal, and foreign law-enforcement agencies to combat criminal activity near the United States borders.

This program has established teams of law enforcement agents from over 100 law enforcement agencies that form units to investigate transnational criminal activity.

This approach supports better cooperation and collaboration among federal, state, local and tribal law enforcement agencies when investigating criminal activity along the southwest and northern borders, as well as at the nation's major seaports.

Since their inception, BEST Units have collectively initiated more than 10,654 cases.

These actions have resulted in more than:

2,718 criminal arrests

7,245 administrative arrests

110,711 pounds of cocaine

5,517 pounds of ecstasy

1,764 pounds of heroin

1,036,749 pounds of marijuana

6,325 pounds of methamphetamine

2,988,561 rounds of ammunition

4,657 vehicles

$130.2 million in U.S. currency

15,062 weapons

This bill instructs the Secretary of Homeland Security to also consider:

The cross-border threats posed by transnational criminal organizations;

The Department's homeland and border security strategic priorities; and

The departmental Joint Task Forces and other multi-agency cross- border operations when establishing new BEST Units.

In addition, this bill would update the Secretary's existing reporting requirement to provide an assessment of how BEST Units enhance information-sharing among law enforcement partners, coordinate with Departmental Joint Task Forces, and advance the Department's homeland and border security strategic priorities.

This legislation will improve and update the information sharing practices between our law enforcement agencies so they will operate in a cohesive manner.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2281 the BEST program because it had proven throughout the years to improve our border security, along with improving how our law enforcement agencies operate and share vital information.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1677 ``Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act of 2017.''

This bill, introduced by my colleague, Foreign Affairs Committee Ranking Member Eliot Engel, uses sanctions to put pressure on the Syrian government and anyone supporting it to stop committing war crimes against humanity.

I support this legislation for its important and necessary purpose to halt the wholesale slaughter of the Syrian people, encourage a negotiated political settlement, and hold Syrian human rights abusers accountable for their crimes.

The Syrian government, empowered with support from Iran and Russia, has pursued a strategy of targeting civilians to eliminate any opposition to its rule, including arresting anyone who opposes it.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights has reported the deaths of 60,000 people in prisons since the start of the conflict.

The Syrian government is the main aggressor in a conflict that has resulted in at least 400,000 dead and 14 million Syrians displaced; between 2011 and 2015, the Syrian Network for Human Rights attributed 96 percent of civilian deaths to the Syrian regime.

Additionally, President Bashar al-Assad has blocked United Nations humanitarian aid from reaching the intended recipients.

Who is Caesar? Caesar, who uses the pseudonym to remain anonymous as a way to protect his family, defected from the Syrian military in 2013.

He worked as a crime scene photographer for the Assad government after joining the military, years before the current conflict began.

As the conflict escalated, so did the number of bodies he would photograph each day.

Photographing the torture and rising death began to change his attitude towards the regime and in 2013, with help from the opposition, he faked his own death and defected from the Syrian military.

When he fled in August 2013, Caesar had collected over 53,000 photographs of detainees who had been tortured and killed.

He handed these photographs over to an anti-government political group, the Syrian National Movement, who then distributed the photographs to other groups, including Human Rights Watch (HRW).

With these photographs, HRW ``found evidence of widespread torture, starvation, beatings, and disease in Syrian government detention facilities.''

With the conflict in Syria in its fifth year, the U.S. House of Representatives introduced a bill intended to punish the Assad regime and its supporters and based it on both Caesar's photographs and his testimony in front of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs this past July.

The photographs and testimony show a clear connection between the reported human rights violations and the Assad government, legitimizing the bill and giving clear evidence to the international courts if President Assad stands trial for international war crimes.

H.R. 1677 is intended to sanction both the Syrian regime and any actors, what the bill refers to as a ``foreign person,'' who support its human rights violations by imposing sanctions on them.

This support can be in any capacity, such as economic or military support.

H.R. 1677 is important and necessary as the United States cannot sit in silence while tens of thousands innocent civilians are slaughtered by Assad's authoritative regime.

Assad's crimes are not only against humanity but also against democracy, and I fully support legislation aiming to stop these atrocities.

Mr. Speaker, I will continue to join my colleagues in honoring our law enforcement officers across America, particularly in my home State, and look forward to providing that tribute in days to come. I thank my colleague, the sheriff, for his work.

I have come to the floor today, however, to again comment on the appointment of a special counsel to investigate the Russian collusion, alleged Russian collusion of the President's campaign operatives and the President as relates to the 2016 election.

Director Mueller is a well respected law enforcement leader. I look forward to his quick response. But I believe it is important for this Congress, and I ask Speaker Ryan to ensure, that the committees of jurisdiction--Oversight and Government Reform, House Judiciary Committee, and House Intelligence Committee--do their work as well. That work would include hearings on the issues before us and an impeachment inquiry to determine the facts.

I believe that we can do this together, Mr. Speaker, not as Republicans and Democrats, but as Americans. The truth must be found, and America will be better for it.

Mr. Speaker, I too rise to honor this week of celebrating our police officers and hope to be able to speak about their bravery throughout the week.

But I am overwhelmed and shocked at the actions of the President of the United States to have yielded classified information into code-word intelligence inside a room with the Foreign Minister of Russia and the Ambassador.

