Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Rev. Crawford W. Kimble, Pastor Emeritus of Good Hope Missionary Baptist Church, which originated in Freedmen's Town in 1872.

Reverend Kimble died earlier this week in Houston at the age of 95. He will be laid to rest on Saturday, March 1, 2014.

Rev. Kimble, the fifth of six pastors at Good Hope Missionary Baptist Church, served as Pastor for approximately 35 years. His dream of building Good Hope in its current location (3015 North MacGregory Way) was fulfilled in 1981.

Rev. Kimble was born in Elgin, Texas on March 24, 1918 and he followed the ministerial paths of both his father and grandfather. He began preaching at the age of 33.

Rev. Kimble joined Good Hope Baptist Church in 1951; he preached his first sermon there in 1959; and he later became pastor to many prominent Texans, namely Congresswoman Barbara Jordan, the first African American United States Congresswoman from the South, and Dr. Lonnie Smith, who played an important role in minority voting rights in primary elections.

It is astounding to find that prior to Rev. Kimble's calling into the ministry, he worked as a newspaper editor and writer! His career began as the managing editor with the Houston Informer, Houston's oldest African American newspaper; and it ended with the Kansas City Call.

After more than 30 years in retirement, Rev. Kimble continued to write and publish books. He worked out of his second floor office and living quarters, a Fourth Ward senior citizen apartment complex which was developed and named after him on April 5, 2007: Crawford W. Kimble Senior Living, located at 1025 Saulnier Street, in Fourth Ward, Texas.

Rev. Kimble's works include books entitled ``Watch the Tree it Might Fall on You, which he wrote and published at age 8o; ``The Adventures of Love: God's plan for a Victorious Life for His People'', which he wrote and published at age 90; and ``God at Work'', his most recent publication, which answers the attacks of Rush Limbaugh on our President, President Barack Obama.

Rev. Kimble was a great man who touched the lives of all who met him. He will be missed.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on the rule governing debate for H.R. 2804, the ``All Economic Regulations Are Transparent Act of 2014,'' the so-called ``ALERRT Act.''

H.R. 2804 makes numerous changes to the federal rule-making process, including: (1) requiring agencies to consider numerous new criteria when issuing rules, such as alternatives to rules proposals; (2) requiring agencies to review the ``indirect'' costs of proposed and existing rules; (3) giving the Small Business Administration expanded authority to intervene in the rule-making of other agencies; and (4) requiring federal agencies to file monthly reports on the status of their rule-making activities.

I cannot support this legislation in its present form for two reasons, one procedural and one substantive.

Procedurally, I oppose the bill because in its present form it was never considered by the Judiciary Committee. This bill was reported by the Oversight and Government Reform Committee on a party line 19-15 vote but was not acted on by Judiciary Committee.

As reported, the bill contained only provisions relating to monthly reporting requirements regarding agency rule-making.

But the bill being brought to the floor now includes three additional and very controversial Judiciary bills (H.R. 2122, Regulatory Accountability Act; H.R. 1493, Sunshine for Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act; and H.R. 2542, Regulatory Flexibility Improvements Act).

This is not the way to legislate on matters that have such serious consequences for the public health and safety.

Substantively, I oppose the underlying bill this rule makes in order because it imposes unneeded and costly analytical and procedural requirements on agencies that would prevent them from performing their statutory responsibilities to protect the public health and safety.

I oppose the bill also because it creates unnecessary regulatory and legal uncertainty, increases costs for businesses and State, local and tribal governments, and impedes common-sense protections for the American public.

Mr. Speaker, the bill is unnecessary and invites frivolous litigation. When a federal agency promulgates a regulation, it already must adhere to the requirements of the statute that it is implementing.

Agencies already must adhere to the robust and well-understood procedural requirements of federal law, including the Administrative Procedure Act, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), and the Congressional Review Act.

Regulatory agencies already are required to promulgate regulations only upon a reasoned determination that the benefits of the regulations justify the costs and to consider regulatory alternatives. Final regulations are subject to review by the federal courts which, among other things, examine whether agencies have satisfied the substantive and procedural requirements of all applicable statutes.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2804 in its current form does not include an exemption for rules promulgated by the Department of Homeland Security to protect the safety of the American people and the security of our country.

For this reason, I offered an amendment that provides this important exception and I thank the Rules Committee for making it in order.

The security of the homeland is one of the most preeminent concerns of the federal government. The increased need for national security following the attacks of September 11th makes it important that the Department of Homeland Security not be unduly impeded in the promulgation of rules that may preempt attacks against our nation.

Unnecessary delays to rules set forth by the Department of Homeland Security can wastes scarce resources that keep our nation safe as well as impede the regular operations of the agency.

I urge all Members to support the Jackson Lee Amendment to H.R. 2804.

Mr. Speaker, I do believe that we in this country have an obligation, commitment, and duty--and just simply out of friendship--to be concerned about the American people in the many ways that they come to this Congress or to their Members of Congress or to their elected officials. After contributing over the years to make America great, when they are in their time of need, it is most appropriate for us to respond.

It is now going on almost a year that we have not responded to hardworking Americans who, over the years, have contributed taxes. Maybe some of them are veterans who served in the United States military and are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice, and now in their time of need we are fiddling and dillydallying. Unfortunately, we are doing so because our friends on the other side of the aisle cannot recognize that, but for the grace of God, there go I.

