Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate with my constituents and the entire music-loving world the 60th anniversary of Willie Mitchell's Royal Studios in my hometown of Memphis, Tennessee. Everyone knows a song mixed in the iconic South Memphis recording studio--whether it's last year's Grammy Award Record of the Year, Mark Ronson and Bruno Mars' ``Uptown Funk,'' Al Green's classic ``I'm Still in Love With You,'' Boz Skaggs' album full of tunes called ``Memphis,'' or Bobby ``Blue'' Bland's ``Touch of the Blues.'' Royal Studios, started in 1957 by the late Willie Mitchell, was the home of Hi and the Hi Rhythm Section and produced chart-topping hits throughout the 1960s and '70s. One of the oldest continuously operating recording studios, it remains a place of pilgrimage under a second generation of Mitchell leadership, hosting such stars as the Rolling Stones' Keith Richards and Led Zeppelin's Robert Plant, among many others. I recently attended the electrifying 60th anniversary celebration for Royal Studios at the historic Orpheum Theatre and heard Tony Joe White play ``A Rainy Night in Georgia,'' Syl Johnson's meditative version of Al Green's and the late Mabon ``Teenie'' Hodges' ``Take Me to the River,'' and Anthony Hamilton's soulful version of Green's signature ``Tired of Being Alone.'' Grammy Award winning saxophonist Kirk Whalum opened the show, which featured Ronnie Brooks doing Otis Clay's ``Trying to Live My Life Without You'' and Natalie Stovall's memorable version of ``I Can't Stand the Rain.'' Bluesman Robert Cray and Dave Stewart of the Eurythmics also charmed the crowd. The show, emceed by Willie's son Lawrence ``Boo'' Mitchell, who engineered ``Uptown Funk'' and saw it stay at No. 1 on Billboard's Hot 100 for 14 weeks, paid tribute to a Memphis institution still going strong into is seventh decade. I want to congratulate all the Royal family of musicians and technicians and encourage my friends to find the time this holiday season to sit and listen to Boz Skaggs' version of ``So Good to Be Here,'' or any of the hundreds of songs on the Royal Studios discography. We're so glad Royal Studios continues to bring Memphis music to the world and help it dance to a Memphis beat. I wish it many more years of success.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to country music's stellar singer-songwriter Mel Tillis, the Country Music Association's entertainer of the year in 1976, who overcame a lifetime of stuttering through song. Lonnie Melvin Tillis died earlier this month at 85. He had six No. 1 country singles as a singer, including ``Good Woman Blues'' in 1976 and ``Southern Rains'' in 1981 and wrote such memorable tunes as ``I'm Tired'' for Webb Pierce, ``The Snakes Crawl at Night'' for Charley Pride and, with Danny Dill and Carl Perkins, the Patsy Cline hit ``So Wrong.'' Mel's songs explored the dark caverns of deep emotion typified by his somber ballad ``Ruby, Don't Take Your Love to Town,'' about a cheating wife, which was a big hit for Kenny Rogers in 1969. Mel was also inducted into the Nashville Songwriters Hall of Fame in 1976 and to the Country Music Hall of Fame in 2007. I want to extend my condolences to his family, particularly my friend and Mel's singer- songwriter daughter Pam Tillis, who recorded a tribute disk for her father in 2002: ``It's All Relative: Tillis Sings Tillis.'' Although he was born and died in Florida, Tennesseans and all Americans will remember and cherish forever his lovely baritone and haunting lyrics. America has lost a true original

Mr. Speaker, what happened today on this floor was a massive tax break for the wealthiest people in our country.

Over half of the tax dollars will go to people in the upper 1 percent of the income strata. The big pot of gold at the end is eliminating the inheritance tax by the year 2024, so that the heirs of the richest will get millions and hundreds of millions and billions in tax relief.

This bill should have been geared toward the middle class. The middle class is getting tip change from a cheap restaurant, while the millionaires and billionaires are getting away with no AMT tax, changed rates at the top, and inheritance tax changes.

They get the money. The middle class gets shafted. It is a con job. It is a shame.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the legislation I introduced today that would require President Trump to immediately meet his obligation to release all documents that can and should be released pertaining to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

Despite the 1992 passage of a Congressionally-mandated October 26, 2017 deadline requiring the President of the United States make a determination about what documents can and should be released to the public regarding President John F. Kennedy's assassination, the current President failed to comply.