It is well known that Ambassador Kislyak is reportedly considered by the U.S. intelligence community to be one of Russia's top spies and a central figure in the FBI investigation into Russia's collusion with Trump campaign officials during the 2016 Presidential election, along with the downfall of General Flynn. This is an absolutely unacceptable way for a President to act.

Mr. President, you have jeopardized the lives of the American people; you have jeopardized the lives of intelligence assets around the world; and you have breached the liaison relationship that we have had with many of our allies.

This needs to have a full investigation, besides a number of tools of the commission, a special prosecutor. This Judiciary Committee on the House side needs to stand up and have full hearings regarding the investigation of these horrific actions, violations that may breach on high crimes and misdemeanors.

It is shocking that the day after the President fired FBI Director Comey to impede the Bureau's investigation of the Trump campaign's ties to the Russian agents and entities that interfered in the 2016 presidential election, we learn that the President recklessly disclosed classified and highly sensitive information to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Russian ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak at a meeting held at the request of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Ambassador Kislyak is reportedly considered by the U.S. intelligence community to be one of Russia's top spies and a central figure in the FBI investigation into Russia's collusion with Trump campaign officials during the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

And yet, the President thought it appropriate to disclose to him classified information that had not even been shared with some of our allies.

The President's disclosure of classified and highly sensitive information may have severely compromised a U.S. intelligence partner.

But rather than provide a more thorough explanation for the President's actions, his surrogates are engaged in a bait and switch, feigning outrage over leaks when the President's loose lips are responsible for the crisis he has created for our nation and for himself.

Every day the President gives the nation another reason to question his judgment, doubt his word, mistrust his motives, or question his capacity and competence to manage the national security and foreign policy of the United States.

The American people deserve better.

Beginning with the creation of an independent bipartisan commission to investigate President Trump's ties to Russia and the appointment of an independent special counsel to investigate the Trump campaign's ties to the Russian agents and entities that interfered in the 2016 presidential election.

And Congress must take seriously its oversight responsibilities, and its oath to uphold the Constitution, and be a check on the excesses of the Executive Branch.

Mr. Speaker, I want you to look and keep your eyes on who will feel the TrumpCare's mother of all bombs of health care dropped on the American people. God have mercy on your soul.

I am a person living with a preexisting disease. I am a breast cancer survivor. This heartless and callous bill, with 24 million-plus people being thrown off of health care and the reverse Robin Hood of stealing from the poor and the seniors laying in their beds, and you are doing an age tax that is five times more than any other young person has to pay, is disgraceful, as well as the pittance that you have given for preexisting conditions, which is $8 billion. They say you need $25 billion.

Then you are telling the States to get a waiver. They are going to celebrate. And then you are saying to Trump, the king, that we have the votes to drop that mother of all bombs of health care.

Let me just simply say: I want to stand with the people. I want her to live in dignity and to be able to get well. I want to make sure that Medicaid is provided for working families. I don't want the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, to steal bread from the market because they can't get any health insurance.

God have mercy on your soul.

Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Budget Committee and the representative of a congressional district that has benefitted enormously from the Affordable Care Act, I rise in strong and unyielding opposition to H.R. 1628, the so-called ``American Health Care Act,'' which more accurately should be called ``Trumpcare, the Pay More for Less Act.''

I oppose this third and latest reincarnation of Trumpcare for several compelling reasons:

1. Trumpcare forces families to pay higher premiums and deductibles, increasing out-of-pocket costs.

2. Trumpcare will take away health care from 24 million hardworking Americans.

3. Trumpcare would gut Essential Health Benefits and protections for Americans with pre-existing conditions.

4. Trumpcare forces Americans aged 50-64 to pay premiums five times higher than what others pay for health coverage, no matter how healthy they are.

5. Trumpcare shortens the life of the Medicare Trust Fund and ransacks funds that seniors depend on to get the long-term care they need.

Mr. Speaker, 85 months ago, on March 23, 2010, redeemed a promise that had been unfulfilled for nearly a 100 years, when he signed into law the landmark Affordable Care Act passed by the Democratic controlled 111th Congress.

Seven years later, the verdict is in on the Affordable Care Act: the American people have judged it a success.

As reflected in the most recent public opinion polls, 61% of Americans approve of ObamaCare and oppose efforts to repeal it, the highest approval rates on record to date and continuing an inexorable upward trend over the past several years.

Mr. Speaker, the reason Americans are adamantly opposed to Republican repeal efforts, including the third iteration of Trumpcare now before us is that Obamacare is no longer a bogey cooked up in Republican talking points but a life-saving and life affirming measure that they experienced in their own lives.

Americans think it is beyond crazy to repeal a law that has brought to more than 20 million Americans the peace of mind and security that comes with knowing they have access to affordable, high quality health care.

Before the passage of the Affordable Care Act, 17.1% of Americans lacked health insurance; today nearly nine of ten (89.1%) are insured, which is the highest rate since Gallup began tracking insurance coverage in 2008.

Because of the Affordable Healthcare Act:

1. insurance companies are banned from discriminating against anyone, including 17 million children, with a preexisting condition, or charging higher rates based on gender or health status;

2. 6.6 million young-adults up to age 26 can stay on their parents' health insurance plans;

3. 100 million Americans no longer have annual or life-time limits on healthcare coverage;

4. 6.3 million seniors in the ``donut hole'' have saved $6.1 billion on their prescription drugs;

5. 3.2 million seniors now get free annual wellness visits under Medicare, and

6. 360,000 Small Businesses are using the Health Care Tax Credit to help them provide health insurance to their workers;

7. Pregnancy is no longer a pre-existing condition and women can no longer be charged a higher rate just because they are women.