No, these individuals are not standing in line to get unemployment insurance. They are standing in line to apply for jobs. Because the people who are eligible for unemployment insurance are individuals who have worked most every day of their life, but, unfortunately, they have found in times of economic upswings and downswings, maybe because of their training or maybe because of being a recent veteran, that they are not able to get a job immediately.

This Congress has delayed over and over again where our friends on the other side of the aisle and those Republicans in the other body claim that they cannot offer one vote to be able to pass unemployment insurance.

These individuals need our commitment, America's commitment, as they have given a commitment to us. Right now in America, there are now 48 million Americans living in poverty, 22 million children. Some of the individuals here were not at minimum wage, but they are individuals that are working and making minimum wage and can't make it either.

We must confront these issues. There must be the attitude of the Good Samaritan in this Congress. I have introduced H.R. 3888, the New Chance for a New Start in Life Act of 2014. It provides grants to nonprofits and State and local governments to train individuals for the emerging industries, the new jobs, so that individuals such as those waiting in line for employment can find employment. I would like to add that legislation as we move forward on the extension of unemployment insurance--1.3 million, 1.5 million and growing, because every week some individual who is unemployed maxes out on the 26 weeks of what they get in unemployment insurance in the State. That is why this is called emergency unemployment insurance. That is why it is called insurance, because it covers individuals who have worked, who have contributed and who have worked.

So it is disappointing that we are here again not being able to extend the unemployment insurance again, not being able to put on the floor of the House and get a vote for increasing the minimum wage to $10.10, a bill that has been filed for more than a year, and to be able to look working families directly in the eye and suggest that they can survive on less than the increase of the minimum wage.

There are businesses that will support this. There are businesses who recognize that, as they provide for their employee, that employee churns into the economy. That employee is a consumer. That employee tries to buy a house or pays their rent or goes out and buys items for their children or for their elderly parents or for themselves.

Why don't we understand that investment is what America is all about? Because America is not broke, and we have the opportunity to invest and to create more research and development, but we are living under the umbrella with the big elephant in the room--sequester. That doesn't make sense, because this country is one of the richest countries in the world.

I can assure you that, if we invest in America, we will create jobs, and those jobs will then churn the economy again and continue to bring down the debt. I don't know why a commonsense approach to building this economy up should not be the direction of this country.

Yesterday, I spoke at a high-speed rail summit. It is very clear that a building of high-speed rail will create thousands of jobs and increase mobility of Americans, but yet the image is that we are broke, and that is a very sad commentary.

As I listened to the ads that were utilized in my State of Texas, individuals not running for Congress or the United States Senate but running for State offices, all they can talk about is standing up against Obama. I want to stand with President Obama and stand with him to build this country and make it greater. That should be the message: invest in people. That is what will make America the Nation that all have looked to.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the Reverend Crawford W. Kimble, pastor

emeritus of the Good Hope Missionary Baptist Church, which was originated in Freedmen's Town in 1872, and my dear friend. My sympathy to Mrs. Kimble and all of his family.

Reverend Kimble died earlier this week in Houston at the age of 95. He will be laid to rest on Saturday, March 1, 2014.

Reverend Kimble was the fifth of six pastors at the Good Hope Missionary Baptist Church. He served as pastor for approximately 35 years. His dream was part of the building of Good Hope in its current location on North MacGregor.

Reverend Kimble was born in Elgin, Texas, on March 24, 1918, and he followed the ministerial paths of both his father and grandfather. He began preaching at 33. He started his church in 1951, and he joined it.

He preached his first sermon in 1959, and later became the pastor to many giants of Texas, including the Honorable Barbara Jordan, the first African American United States Congresswoman from the South, and Dr. Lonnie Smith, who played an important role in minority voting rights in primary elections.

It is astounding to find that prior to becoming Reverend Kimble, he was in the newspaper business as an editor of the Houston Informer. He was also part of The Kansas City Call, which was the oldest African American newspaper, and it ended with The Kansas City Call that he was a part of.

After more than 30 years in retirement, Reverend Kimble continued to write. He had many books, and he also was part of the Crawford W. Kimble senior living facility, which he lived in in the Fourth Ward, Freedmen's Town, that was named after him by Reverend Elmo Johnson.

Mr. Speaker, let me just say that this giant is deserving of our honor and respect and commendation, and let us all remember his book, ``Watch the Tree, It Might Fall on You.''

Reverend Kimble, may you rest in peace. God bless you, and God bless your family.

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak to the Jackson Lee amendment with great enthusiasm for its seriousness, and I say to my colleagues, there are no smoke and mirrors here.

This amendment exempts rules made by the Secretary of Homeland Security or any consent decree or settlement made as a result of this rule.

I don't think that we need to further educate our very diligent Members, whether they are on the Homeland Security or Judiciary or Intelligence or Armed Services Committees, or many other committees, about the new climate in which we live in this world after 9/11. We simply have to look at the landscape that we are around as we speak: Central African Republic, South Sudan, Ukraine, Venezuela, Nigeria, and Syria. Just a few days ago, I was on the Israeli side of the Syrian border, and I could look into a city very close and see constant mortar fire.

Everybody understands that with the new climate of franchise terrorism, al Qaeda travels from one conflict area to another, each time posing a threat to the United States of America or the West. Yet, we have legislation that does not exempt the actions of the Secretary of Homeland Security, who may be required to make emergency decisions.