The President's failure to execute this requirement before the established deadline raises long-held concerns that the U.S. government continues to withhold critical information about the former President's assassination.

As a result, it is now up to Congress to enforce this deadline and deliver to the American public the certainty it deserves.

I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to exert the authority of this body's intent when it passed the 1992 President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act and enact this important measure to enforce the required release of all appropriate documents concerning the assassination of the late, and Honorable, President John F. Kennedy.

Madam Speaker, on Tuesday, we had the holiday of Halloween, and a character came to my house with paint all over their face, and I thought they were the musical group KISS. Well, they weren't.

They were the Trump administration, disguised as the Trump administration is, and with the simple logo of KISS: Keep it simple, stupid. That is what the Trump administration's attempts are to the American people.

The previous speaker made some comments about regulations and said that the Obama administration wanted to stop Second Amendment advocates from getting guns, arbitrarily, for Social Security recipients. Well, that sounds good. It is simple. Keep it simple.

Well, they weren't Social Security recipients. They were Social Security recipients who had been declared incompetent to manage their own affairs. That is who they said shouldn't get guns, not Social Security recipients.

The previous speaker said something about abortion provider Planned Parenthood getting their funds cut off. Planned Parenthood does most of their work outside of the arena of abortion. Mostly, they do women's basic health services, and by cutting that off, they are hurting women, particularly in my community and other communities where poor people often get their healthcare, their women's care, from Planned Parenthood, and they are depriving them of that healthcare.

Just yesterday, in the subcommittee of which I am the ranking member, we had a hearing on changing Roe v. Wade. They called it the Heartbeat bill. In reality, it is destruction of women's right to choose, a fundamental right established in Roe v. Wade, and an unconstitutional bill that could limit the right of a woman to have an abortion as early as 6 weeks, while right now it is 20 to 24 weeks, the period of viability.

They brought a sonogram in and showed a sonogram on the monitor. What they didn't do when they talked about their ``culture of death'' was bring in any lifesaving equipment that

will not be available when they cut $1 billion from Medicaid and $500 million from Medicare in their tax proposal, when they put 23 million people off of healthcare, the Affordable Care Act, which is what they tried to do but couldn't accomplish.

It is difficult to sit here and watch what is happening to our country. Having the Trump administration tell the middle class they are going to get a tax cut on the one hand, but on the other hand, they are creating over a trillion dollars in debt, where is that debt going to come from? It is going to come from programs that the middle class will have to give up, so they will be net losers.

One of the main thrusts of their tax proposal is to eliminate the State tax, originally to do it immediately. Now they are talking about maybe phasing it out over 5 or 6 years. That will cost the Federal budget $290 billion. That will come from Pell grants that give people the opportunity to go to college and not have a terrible debt over their heads when they leave; from SNAP payments that give nutritional benefits to people that otherwise would go without, the families that would go without food and proper nutritional benefits; and even LIHEAP, which gives help with heating bills to people who can't afford it in difficult winter conditions.

What they are proposing is not a middle class tax cut. It is a cut for the wealthiest in our country, and that is who will get the benefits. That is who they are about.

Their whole program is KISS: Keep it simple, stupid. That is the only way they can try to sell their wealthy tax break, their aims to prevent women from getting proper healthcare, and their attacks on women in general.

It is unfortunate what we see, what we saw earlier this week in the indictments handed out to Mr. Manafort, Mr. Gates, and the guilty plea of Mr. Papadopoulos. Individuals involved with the campaign and the administration have not been the best, as they were supposed to be. In fact, they are suspected of criminal behavior, and one has admitted to it.

Our democracy is at risk, and I fear what could happen to it. That is why I introduced an amendment to the Constitution to limit the President's pardon power so he couldn't pardon himself, members of his family, members of his administration, or paid members of his campaign staff.

He has already pardoned Joe Arpaio, and he has threatened to use that power in furtherance as he discussed the possibility of pardoning himself. If he does so, any of these pardons, it will be a test of our democracy, and it will be a test of my colleagues on the other side.

We must protect democracy and protect America from unlawful activity.

God bless America.