We are becoming a nation of equals when it comes to access to affordable healthcare insurance.

With all of this progress, and the prospect for more through further refinements, who in their right mind would want to go back to how it used to be?

The answer seems to be only the President and House Republicans who call the Affordable Care Act and its enviable record of success a ``disaster.''

Americans know a disaster when they see one and they see one in the making: it is called ``Trumpcare,'' masquerading as the ``American Health Care Act,'' which will force Americans to pay more, get less, decimate the Medicare and Medicaid programs, and give a massive tax cut for top 1 percent.

Americans are right to be alarmed and angered by what the Trump Republicans are trying to do by rushing to vote on a Trumpcare bill before it can be scored by highly respected and nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

What we do know for sure is that this Trumpcare bill is a massive $900 billion tax cut for the wealthy, paid for on the backs of America's seniors, the vulnerable, the poor, and working class households.

Trump gave the game away on March 20, 2017 in one of his trademark pep rallies:

``We want a very big tax cut, but cannot do that until we keep our promise to repeal and replace the disaster known as Obamacare.''

This ``Robin Hood in reverse'' bill is unprecedented and breathtaking in its audacity--no bill ever tried to give so much to the rich while taking so much from the poor and working class.

When they were forced to pull Trumpcare 1.0 from the floor because they lacked the votes to pass, House Republican leaders responded by adding an amendment (Trumpcare 2.0) that made the original bill even worse.

Trumpcare 2.0 would allow states to jettison existing essential health benefit requirements, thereby permitting health plans covering millions of people once again to exclude coverage for maternity and newborn care, pediatric dental and vision services, mental health and substance use services, and other crucial benefits.

All this accomplished was a hemorrhaging of support from the moderate wing of the Republican Conference who feared the repercussions of leaving millions of Americans with preexisting conditions without health insurance so the Trump Republicans invented Trumpcare 3.0 to provide $8 billion over five years to offset the cost of setting up separate pools or premium assistance programs for people with pre- existing conditions.

This pittance is not designed or intended to help real people with preexisting conditions, but to provide cover for House Republicans to walk the plank.

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, at least $25 billion per year would be required, not $8 billion spread out over five years as provided for in Trumpcare 3.0.

Trumpcare represents the largest transfer of wealth from the bottom 99% to the top 1% in American history.

This callous Republican scheme gives gigantic tax cuts to the rich, and pays for it by taking insurance away from 24 million people, leaving 52 million uninsured, and raising costs for the poor and middle class.

In addition, Republicans are giving the pharmaceutical industry a big tax repeal, worth nearly $25 billion over a decade without demanding in return any reduction in the cost of prescription and brand-name drugs.

To paraphrase Winston Churchill, of this bill, it can truly be said that ``never has so much been taken from so many to benefit so few.''

The Pay-More-For-Less plan destroys the Medicaid program under the cover of repealing the Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion.

CBO estimates 14 million Americans will lose Medicaid coverage by 2026 under the Republican plan.

In addition to terminating the ACA Medicaid expansion, the bill converts Medicaid to a per-capita cap that is not guaranteed to keep pace with health costs starting in 2020.

The combined effect of these policies is to slash $880 billion in federal Medicaid funding over the next decade.

The cuts get deeper with each passing year, reaching 25% of Medicaid spending in 2026.

These steep cuts will force states to drop people from Medicaid entirely or ration care for those who most need access to comprehensive coverage.

The Pay-More-For-Less plan undermines the health care safety net for vulnerable populations.

Currently, Medicaid provides coverage to more than 70 million Americans, including children, pregnant women, seniors in Medicare, people who are too disabled to work, and parents struggling to get by on poverty-level wages.

In addition to doctor and hospital visits, Medicaid covers long-term services like nursing homes and home and community-based services that allow people with chronic health conditions and disabilities to live independently.

To date, 31 states and D.C. have expanded Medicaid eligibility to low-income adults, which, when combined with the ACA's other coverage provisions, has helped to reduce the nation's uninsured rate to the lowest in history.

Trumpcare throws 24 million Americans off their health insurance by 2026 according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Low-income people will be hit especially hard because 14 million people will lose access to Medicaid by 2026 according to CBO.

Trumpcare massively shifts who gets insured in the nongroup market.

According to CBO, ``fewer lower-income people would obtain coverage through the nongroup market under the legislation than current law,'' and, ``a larger share of enrollees in the nongroup market would be younger people and a smaller share would be older people.''

The projected 10% reduction in premiums is not the result of better care or efficiency--it is in large part the result of higher-cost and older people being pushed out of a market that is also selling plans that provide less financial protection.

People with low incomes suffer the greatest losses in coverage.

CBO projects the uninsured rate for people in their 30s and 40s with incomes below 200% of poverty will reach 38% in 2026 under this bill, nearly twice the rate projected under current law.

Among people aged 50-64, CBO projects 30% of those with incomes below 200% of poverty will be uninsured in 2026.

Under current law, CBO projects the uninsured rate would only be 12 percent.

Being uninsured is not about ``freedom.''

Speaker Ryan has argued that people will happily forgo insurance coverage because this bill gives them that ``freedom.''

The argument makes as much sense as the foolish claim that slaves came to America as ``immigrants'' seeking a better life.