This particular legislation has 60 new barriers, procedural requirements, before an important rulemaking can go forward. It requires a 6-month online presence before you can move forward.

I would offer to say that the conflicts in the Central African Republic and South Sudan, the crisis in the Ukraine, on which America is standing on the sides of those who believe in democracy, the fighting in Nigeria between Christians and Muslims, and the conflict in Syria that has a terrible impact as we move forward on the Palestinian and Israeli peace process--how can we not exempt the Secretary of Homeland Security?

Mr. Chairman, not only do we deal with issues of terrorism, but it is also the stand-up agency when America faces natural disasters. For example, Hurricane Rita was the fourth-most-powerful Atlantic storm in history, and made landfall with 120-mile-per-hour winds, which had devastating consequences for many of my Texas constituents. That occurred just a few years ago. Hurricane Rita came out of the gulf, but Hurricane Sandy came out of the east coast and the Atlantic waters. It brought havoc that no one ever expected. FEMA was vital in the restoration of the lives of Americans. In that instance, I would think we would want any rulemaking process to move quickly, to be able to bring aid to those in need.

As indicated, this is a question of national security and the protection of our people. We need swift responses to imminent threats to national security. We need to have flexibility for the Secretary of Homeland Security to make those decisions. H.R. 2804 was created under the guise of increasing transparency. I would offer to say that there are instances when all of us know that our security is crucial.

Mr. Chairman, I ask that my colleagues support this exemption for Homeland Security to protect America's homeland and national security.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in strong support of my amendment to H.R. 2804 that provides a common-sense exception to the ``All Economic Regulations are Transparent Act of 2014.''

H.R. 2804 makes numerous changes to the federal rule-making process, including:

1. requiring agencies to consider numerous new criteria when issuing rules, such as alternatives to rules proposals;

2. requiring agencies to review the ``indirect'' costs of proposed and existing rules;

3. giving the Small Business Administration expanded authority to intervene in the rule-making of other agencies; and

4. requiring federal agencies to file monthly reports on the status of their rule-making activities.

My amendment provides an exception to the ``All Economic Regulations are Transparent Act of 2014'' for rules made by the Secretary of Homeland Security or any consent decree or settlement made as a result of the rule. My amendment is simple in that it provides an exception for critical agency rules that the general safety and well-being of individuals in the United States.

Mr. Chair, Hurricane Rita, which was the fourth most powerful Atlantic storm in history made landfall with 120 mile per hour winds and had devastating consequences to Texans, many of whom were my constitutients. Without Homeland Security how do Americans get through hurricanes and tornadoes?

The ALERRT Act packages four measures, all of which are designed to stop, delay, or weaken new protections. The Regulatory Accountability Act (RAA) is the most far-reaching of these measures. It amends the Administrative Procedure Act, but goes far beyond establishing procedures for rulemaking. The RAA acts as a ``super mandate'' overriding requirements of landmark legislation such as the Occupational Safety and Health Act and Mine Safety and Health Act.

Homeland Security is one of the most preeminent concerns of the federal government. The increased need for national security following the attacks of September 11th has increased the demand for Homeland Security to find more effective means to preempt attacks against our nation. And that is why my colleagues should vote to exempt the Department of Homeland Security from this legislation today.

And Mr. Chair, I was pleased to meet with, Jeh Johnson the new Secretary, on Tuesday and he appeared before the Homeland Security Committee yesterday, and I am encouraged to see that he understands just how critical his mission is and the utter importance of being able to respond swiftly to address problems as they arise. Swift responses to imminent threats to national security allow the Department of Homeland Security to protect the

rights and interests of individuals in the United States. Unnecessary delays to rules set forth by the Department of Homeland Security can waste scarce resources that keep our nation safe as well as impede the regular operations of the agency.

What we have before us in H.R. 2804 is an unnecessary reporting burden for the Department of Homeland Security. The Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 12866 already requires agency status updates twice a year. H.R. 2804 requires monthly reporting, which would create additional difficulties for agency to produce requisite reports. H.R. 2804 requires the OIRA to issue an annual cumulative report even though this reporting is already part of existing laws, thus creating duplicative reporting mechanisms and wasting limited federal resources.

The additional reporting requirements create a delay on agency activity and waste valuable resources in creating extraneous and duplicative records. The bill also prematurely calls for agencies to provide cost estimates for proposed rules that are to be finalized in the following year. Executive Order 12866 does not require agencies to report full cost estimates, but rather makes cost-benefit information discretionary. Even though the rule requires the estimation of costs, it prohibits benefit calculations of agency rules.

Further, H.R. 2804 precludes rules from taking effect until the information required by the act is available on the Internet for at least six months. This provision of the bill severely limits agencies' abilities to respond to imminent threats of national security. The amendment would preclude such a delay in relation to Homeland Security rules, consent decrees, or settlements.

H.R. 2804 was created under the guise of increasing agency transparency and regulation, but in actuality, the bill serves as an impediment to the government's ability to implement national security protections with expedience. My amendment to H.R. 2804 is necessary to curb unnecessary delay, waste, and duplication and ensuring that the Department of Homeland Security is able to make haste--not waste.