Mr. Speaker, today is the last day of baseball, but, more importantly, it is the first day of open enrollment for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

This year, enrollment only runs from November 1, today, through December 15. This is half the length of last year when open enrollment extended until January 30. It is 6 weeks shorter, so to sign up, get started today. You only have 45 days to do it. This is something the Trump administration is doing to

make it more difficult and less likely people will sign up.

Don't let them do this. Sign up for your healthcare. During this shortened enrollment period, there will also be 12-hour periods of scheduled maintenance when the website will be inaccessible. These periods will occur every Sunday morning, except one, during the open enrollment period. December 15 is the last chance for individuals to sign up for health insurance for 2018, unless you have a major event like getting married, having a child, or moving.

In previous years, individuals were notified of autoenrollment with time to change their choice. This year, that happens on December 16, a day after open enrollment ends, so there is no reason to do it. It just tells you what you have got, and you don't have the opportunity to change. So individuals should not rely on autoenrollment. They should use healthcare.gov to find the best plan for them and their families.

In many cases, there are affordable plans. In 2018, in Tennessee, 88 percent can find a bronze plan for under $75.

In Memphis, many consumers earning $30,000 to $48,000 a year can find silver plans for under $100. This is particularly true for those in their late forties to age 64.

You may qualify for premiums and cost-sharing reductions like in past years. In 2016, 88 percent of Tennesseans on the exchanges received premium assistance, and 58 percent received cost-sharing reduction subsidies.

This is still true even as the President attempts to sabotage the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Marketing funding and funds for navigators to help people through the process have both been slashed. In spite of that fact, we are going to try to find some navigators still around and have a townhall in Memphis possibly Saturday, November 11. We are still in the process of scheduling that, but we want all of our people to get that chance. So we encourage all Americans to get that chance.

Cost-sharing reduction subsidies will be available for individuals who qualify for silver plans despite Trump's decision to stop the government from reimbursing insurers.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is the law of the land. All current efforts to repeal and replace have failed because they have not come up with a better plan. Healthcare is difficult, and we came up with a plan that needs some tweaking but not repealing.

Memphis has recently seen a decrease in the disparity of breast cancer mortality rates between Black and White women, a clear indication that access to affordable care saves lives.

Memphis has done excellent work at expanding access to screenings and coverage. In addition to local efforts, the Affordable Care Act has helped to reduce or even eliminate copayments that women have to pay for preventive screenings, including mammograms.

Access to affordable healthcare has saved lives in Memphis and throughout this country. The open enrollment for the Affordable Care Act starts today and runs through December 15. Avail yourselves of those opportunities.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Protect Our Students and Taxpayers (POST) Act.

If enacted, this legislation would take steps towards eliminating an incentive for for-profit colleges to aggressively recruit and enroll veterans, service members and their families, who have sacrificed for this country and deserve the highest quality of education.

Current law prohibits for-profit colleges and universities from deriving more than 90 percent of their revenue from the U.S. Department of Education's federal student aid programs. The other 10 percent is required to come from sources other than the federal government. However, because of the way the law was written, veterans' and active duty service members' federal student aid does not count towards the 90 percent. Instead, it may be included among a for-profit institution's calculation of its 10 percent non-federal revenue.

As a result, for-profit colleges and universities are left with a powerful incentive to recruit veterans, service members and their families, offering them degrees that are often less valuable than those from not-for-profit institutions.

The POST Act would strengthen the definition of ``federal aid'' to include G.I. bill funds, Department of Defense Tuition Assistance benefits, and all other federal funding sources.

Furthermore, the POST Act would reinstate a 15 percent minimum on revenue that for-profit colleges must receive from sources other than the federal government. The requirement was lowered from 15 percent to 10 percent in 1998.

The bill also takes steps towards eliminating accounting tricks used by for-profit educational institutions that inflate their declared amount of non-federal funding.

Finally, the POST Act increases the penalty for rule-breakers by causing colleges to lose eligibility to participate in federal student aid programs after one year of noncompliance with the new 85-15 rule. Currently, they do not face penalties until they have been noncompliant for two years.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and help get it passed.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of a constitutional amendment I have introduced today to prevent the President of the United States, or any future President of the United States, from pardoning himself or herself, members of their family, members of their administration, or members of their Presidential campaign.