The freedom to be uninsured is no freedom at all to people in their 50s and 60s with modest incomes who simply cannot afford to pay thousands of dollars toward premiums.

They do not really have a choice.

The claim of our Republican friends that Trumpcare provides more freedom to all Americans calls to mind the words of Anatole France:

``The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread from the market.''

Trumpcare raises costs for Americans nearing retirement, essentially imposing an ``Age Tax.''

The bill allows insurance companies to charge older enrollees higher premiums than allowed under current law, while reducing the size of premium tax credits provided.

Again, these changes hit low-income older persons the hardest.

A 64-year-old with an income of $26,500 buying coverage in the individual market will pay $12,900 more toward their premiums in 2026, on average.

Trumpcare raises costs for individuals and families with modest incomes, particularly older Americans.

A recent analysis found that in 2020, individuals with incomes of about $31,000 would pay on average $4,000 more out of pocket for health care--which is like getting a 13% pay cut.

And the older you are, the worse it gets.

An analysis by the Urban Institute estimates that for Americans in their 50s and 60s, the tax credits alone would only be sufficient to buy plans with major holes in them, such as $30,000 deductible for family coverage and no coverage at all of brand-name drugs or many therapy services.

Another reason I oppose the Trumpcare bill before us is because its draconian cuts in Medicaid funding and phase-out of Medicaid expansion put community health centers at risk.

Community health centers are consumer-driven and patient-centered organizations that serve as a comprehensive and cost effective primary health care option for America's most underserved communities.

Community health centers serve as the health care home for more than 25 million patients in nearly 10,000 communities across the country.

Across the country, 550 new clinics have opened to receive 5 million new patients since 2009.

Community health centers serve everyone regardless of ability to pay or insurance status:

1. 71% of health center patients have incomes at or below 100% of poverty and 92% have incomes less than 200% of poverty;

2. 49% of health center patients are on Medicaid; and

3. 24% are uninsured;

4. Community health centers annually serve on average 1.2 million homeless patients and more than 300,000 veterans.

Community health centers reduce health care costs and produce savings--on average, health centers save 24% per Medicaid patient when compared to other providers.

Community health centers integrate critical medical and social services such as oral health, mental health, substance abuse, case management, and translation, under one roof.

Community health centers employ nearly 100,000, people and generate over $45 billion in total economic activity in some of the nation's most distressed communities.

Mr. Speaker, community health centers are on the front lines of every major health crisis our country faces; from providing access to care (and employment) to veterans to addressing the opioid epidemic to responding to public health threats like the Zika virus.

We should be providing more support and funding to community health centers; not making it more difficult for them to serve the communities that desperately need them by slashing Medicaid funding.

Trumpcare Republican plan leaves rural Americans worse off.

Mr. Speaker, health insurance has historically been more expensive in rural areas because services cost more and it is hard to have a stable individual market with a small population.

Under the Affordable Care Act, premium subsidies are tied to local costs, which helps keeps premium costs down.

But they are not under the Republican plan.

So, under the Republican plan residents in rural areas, who tend to be older and poorer, will pay much more and get much less health insurance.

What the Affordable Care Act, and its repeal means in the lives of real people:

At the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, the powerful and compelling reasons to reject Trumpcare lie in the real world experiences of the American people.

Let me briefly share with you the positive, life affirming difference made by the Affordable Care Act in the lives of just three of the millions of Americans it has helped.

Joan Fanwick: ``If Obamacare is repealed, I don't know if I'll live to see the next President''

``After nearly a decade of mysterious health scares, I was diagnosed with an autoimmune disorder called Sjogren's syndrome last year, when I was a junior at Temple University.

``It's a chronic illness with no known cause or cure, and without close medical surveillance and care, it can lead to life-threatening complications (like the blood infection I frequently experience).

``For me, having this disorder means waking up every morning and taking 10 different medications.

``It also means a nurse visiting my apartment every Saturday to insert a needle into the port in my chest, so I can give myself IV fluids throughout the week.

``Without insurance, my medical expenses would cost me about $1,000 per week--more than $50,000 per year. And that doesn't even include hospitalizations.

``My medical bills aren't cheap under Obamacare, but I can afford them.

``Under Obamacare, insurance companies aren't allowed to cut you off when your costs climb so right now, the most I personally have to pay out of pocket is $1,000 per year.''

Brain Norgaard: ``I am a small business owner and leadership trainer who Obamacare has helped tremendously.''

Brian Norgaard, a Dallas, Texas resident called my office to express his opposition to Trumpcare and to offer share how the Affordable Care Act has helped small business owners like himself:

``I am a small business owner and leadership trainer who Obamacare has helped tremendously.

``My wife and I both own small businesses in the Dallas, Texas area and as a result of the huge savings we received after paying lower [healthcare] premiums under Obamacare, we were able to reinvest those saving into both of our businesses and the community.

``And the healthcare we received was quality, at that.''

Ashley Walton: ``For cancer survivors, we literally live and die by insurance''

Ashley Walton was 25 when a mole on her back turned out to be melanoma.

She had it removed, but three years later she discovered a lump in her abdomen.

She was then unemployed and uninsured, and so she put off going to a doctor.

She tried to buy health insurance. Every company rejected her.

Ashley eventually became eligible for California's Medicaid program, which had been expanded under the Affordable Care Act.

The 32-year-old Oakland resident credits her survival to the ACA.