I ask my colleagues to please support the Jackson Lee amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman very much, and we obviously have a great deal of mutual respect, I hope, but a great deal of disagreement on the intent and the impact of this legislation.

Let me say that Homeland Security has vast jurisdiction. Congress created it. In the course of that, it has a great deal of jurisdiction dealing with humanity and the necessity to help humanity. So in the crisis of dealing with issues of individuals who have been unfairly put in front of a deportation order who need to have the response of this agency, or the agency needs to correct some aspect of the many responsibilities that it has, from natural disaster to terrorism to ensuring the security of the border, the needs of Customs and Border Protection, the needs of ICE officers for regulatory schemes that will give them better tools to ensure the security of this Nation, I would argue that a 6-month delay, that 60 barriers being put in place of that regulatory scheme, does not give comfort to the American people that their homeland is secure. Give the Secretary of Homeland Security and his fellow Secretaries or Assistant Secretaries or Directors the responsibility and the leadership that they need to have to protect the homeland.

I would just offer to say that my amendment is common sense. It deals with consent orders and settlements that the Homeland Security Secretary is making in the course of making America safe. Please support the Jackson Lee amendment, commonsense security, protecting the homeland, and having us do the job we should be doing on behalf of the American people.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Will the gentleman yield?

I thank the gentleman for his explanation. We have noted 653, and you are absolutely right. It thrusts that in the hands of the President of the United States, but I would argue that the Congress created the Department of Homeland Security with a Secretary to be able to be the first line of defense, and I would argue that it is important that we exempt the Secretary of the Department from that because of their number one responsibility, which is securing the homeland, and we live in a different climate.

I think the gentleman accepts the fact that terrorism has become franchised at this moment. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I ask individuals, again, to support the Jackson Lee amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk as the designee of Mr. Johnson.

Mr. Chairman, as I indicated, I am moving this on behalf of Mr. Johnson. The amendment is simple. It would exclude from this bill any rule that would result in net job growth.

I ask that my colleagues support this commonsense amendment to promote job growth and strengthen the middle class. After all, the stated purpose of the ALERRT Act is to grow the economy and create jobs. Although this bill purports to grow the economy and create jobs, we cannot pretend that this bill's myopic focus on regulations will accomplish any of these goals.

I have profound concerns with the ALERRT Act. The bill would undermine the ability of agencies to protect the public interest. It is a continuation of the majority's obstructionist approach that led to the sequester and the shutdown of the Federal Government. The majority continues to rely on debunked and partisan studies that presuppose that regulations have harmful effects. Far from it. There is ample, bipartisan evidence that have found that regulations have a negligible effect on the economy and create jobs.

No one would argue that there is not a positive impact from the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act, and all of the regulatory scheme that has provided for a safe workplace for our workers under OSHA, and those who protect the quality of life of Americans from sea to shining sea.

Leading scholars such as Wake Forest law professor Sidney Shapiro has testified that all of the available evidence contradicts the claim that regulatory uncertainty is deterring business investment. Bruce Bartlett, a senior policy analyst in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations, has observed that regulatory uncertainty is the canard invented by Republicans that allows them to use current economic problems to pursue an agenda supported by the business community year in and year out. In other words, it is a simple case of political opportunism, not a serious effort to deal with high unemployment.

Nevertheless, the House Republican leadership continues to bulldoze its deregulatory agenda through Congress. This deregulatory train wreck threatens to send us back to the days before the Wall Street collapse, a financial catastrophe that could have been avoided by responsible policies. Instead of working together to come to a bipartisan solution and end sequestration, this Congress has continued an agenda to make life worse for American families. I urge all of my colleagues to support the Johnson amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, a few minutes ago I stood to the floor of the House and showed a picture that has been made by the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi) of a long line of suit-wearing Americans looking for jobs. Yet this Congress, my friends on the other side of the aisle, have refused to pass extended unemployment insurance, emergency unemployment insurance. Yet they put legislation on the floor pretending to create opportunities for American workers. I can tell you what will create opportunities for American workers, and that is to extend the unemployment insurance, or in actuality, pass my legislation, H.R. 3888, that provides training for individuals for newly created job skills. Or, in fact, as so many of us have done, sign a discharge petition to raise the minimum wage. That is a story for creating jobs or lifting up the opportunities for the American people.

This amendment says simply, if you join us and you believe in job growth, if there is a regulatory scheme that in fact deals with job growth, then this is the amendment that you should support. And I would argue you should support an increase in the minimum wage, and today we should put on the floor of the House the extension of the unemployment insurance, emergency insurance for my constituents and Americans across America. The number is 1.3 million in 2013, rising to 2 million now, with no relief. There is no excuse. The other body had a bill that was paid for, and yet it was refused by Republican Senators in the other body.

I would simply ask that we work together to create job growth. This amendment will say to my good friends that if it creates jobs, then we should in fact support it, that particular regulatory regulation, and we should not subject it to this legislation.

With that, I ask for the support of this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

I want to thank my good friend, Congressman Johnson, for his leadership and the management of this legislation.

I would just like us to take a journey down memory lane:

I am sure that many of us will be reminded of the famous Pinto and the crafting of that automobile. I have no commentary on the great industry that so many of us admire, but for those of us who have memories, we realize some of the injuries that occurred in the structure of the Pinto;

Or maybe it is cars without seatbelts or airbags;

Or maybe we recall times when we travel throughout our community and we notice not only a heavy fog but polluted air. Maybe some of us have been exposed to polluted water;

Or maybe you traveled internationally, even in the 21st century, seeing the conditions that many who live outside of the United States live in, with the utilization of dirty water because they have no other water or the food danger because it is not regulated.

Well, my friends, unfortunately, the legislation that is here on the floor of the House seems to take us backwards down a poisonous memory lane. So it is very difficult to support this legislation.

I said today in a committee hearing that I know that Members come here with good intentions. So I will not attribute to anyone that this bill does not come to the floor with good intentions, but it is a bill that has not been, as a whole, considered by the Judiciary Committee.

This is now being brought to the floor with three separate bills combined, now called the ALERRT Act. But it really imposes unneeded and costly analytical and procedural requirements on agencies that would prevent them from performing their statutory responsibilities to protect the public health and safety. This, I believe, is an important responsibility. It creates unnecessary regulatory and legal uncertainty and increases costs for businesses and State, local, and tribal governments and impedes plain common sense.

I will offer an amendment dealing with homeland security. We just had a hearing today that emphasized the importance of the work of the Homeland Security Department. With our new Secretary of Homeland Security, Secretary Johnson, we are very much on the right track, recognizing franchise terrorism and the need for securing the border. Much of the work done by Homeland Security is a regulatory structure.

Why would we want to impede securing America?

Well, my friends, that is what is going to occur with this legislation, the All Economic Regulations Are Transparent Act.

I also offered an amendment dealing with baby formula. For those of us mothers who have raised children and tend to their needs as newborns and use infant formula, it is well known that there is a great need to regulate companies that manufacture infant formulas in an effort to protect babies from food-borne illnesses and promote healthy growth.

On Thursday, the FDA announced plans to revise, earlier this month, infant formula regulations with an interim final rule that will be published soon. But guess what. The legislation that we have will stand in the way as an iron wall, if you will, prohibiting any rule from being finalized until certain information is posted for 6 months.

How long will 6 months be in the life of an infant?

It will override existing statutes, such as the Clean Air and Clean Water Act, and override any aspect of regulating this important food product, adding more than 60 additional procedural and analytical requirements to the FDA's work on trying to help babies and making it easier for rules to be delayed or stopped by allowing regulated industry and entities to intervene.

And so, in actuality, this is not saving money. It will be a quagmire of spending money. In the meantime, the protections of our innocent babies who demand the responsibility of adults to protect the food products that they need for life by good regulations will be stopped.

Well, Madam Chairman, I don't want to go back down memory lane and horrible car crashes and no seatbelts and no airbags and polluted air and dangerous water. That is what we will be doing.

I look forward to introducing my amendment on the floor regarding the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. I can't imagine that my colleagues would want to stand in the way of securing America.

With that in mind, I hope that we will find a way to defeat this legislation, or to make it better, and ask our colleagues who are they standing for.

Madam Chair, I rise today to speak on H.R. 2804, the ``All Economic Regulations Are Transparent Act of 2014,'' the so-called ``ALERRT Act.''

H.R. 2804 makes numerous changes to the federal rule-making process, including: (1) requiring agencies to consider numerous new criteria when issuing rules, such as alternatives to rules proposals; (2) requiring agencies to review the ``indirect'' costs of proposed and existing rules; (3) giving the Small Business Administration expanded authority to intervene in the rule-making of other agencies; and (4) requiring federal agencies to file monthly reports on the status of their rule-making activities.

I cannot support this legislation in its present form for two reasons, one procedural and one substantive.

Procedurally, I oppose the bill because in its present form it was never considered by the Judiciary Committee. This bill was reported by the Oversight and Government Reform Committee on a party line 19-15 vote but was not acted on by Judiciary Committee.

As reported, the bill contained only provisions relating to monthly reporting requirements regarding agency rule-making.

But the bill being brought to the floor now includes three additional and very controversial Judiciary bills (H.R. 2122, Regulatory Accountability Act; H.R. 1493, Sunshine for Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act; and H.R. 2542, Regulatory Flexibility Improvements Act).

This is not the way to legislate on matters that have such serious consequences for the public health and safety.

Substantively, I oppose the bill because it imposes unneeded and costly analytical and procedural requirements on agencies that would prevent them from performing their statutory responsibilities to protect the public health and safety.

I oppose the bill also because it creates unnecessary regulatory and legal uncertainty, increases costs for businesses and State, local and tribal governments, and impedes common-sense protections for the American public.

Madam Chairman, the bill is unnecessary and invites frivolous litigation. When a federal agency promulgates a regulation, it already must adhere to the requirements of the statute that it is implementing.

Agencies already must adhere to the robust and well-understood procedural requirements of federal law, including the Administrative Procedure Act, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), and the Congressional Review Act.

Regulatory agencies already are required to promulgate regulations only upon a reasoned determination that the benefits of the regulations justify the costs and to consider regulatory alternatives. Final regulations are subject to review by the federal courts which, among other things, examine whether agencies have satisfied the substantive and procedural requirements of all applicable statutes.

Finally, Madam Chairman, H.R. 2804 in its current form does not include an exemption for rules promulgated by the Department of Homeland Security to protect the safety of the American people and the security of our country.

For this reason, I offered an amendment that provides this important exception and I thank the Rules Committee for making it in order.