Without it, ``I would likely be dead, and my family would likely be bankrupt from trying to save me.''

Before any of our Republican colleagues supporting this bill cast their vote, I urge them to reflect on the testimony of Joan, Brian, and Ashley, and on this question posed by a constituent to Sen. Cotton of Arkansas at a recent town hall:

``I've got a husband dying and we can't afford--let me tell you something.

``If you can get us better coverage than this [Obamacare], go for it.

``Let me tell you what we have, plus a lot of benefits that we need.

``We have $29 per month for my husband. Can you beat that? Can you?

With all the congestive heart failures, and open heart surgeries, we're trying. $29 per month. And he's a hard worker.

$39 for me.''

Like a horror film of yore with monsters and vampires, both the original Trumpcare and its sequels threaten to return this country to the days when annual and lifetime dollar-based limits on the use of essential health benefits shifted tremendous financial and health risks to working families.

Insurance companies could charge people with pre-existing conditions many times more than they charge healthy people--just as they did before the Affordable Care Act.

Millions of Americans with pre-existing conditions would be at risk of losing health coverage or face premiums so high only the very wealthy could afford them--the same people who benefit from the massive tax cuts in the original bill.

I urge all Members to reject Trumpcare, one of the most monstrously cruel and morally bankrupt legislative proposals ever to be considered in this chamber.

To paraphrase a famous former reality television personality, ``believe me, Trumpcare is a disaster.''

We should reject it and keep instead ``something terrific'': and that is the Affordable Care Act, regarded lovingly by millions of Americans as ``Obamacare.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak about Senate Amendment to H.R. 244, ``Making Consolidated Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2017.''

The legislation before us is an imperfect vehicle for appropriations for FY 2017, but this Omnibus Appropriations package contains new funding for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2017 for federal agencies under the eleven remaining Appropriations subcommittees.

The Omnibus Budget Agreement appropriates $1.070 trillion in base discretionary budget authority, allocating $551 billion for defense and $519 billion for nondefense in line with the Budget Control Act's statutory discretionary spending caps, as well as $93.5 billion in additional funding designated for Overseas Contingency Operations(OCO).

Mr. Speaker, this budget agreement is far from perfect, but it is a positive step since it ensures that funding for appropriated entitlements will continue at a rate maintaining program levels under current law and prevents congressional Republicans from shutting down the government again and manufacturing a crisis that only harms our economy, destroys jobs, and weakens our middle class.

The government shutdown of 2013, which was manufactured by the Republican majority lasted 16 days and cost taxpayers $24 billion.

The enormous harm and disruption of the lives of federal employees and the people they serve, however, was irreparable.

As I stated, Mr. Speaker, this Omnibus Budget Agreement is a product of goodwill and realism, and averts a shutdown of government operations and the disruption a shutdown causes to the lives of millions of Americans who depend upon federal programs to do their jobs, educate their kids, care for their parents, and contribute to their communities.

Our constituents look to the Congress and the President to make responsible choices and decisions to keep the nation safe, the economy prosperous, and to make necessary and prudent investments in education, healthcare and research, transportation and infrastructure, economic development, science, the arts and humanities, and the environment.

This is, after all, just another way of saying that the American people expect their leaders in Washington be guided by the Constitution's Preamble and pursue policies and provide the resources that will:

``establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty.''

The funding priorities that have been floated by the Trump Administration fail this essential test of leadership because they are irresponsible, impracticable, unrealistic, and, in many respects, insensitive or indifferent to the deleterious impact they will have on the lives of real people living in the real world.

They do not command majority support in the Congress or of the public and have been rejected in this budget.

Instead, in a stinging defeat for the Trump, the Omnibus Budget Agreement does not fund the immoral and unwise border wall or create a cruel new deportation force.

Also eliminated are more than 160 Republican poison pill riders, ranging from undermining a woman's right to reproductive health to dismantling Dodd-Frank's vital Wall Street consumer protections.

Mr. Speaker, I am also pleased that we succeeded in securing Democratic policy priorities and funding increases for critical nondefense items.

This will save lives and create jobs.

Mr. Speaker, let me identify some of the important policy and funding priorities included in this budget agreement:

Fully funds community development block grants and low income housing programs in urban and rural communities.

$2 billion for Medical Research: the budget rejects President Trump's dangerous plans to steal billions from lifesaving medical research;

$221 million overall for Community Oriented Policing (COPS) and $137 million for the COPS hiring program;

$1 billion for Coal Miners' Health: Democrats secured funding to deliver permanent health benefits for the thousands of coal miners and their families who stood to lose their health benefits this month;

$600 million to combat and respond to the Opioid Epidemic;

Provides level funding for the Environmental Protection Agency despite Republicans' hopes to gut it;

Year-Round Pell Grants: Democrats insisted on, and won an increase of $105 in the maximum Pell Grant award and succeeded in restoring access to year-round Pell Grants which will make a huge difference in the lives of hard-working students;

Science Funding: the omnibus budget increases funding for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, the Department of Energy Office of Science and ARPA-E, all initiatives President Trump wanted cut;

Puerto Rico's Medicaid: the omnibus budget includes vital funds to stabilize Puerto Rico's underfunded Medicaid program, which threatened so many of our fellow Americans in Puerto Rico;

$1 billion for Emergency Famine Relief to alleviate famine resulting from war, drought and displacement in Africa and the Middle East, saving countless lives around the world;

Mr. Speaker, I support the omnibus budget agreement before us because it achieves the following goals and objectives that I laid out last week:

``To establish justice'' and ``To promote the general welfare'':

1. Funding for the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division and the Department of Education Office of Civil Rights so that they have funds needed to enforce laws protecting civil rights, voting rights, and prosecuting hate crimes.

2. Fully funds community development block grants and low income housing programs in urban and rural communities.

3. Fully funds the Legal Services Corporation so that working and low-income persons who lack an army of lobbyists to represent them in Washington will at least have the assistance of counsel to defend their legal rights in courts of law.

4. Fully funds programs providing food assistance to housebound seniors, such as Meals on Wheels.

5. Fully funds programs that provide students from low and moderate- income families access to affordable access to higher education and provides students with special needs the support needed to receive the free appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment (LRE) guaranteed by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA Act).

6. Funds before and after school programs and other student enrichment programs that help students succeed.

7. Fully funds programs that make federal housing safer through energy efficient healing and cooling systems.

8. Preserves tax credit programs that help revitalize low income communities.

9. Fully funds the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Energy programs developing the next generation of clean energy and transportation technologies.

``Provide for the common defense'':

1. Provides robust funding for the Department of State and USAID to advance national security interests in places like Iraq and Afghanistan and to end violent conflicts in trouble spots which could threaten the security interests of the United States.

2. Provides adequate funding for United Nations peacekeeping missions throughout the world and distribution of food aid to people in developing and famine stricken countries, such as South Sudan, Somalia, Yemen, and Nigeria.

``To ensure domestic tranquility'':

1. Fully funds cost-sharing reduction subsidies, or CSRs, to compensate insurers for reducing deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums for low-income customers on the Affordable Care Act exchanges.

2. Protects the adequacy, solvency, and integrity of the Medicare and Medicaid programs, which provide health sustaining support for 70 million Americans.

3. Fully funds the National Institutes of Health research programs so that patient access to lifesaving treatments is not delayed.

4. Does not convert funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention into block grants which would hindering the nation's ability to respond swiftly and effectively to public health crises like Ebola, Zika, and HIV/AIDS.

Mr. Speaker, working together the House and Senate has reached an agreement on an appropriate budget framework that invests in the American people, preserves our national security, and keeps faith with the values that have served our nation well and made the United States the leading nation on earth.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the continued appropriations for 2017 and to say: Say it isn't so.

When the Trump budget was presented--the skinny budget--$600 billion was cut out of NIH, which would impact a major research in diseases that impact Americans. Thank goodness that we worked for a $2 billion increase for the NIH in this appropriations bill.

And, equally so, how important it is that we can announce in Houston that the Houston Housing Authority will be able to reissue vouchers for homeless families because $654 million-plus was put in the section 8 vouchers, $40 million-plus was put in for veterans who are homeless, and $10 million was put in for the disabled.

In addition, we added to the Cops on the Beat program and, as well, provided additional dollars to enhance the Civil Rights Division some $897.5 million.

The budget or the appropriations should be a road map for serving Americans, not a nickel-and-dime approach to undermine. I am glad the resistance remains strong, and that is why we have a budget or an appropriation that listens to the people and the healthcare subsidies are being paid for, so that people can have that health insurance.

Mr. Speaker, as Members of Congress we know well, perhaps better than most, how blessed our nation is to have in reserve such exceptional young men and women who will go on to become leaders in their local communities, states, and the nation in the areas of business, education, government, philanthropy, the arts and culture, and the military.

We know this because we see them and benefit from their contributions every day. Many of them work for us in our offices as junior staff members, congressional fellows, or interns and they do amazing work for and on behalf of the constituents we are privileged to represent.

Mr. Speaker, I believe there is no higher calling than the call to serve a cause larger than ourselves. That is why I ran for public office. I was inspired to serve by President Kennedy who said, ``Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country,'' and by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. who said:

``Everybody can be great because anybody can serve. . . . You only need a heart full of grace. A soul generated by love.''

By this measure, there are several other great young men and women who served as volunteers this year in my offices. They may toil in obscurity but their contributions to the constituents we serve are deeply appreciated. That is why today I rise to pay tribute to four extraordinary young persons for their service to my constituents in the 18th Congressional District of Texas and to the American people. They are: Marieme Foote from Ithaca College; Naomi Mulugeta from Texas Tech University; Mitch Kuhlman, from American University; and Alexandria Johnson from the Madeira School.

Mr. Speaker, the energy, intelligence, and idealism these wonderful young people brought to my office and those interning in the offices of my colleagues help keep our democracy vibrant. The insights, skills, and knowledge of the governmental process they gain from their experiences will last a lifetime and prove invaluable to them as they go about making their mark in this world.

Because of persons like them the future of our country is bright and its best days lie ahead. I wish them all well.

Mr. Speaker, I am grateful that such thoughtful committed young men and women can be found working in my office, those of my colleagues, and in every community in America. Their good works will keep America great, good, and forever young.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday evening I began my remarks by saying, ``Say it is not so''; and I rise again this morning, as we begin our journey on ensuring that the government does not shut down and again rebutting TrumpCare that is so devastating, to say, ``Say it is not so.''

This morning we rose to headlines of the President of the United States saying that the government needs a shutdown in September. I am glad Democrats recognize that we do not represent just Democrats. We represent the entire Nation, and we owe them a commitment to govern, and that is what we will do.