The security of the homeland is one of the most preeminent concerns of the federal government. The increased need for national security following the attacks of September nth makes it important that the Department of Homeland Security not be unduly impeded in the promulgation of rules that may preempt attacks against our nation.

Unnecessary delays to rules set forth by the Department of Homeland Security can wastes

scarce resources that keep our nation safe as well as impede the regular operations of the agency.

The Jackson Lee Amendment to H.R. 2804 will improve the bill. But, on balance, the bill still has too many defects and should not be passed by this body.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on the rule for the debt ceiling increase.

You may recall that two years ago the Nation's credit rating was downgraded for the first time ever because of politicized negotiations and the initial failure to reach an agreement--and now we risk that and more because an odd lot of members in this body and one, perhaps two in our bicameral twin, wish on the American people out of some misguided principle.

Refusing to raise the debt ceiling poses a cataclysmic danger to the stability of our markets and the economic security of our middle class and complete devastation for the poor.

I agree with President Obama that the full faith and credit of the United States is non-negotiable. The United States has been the worldwide standard bearer for many years and many other nations have been comfortable holding our paper but now our preeminent financial status is in jeopardy.

As former Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke stated last year: ``A government shutdown, and perhaps even more so a failure to raise the debt limit, could have very serious consequences for the financial markets and for the economy . . .''

The Federal Government's statutory debt limit currently stands at a sum near $16.699 trillion; and it needs to be increased.

I ask what we tell the people of China and Japan, who each own over one trillion in U.S. treasury securities. Or Singapore which owns $80 billion.

We have enjoyed the status for many years now of hearing the phrase: ``the flight to Treasuries,'' from financiers and investment analysts from around the world. This is something we should not and cannot take for granted.

And I ask what about the Seniors and Baby Boomers who literally count on the Social Security Trust Fund for their retirement--because while our international image and reputation are incredibly important, Mr. Speaker, the largest single holder of Treasury Securities is the Trust Fund.

The American people are not just owed government bonds--this Congress--and you--owe them peace of mind let us vote on the debt limit--post haste.

Here are some of those consequences if we do not raise the debt ceiling and pay our nation's bills:

A debt limit increase simply allows Treasury to pay the bills for spending Congress has already approved and does not add one cent to the debt.

House Democrats agree with President Obama that the full faith and credit of the United States is non-negotiable.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3578, a bill to ensure new and revised requirements for screening testing or treatment of airman or air traffic controller sleep disorders.

As the former chair of the House Homeland Security Committee Subcommittee on Transportation Security I am in strong support of this bill. This bill is a commonsense measure to address sleep disorder conditions that airman and air traffic controllers may be experiencing.

Under the bill the Secretary of Transportation can follow consistent acceptable medical standards and practices, to implement or enforce actions that provide for the screening, testing, or treatment; including consideration of all possible treatment alternatives for sleep disorders.

Sleep disorders is a serious matter that requires Congressional action to save lives and improve medical knowledge and best practices to assist those who suffer from a wide range of conditions.

There are 40 million people, or about 5 percent of the population, in the United States who suffer from chronic sleep disorders. It is estimated that sleep disorders cost U.S. employers about $18 billion in productivity due to sleep loss issues.

Further it is estimated that about 62 percent of all adults in the United States experience sleep problems a few nights each week.

During any year, about 30 percent of all adults suffer from insomnia. In addition, only 29 percent of adults report getting the required amount of sleep each night.

At least 37.9 percent of adults report unintentionally falling to sleep during the day once in the past month. The annual number of fatal car crashes associated with falling asleep at the wheel is 1,550. The number of non-fatal crashes associated with falling asleep is 40,000.

Sleep disorders can occur due to medical conditions such as excessive drowsiness, fibromyalgia or narcolepsy and low thyroid function.

Drowsiness in the context of sleep disorders is more serious than when the average person feels drowsy or sleepy during the day. We can usually deal with that feeling by walking around, consuming a hot beverage or distracting themselves with other mentally stimulating activity.

The excessive drowsiness experienced as a sleep disorder is a feeling of abnormally needing to sleepy during the day. People experiencing excessive drowsiness may fall asleep in inappropriate situations or at inappropriate times.

Fibromyalgia is a common syndrome that can lead to sleep disorders. Fibromyalgia is a syndrome in which a person has long-term, body-wide pain and tenderness in the joints, muscles, tendons, and other soft tissues. Fibromyalgia has also been linked to fatigue, sleep problems, headaches, depression, and anxiety.

Narcolepsy is more widely known as a nervous system disorder that can cause a sufferer to fall into an uncontrolled sleep nearly instantaneously. The exact cause of narcolepsy is unknown.

In some patients, narcolepsy is linked to reduced amounts of a protein called hypocretin, which is made in the brain. The reason why narcolepsy can lead to less production of this protein is unknown.

Researchers believe that low levels of a protein called hypocretin may be an underlying cause of narcolepsy--a disorder that makes people fall asleep during the day. Pharmaceutical companies are now looking for drugs that will replenish the lost hypocretin.

Emmanuel Mignot, of Stanford University Medical School, California, and his colleagues identified that low levels of hypocretin in patients with narcolepsy, their study appear in the September issue of Nature Medicine.