We now will face another attempt to repeal the Affordable Care Act, ObamaCare. I am glad that Democrats have come together around common sense and the responsibility of serving not only the healthy, but the sick.

Last evening, in a very emotional testimony, one of our late-night hosts who entertains America every night, gave an emotional statement about his infant son who was receiving heart surgery. In his tears, his excitement for the success, but also his pain that people who did not have money, as we debate this frivolous healthcare bill, will be subject to the dangers and the devastation and the potential death of a child they love.

Say it is not so.

And I remember when we started the Affordable Care Act, as a member of the Judiciary Committee--all committees were involved in this process. I remember us holding Democratic hearings to listen to families who were suffering and were the brunt of not having health insurance:

The father who had a medical student son who was interning in Atlanta who had to drive with great fury to pick him up to be able to take him back to Washington, D.C., when he had an immediate attack of an appendix,

laying him on his back seat because the insurance that the young man had only covered him in the city of Washington, D.C., where he was going to medical school.

Or I remember the mother whose son was a drug abuser--but a lawyer, got himself back on track but suffered from hepatitis--whose son died in the emergency room because he did not have the medical coverage as he was getting his life back to help stabilize him, died in that medical condition and in that emergency room.

Those are just a few stories of those who died because they did not have health insurance pre the Affordable Care Act.

Now, today we come with a bill that is going to eviscerate the sick people with preexisting diseases--it is not like the Affordable Care Act--and literally throw them under the bus. Because what they are doing is taking away essential services and saying that there is no room at the inn for those with preexisting conditions, such as diabetes, asthma, allergic conditions, heart disease, cancer, leukemia, or a baby that is born with a heart defect.

It is tragic that the bill they are putting on the floor is taking away essential services, like mental health, substance abuse, hospitalization, maternity; and they are throwing them to the States. If your State will do it, so what. I live in a State--as we all do, we love our State--they are facing fiscal crisis.

Do you think they are going to take the sickest?

No, they are not.

Twenty-four million people will still lose their insurance. Hardworking families will have no health insurance. Those with preexisting conditions, under the Trump plan, still remain in the darkness of corners, not helped, and ready to die.

What family wants to subject their loved one to a place where they have no hope?

Then, of course, there is the horrific age tax. The premiums for those between age 50 and 64, hardworking Americans, just because they have reached a certain age, their premiums will shoot through the roof. These are people who have made and built this country with their hands and their minds, our mothers and fathers, and even ourselves. How tragic it is to be able to have these kinds of conditions. Then, of course, it will shorten the life of the Medicare trust and literally implode that.

This is governing?

I don't think so. I don't think so. And I, for one, am not going to stand for it because it is important that our people understand that we govern as Democrats.

As we put this bill on the floor to keep from closing this government, let me just say to you quickly that we have upped the NIH-- the National Institutes of Health--with $2 billion. We have preserved the yearlong Pell, and we have funded housing so people don't have to be thrown out of housing.

Mr. Speaker, Democrats know how to govern and save this country. I don't know what this person is doing at all.

Mr. Speaker, I have listened to the debate on the floor, and I want to join my fellow colleagues--women and men of the Democratic Caucus--on opposing the Working Families Flexibility Act of 2017.

I just have one anecdotal story that reflects the constituents that I represent. Take that woman who I saw--when going to my elementary schools, visiting them, I saw a mother who got up at 4 in the morning to take three buses to drop her young child off at an elementary school, and then get two buses back to work, an hourly wage maker. She does it because, one, she is supporting her child and, two, she has got to work.

This bill is a complete undermining of all of the hardworking men and women who need their money to pay a light bill, to pay rent, maybe even a mortgage, to pay the normal expenses that many take for granted. And this bill wants to substitute compensatory time for overtime pay.

So I cannot imagine that anyone with a heart would have this legislation as a substitute for this hardworking mother to be paid overtime. I just can't imagine that compensatory time off cannot pay the light bill, cannot pay rent, cannot pay healthcare costs, which we see are immediately being taken away from 24 million Americans.

So I oppose this legislation because I want to stand on the side of the hardworking mother who needs her resources for a school uniform, a school trip, a rent payment, a light bill.

Mr. Speaker, this bill should be opposed. It does not serve the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Congresswoman Frankel, our chair, our leader, and all of my colleagues that appeared today. What a powerful force of women who are standing by our Marines.

Now, let me be very clear: All of our men and women in the United States Marines have earned and deserve our respect and trust. All of the women in the United States Marines deserve our trust and our respect.

So it saddens me today to have to rise and bring to the attention of so many this unbelievable abuse of the men and women--men because their reputation is tarnished, through no fault of their own, who are not affiliated with Marines United; and women who feel that their service to this Nation has been denigrated.

Let me cite for you the words of 23-year-old Erika Butner:

``As a Marine Corps veteran, I am disheartened and disgusted with this scandal.''

Victim blaming and the excuse that some are giving that boys will be boys needs to stop.

Butner says she first heard of the group in August when a friend of hers was posted to the page without her consent. In January, she notified the Naval Criminal Investigative Service and Google about a shared drive posted to the group that contained naked photos of more than two dozen servicemembers. Comments posted to the group described the victims graphically and, in some cases, advocating that they be raped or sexually assaulted. Names, ranks, and duty stations of the victims were also shared. The Marines United page has been taken down, but there are supposed to be some 30,000 users of that site.