There is no cure for narcolepsy and symptoms include an uncontrollable desire to sleep during in the day, sudden loss of muscle tone, and paralysis. Narcolepsy is diagnosable as early as aged 15 to 25, and those affected by the disorder must find ways to cope with illness by changing their work and eating habits to achieve a level of normal behavior.

There is far too little research that answers the hard questions about sleep disorders which impact airman and air traffic controllers as well as millions of people in the United States.

I ask my colleagues to join me in support of H.R. 3578.

Madam Speaker, just a few minutes ago, I left the House Judiciary Committee, where they were discussing, ``Asylum Fraud: Abusing America's Compassion,'' a hearing that was called by the Republican majority.

Madam Speaker, I adhere to following the law, but I do believe as we approach the 50th year of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, we will see more and more voices being raised for the indignity and lack of human rights in not passing comprehensive immigration reform.

Let me remind my colleagues that the Refugee Act was signed by President Reagan in 1980. It reflects America's values and this country's deep-seated commitment to liberty and human dignity, as well as to pledge, under the Refugee Convention protocols, to save those who have been abused, sexually or otherwise, and children or families who have been subject to violence.

Let's get on with the values of this Nation. Let's pass comprehensive immigration reform. Let's restore the values of this country and provide laws that secure all of our borders. Yet we continue to have these hearings suggesting that those of us who cry out for immigration reform do not understand the law. Coming from a border State, let me be very clear, Madam Speaker, that I understand the law.

Let's pass comprehensive immigration reform.

I thank the gentleman from Colorado and the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. Speaker, what we can do is really do our work and pass comprehensive immigration reform to deal with the pain of so many in this country.

I do believe that we should defeat the previous question so that my constituents in Texas, along the coastline, can stop paying $8,000 in flood insurance. It is absolutely absurd. A bill has passed. We are ready to go.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I think it is important that we discuss H.R. 3193, which wants to undo the corrections that we made to save America's jobs, homes, life savings, and pensions when we reformed Wall Street. We believe in the capitalistic system. We just don't believe in the abuse of the capitalistic system. The Consumer Protection Agency that has been put in place to help consumers with credit, credit cards, and other matters dealing with their financial needs is now being imploded by this legislation.

What do we have to say to speak for the people of the United States? This bill effectively defunds the CFPB.

What we want to do is to continue the consumer protection board, continue the leverage that it has given to protect consumers. I have actually heard from consumers who have said, Thank you; we now have a board that will hear our voices and that will express our concerns with what kind of treatment we are getting from financial agencies.

Let's move on behalf of the American people now, not on behalf of special interests.

I thank the gentleman, and I thank the manager of this legislation.

I thank our chairman, our ranking member of the Armed Services Committee, for his consistent diligence on acting on behalf of the men and women in the United States military, and certainly those who have already served.

I, for one, will associate myself with the disappointment of the offset that has been offered in this legislation. No one likes sequester.

I will add an additional point of contention is that this Nation is not broke. Economists have said over and over again that we are not broke. We can fully fund and should fund our military as it relates to preparedness. That is part of protecting the homeland, which I serve on the Homeland Security Committee.

Then of course we all have tried to deliberate on what we can do best for our doctors under what we call the SGR, or the doctor fix. Let me just say this as I rise to support this legislation, because I do come from Texas, and I do interact with veterans across the Nation and others.

As painful as the extending out of the sequester to 2024 was, I just want to offer this thought. First of all, as I have argued--and I hope maybe the light will come on that we are not broke, that we will rid ourselves of the sequester and begin to budget fully to provide investment in our people.

So, the reason for advocating is, as I go home every weekend, and throughout the week when I am in the district I will run into military personnel and/or veterans, to speak about the impact that this would have on them, their families. Certainly I believe that this was one that needs to be corrected, and I would like to see us working fairly across the board, that we find a way to respond to the high numbers that this costs, and as well to work with those with optional ideas. I hope before 2024

we have no sequester. As my good friend has indicated, it is a poor way of managing our budget.

Let me also say, because of the many low-income areas and the physicians that I have interacted with, who indicate how difficult it is to serve my low-income patients or my patients that are elderly, that the doctor fix is crucial for the 18th Congressional District in providing health care for those who are in need, particularly those who are elderly.

So, as we look askance at how this has been formulated--and I know that it is one that has come to us--but I would hope that we would do this fix this time, Mr. Speaker, and then work to undo the offset so that we can help seniors and doctors.

Mr. Speaker, as I have listened to debate on the floor of the House, I have seen that Members are coming from all regions of the United States, which means that, in fact, this will be impacting all of our constituents. So I would hope Republicans would join the Democrats who will vote by and large, almost near 100 percent, to do what the Federal Reserve former Chairman Ben Bernanke said is to avoid a government shutdown. And perhaps even more so, a failure to raise the debt limit could have very serious consequences for the financial market and for the economy.

More importantly, it will cost student loans much more to our young aspirants who are attempting to develop an expertise to contribute to this society. A longer default could increase payments by $2,000 of 531,327 Texas students who rely on loans to go to college. Mr. Speaker, I don't want to do that.

Higher interest rates for mortgages and auto loans and student loans and credit cards--Mr. Speaker, I don't want to do that.

Families' retirement savings and 401(k)s dropping as the stock market plummets, reminding us of about 4 years ago when we had one of the worst plummets that we have ever experienced during the last administration.

3.4 million veterans not receiving their disability--I know we do not want to do that.

Ten million Americans not receiving their Social Security check on time in just the first week--we cannot do that.

Drug reimbursements under Medicare stopping and doctors and hospitals not getting paid--I know the Members of Congress will not and do not want to do that.

So, a clean debt ceiling is the only direction, but we have some other options. We can do this in a bipartisan manner. We can have the Democrats standing tall as they have advocated for a clean debt ceiling, but we can join with our partners and we can acknowledge the fact that the government is not broke. We can invest in infrastructure.

As my colleague, Congressman Levin, has said, we can ensure that we extend the unemployment insurance and provide for education and provide for research and development. We can build this country. It is time now to vote for a clean debt ceiling and do it together so that we can invest in America.

Mr. Speaker, on February 10, 2014, I was unavoidably detained attending to representational activities in my congressional district and thus unable to return in time for rollcall votes 55 and 56.

Had I been present I would have voted as follows: on rollcall No. 55 I would have voted ``aye'' (February 10) H.R. 2431--The National Integrated Drought Information Systems Reauthorization Act (Representative Hall--Science, Space and Technology); On rollcall No. 56, I would have voted ``aye'' (February 10) (H. Res. 447, Supporting the democratic and European aspirations of the people of Ukraine and their right to choose their own future free of intimidation and fear, as amended 2319, Native American Veterans' Memorial Amendments Act of 2013 (Representative Engel--Foreign Affairs).

Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the Judiciary Committee, we had a very vigorous hearing and discussion on the questions of the National Security Agency and privacy for the American people. I have introduced H.R. 2434, the Civilian Contractors Engaged in Intelligence Activities Reduction Act, which has seen a large support from the White House and others about the importance of considering and looking at reduction of outsourcing of our intelligence activities and really bringing in-house the training and the expertise of those handling America's intelligence.

I introduced H.R. 2440, which is the FISA Court in the Sunshine Act, which I am very glad that part of it is in H.R. 3361, Uniting and Strengthening America By Fulfilling Rights and Ending Eavesdropping. This is the bill that deals with the mega trolling that has occurred under the NSA of business records.

What America wants is security but balanced with privacy and the respect for the Fourth Amendment, prohibiting unreasonable search and seizure. It is important for this Congress to come together in a bipartisan way to stand up and be on the American people's side so that we can secure them, secure the homeland, but we can also provide for their privacy.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1791, the Medical Preparedness Allowable Use Act for two reasons.

First, the bill will save lives. Second, the legislation is necessary to support the vital work of first responders in the event of a biological and chemical terrorists attack or incident.

The legislation provides for the development and maintenance of an initial pharmaceutical stockpile, including medical kits, and diagnostics sufficient to protect first responders, their families, and immediate victims from a chemical or biological event.

The Medical Preparedness Allowable Use Act will amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to authorize the use of Urban Area Security Initiative and State Homeland Security Grant Program funding for enhancing medical preparedness, medical surge capacity, and mass prophylaxis capabilities.

This legislation ensures that first responders have necessary medicines and treatments to protect themselves, their families and those within their vicinity immediately should a biological and chemical terrorist attack occurs.

In short, first responders will not be able to do the work of saving lives if they fall victim to an attack or are distracted by worry regarding how their family may be fairing during a biological or chemical attack should one occur.

First responders often include law enforcement officers, fire fighters, and emergency medical personnel.

The city of Houston covers over a 1000 square mile region in Southeast Texas. It has an evening population of nearly two million people and over three million during the day when commuters are in the city.

There are 103 fire stations that serve the city of Houston with most offering ambulance or medic support, but there is only one station, Number 22, that specializes in hazardous material.

In the city of Houston one out of every ten citizens use Emergency Management Services (EMS) and within a year there are over 200,000 EMS incidents involving over 225,000 patients or potential patients.

EMS response services have 88 City of Houston EMS vehicles, with just under fifty percent staffed by two paramedics and can provide Advanced Life Support (ALS) to patients.

These consist of 15 ALS Squads, and 22 ALS transport units with eight functioning in a ``Dual'' capacity as both Advanced Life Support and Basic Life Support (BLS).

The remaining fifty-one transport units are Basic Life Support (BLS), and staffed by two Emergency Medical Technicians.

Law enforcement agencies that serve the city of Houston include the Houston Police Department, Harris County Sheriff's Department, Harris County Constables, Port of Houston Authority Police and Corrections Officers.

Because of the nature of chemical or biological terrorist attacks mass casualties are the objective and the impressive resources of our nation's 4th largest city would likely be overwhelmed immediately should an attack occur it is important to provide them with the resources provided by this legislation.

The prepositioning of resources in the form of medicines that can support pulmonary respiratory function or arrest neurological damage as a result of poisoning lives can be saved that could otherwise be lost. This bill can reduce deaths and give victims the greatest chance for survival and recovery.

Emergency responders because of this bill would have treatments in the communities where they serve and live to help neighbors, coworkers, and people who are immediate need to live saving help.

As a senior member of the House Homeland Security Committee, I am mindful of the need for our first responders to be prepared and well trained to manage a wide range of potential threats both conventional and unconventional.

This bill offers one more resource that will be available to first responders to do the work they have dedicated their lives to doing-- saving lives.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1791, the Medical Preparedness Allowable Use Act for two reasons.