Can you imagine that this is my story for America: that young women marines who put on the uniform and, therefore, are willing to lay down their life and bleed for this Nation and die will be subjected to this?

So I join my colleagues in standing against it, and I ask my friends in the United States Marines--and I have many. I have staff persons who have been members of the Marines and a wounded warrior on my staff right now who loves his Marines. But enough is enough. We will not tolerate the objectification of women, we will not tolerate the nonconsensual pornography, and we will not live with sexual assault.

That is why, for starters, I am proud to be a cosponsor of Congresswoman Speiers' resolution for claiming April as Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month. Also, I am very pleased of the privacy bill that is being put forward to never have this occur again. Every 98 seconds another American is sexually assaulted, and there are an average of 321,500 victims per year.

So this ties very clearly into what these United States Marines, who happen to be women, are facing. This is a horrendous reality for women here in the United States, but it is a reality for women in uniform who are defending our freedom abroad. That is what I want to focus on as I complete my remarks.

These female marines go to faraway places and are in the battlefront and the battle lines, standing alongside with their male counterparts. They are expected to go through basic training without any waivers. They are expected to carry that gun without any waivers. They are expected to wear that uniform in dignity without any waivers.

Nude photographs of female marines and veterans across the military were shared on Marines United, and those photographs showed women in various stages of undress, and they were grossly obscene. Some posts on Marines United suggested sexually assaulting women marines and that women did

not belong in the United States military or this particular branch.

Once again, these photos were posted without the knowledge and the consent of the women whose photos were posted. This conduct, as I said, is unacceptable.

The Marines Corps' creed of good order and discipline is being undermined when it cannot police Marines who use social media to promote anti-Semitism, sexism, and racism. These messages of hate are oppressive and demean human dignity.

Let me close by saluting our United States Marines because I do know that they have decades and centuries of laying their lives down. That is not the issue here as I stand before you today.

What the issue is, of course, is that United States Marines deserve the dignity and the respect, even if they are women and, I might say, especially because of what has occurred because they are women. They ask for no deference. They ask for no waivers. They ask for no apologies in terms of them being United States Marines. They simply want that dignity and respect that we all owe them.

I salute them and we stand alongside them.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1242, ``400 Years of African-American History Commission Act'', which establishes the 400 Years of African-American History Commission to develop and carry out activities throughout the United States to commemorate the 400th anniversary of the arrival of Africans in the English colonies at Point Comfort, Virginia, in 1619.

Through this bill, the commission must:

1. Plan programs to acknowledge the impact that slavery and laws that enforced racial discrimination had on the United States;

2. Encourage civic, patriotic, historical, educational, artistic, religious, and economic organizations to organize and participate in anniversary activities;

3. Assist states, localities, and nonprofit organizations to further the commemoration; and

4. Coordinate for the public scholarly research on the arrival of Africans in the United States and their contributions to this country.

The commission may provide:

1. Grants to communities and nonprofit organizations for the development of programs;

2. Grants to research and scholarly organizations to research, publish, or distribute information relating to the arrival of Africans in the United States; and

3. Technical assistance to states, localities, and nonprofit organizations to further the commemoration.

The commission must prepare a strategic plan and submit a final report to Congress that contains a summary of its activities, an accounting of its received and expended funds, and its recommendations.

The commission would submit a final report to the Congress and terminate on July 1, 2020.

H.R. 1242 would authorize the appropriation of the necessary amounts for those purposes.

The commission would consist of 15 members who would serve without pay but would be reimbursed for travel expenses.

CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 1242 would not increase net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2028. Enacting H.R. 1242 would not affect revenues.

H.R. 1242 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments.

August of 2019 will mark 400 years since the first documented arrival of Africans who came to English America by way of Point Comfort, Va.

Not only is it appropriate to establish a commission that would recognize the contributions of African Americans, but it is historically significant to acknowledge that the ``20 and odd'' Africans (as it was recorded) were the first recorded group of Africans to be sold as involuntary laborers or indentured servants in the English colonies.

The commission would be charged with highlighting the resilience and contributions of African Americans, as well as acknowledging the painful impact that slavery and other atrocities have had on our nation.

African Americans have contributed to the economic, academic, social, cultural and moral well-being of this nation.

Could we claim America as the most innovative nation on earth without the invention of the modern traffic light, the perfection of the carbon filament or the use of the mathematics that propelled Apollo astronauts to the moon?

African-American culture is American culture, and African-American discoveries are American discoveries. Without the accomplishments of African Americans, the United States could not boast the ingenuity and cultural richness that we cherish.

Mr. Speaker, a few of us were at the United Nations this morning and this afternoon, and what we heard most was the importance of empowering women in developing countries who have experienced violence, sexual violence. Tell me it isn't so that the President of the United States has discontinued Let Girls Learn, fostered and supported by Mrs. Obama, which is an important key element of the Peace Corps, which is attempting to help these girls learn and empower them.

Tell me it isn't so that the President of the United States, not recognizing the Constitution and freedom of speech, is trying to expand or change the libel laws that if you don't like what they say about you as a politician, you can undermine and you can charge First Amendment privilege, First Amendment press, and others with a violation of those laws.

Tell me it isn't so that America is going back on her values and her commitment to helping people around the world, particularly vulnerable women and children, and, of course, denigrating the First Amendment and the freedom of the press. Tell me it isn't so.