Monday's indictment of President Trump's campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, and guilty plea of another campaign staff member demonstrate how important it is for Congress to act.

The pardon power is supposed to be a safety valve against injustice, a vestige from when we were part of Britain and the King had this power. We are no longer part of Britain, and that power should not be as complete as it is. It is not supposed to be a way for Presidents to put themselves, their families, and members of their administration and their campaign team above the law, to obstruct justice if there is an investigation of wrongdoing.

Unless we change the Constitution, this is how it can be used and may be used. We should stop this conflict of interest from ever arising.

There are already serious questions swirling around the current President, his family, and members of his administration and his campaign staff, including possible collusion with Russia during the 2016 Presidential election currently being investigated by special counsel Robert Mueller. To ensure that everyone is treated equally under the law, we need to amend the Constitution to narrow the scope of the pardon power.

For some who may say this is only because of the current President, I would say: I objected to the pardon of the brother of a President in the past; in 1977, I proposed changing the pardon power in Tennessee through a constitutional convention item that would have said four Supreme Court Justices could disapprove of a gubernatorial pardon; and I also proposed in 2007, in this Congress, a change in the pardon power with the Supreme Court of our United States where a vote of six members could veto a pardon.

The pardon power is a vestige of a day gone by. It is not something that we should have complete and total ability of the President to use to pardon whomever and whatever he pleases and to obstruct justice.

I ask my fellow Members to join me in this amendment to protect America, to see that our Constitution is current and reflects our values, and to not be complicit in any activities that this President may use with the pardon power to free up wrongdoers.

You have got a minority report you are putting in which cites lists of abuses; is that correct?

I just wondered, do you have in there all the things Chris Christie did that came up in a hearing that we held in 2009 in our committee showing the abuses of the system by Chris Christie?

Mr. Chairman, Mr. Pascrell will discuss it in more detail.

Mr. Chairman, Mr. Pascrell will go into this in some detail.

But we held hearings on this, and we didn't have any support from the other side of the aisle when we pointed out all of the abuses that were going on in New Jersey, Mr. Chairman, with monitors being appointed that were making $52 million--Mr. Ashcroft, in particular--other monitors who had involvement in cases that Mr. Christie was involved in, which his brother was involved in, and where money was given to Mr. Christie's law school and other pet projects. Nobody on the other side criticized it. It was only when they cared about Obama.

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

Mr. Chairman, the reason I have this amendment is because I don't think the bill is a good bill, and it shouldn't affect settlement agreements on the basis of race, religion, national origin, or any other protected category.

I was kind of shocked that it was put in order; I will be even more shocked if it passes. But the reality is it doesn't make any difference because this bill isn't going anywhere in the Senate.

Most of what we do in the Judiciary Committee is highly partisan matters that won't go anywhere in the Senate. We are one of the four committees of jurisdiction that can deal with matters dealing with the White House, with Russian interference in our election, and with issues concerning obstruction of justice and the firing of James Comey with Emoluments Clause violations, abuse of power, and attacks on the judiciary.

The Senate and House Intelligence Committees have investigations. So does the Senate Judiciary Committee. Only our committee has done absolutely nothing. Absolutely nothing.

Today, Senator Jeff Flake, a gentleman who I served with in the House and a man of moral rectitude, said he cannot continue to serve in the Senate because to be quiet on issues concerning the White House in relation to decency, truth, and other matters would involve complicity. He couldn't remain complicit.

By our committee not taking any actions concerning activities in the White House, we are complicit. We should be the most responsible committee in the Congress because we are the people's House, and we have the judiciary, the FBI, and elections all within our purview, yet we have remained silent.

Part of the reason that has been said is because other groups are investigating. Well, we are the group that should be doing the investigating because we are the people's House. We don't not take up bills like this because the Senate is not going to pass them. We take them up all the time, throw them over there, and they don't come back.

So I am distraught by the fact that my friend Jeff Flake, who is one of the finest people I have served with, a man of rectitude, is not going to run for reelection. He wasn't a knee-jerk Republican, just like Bob Corker is not a knee-jerk Republican. And both

have said many truths today about what is going on in the executive branch.

We are an equal branch of government that has responsibility to be a check and balance, and the House Judiciary Committee has that responsibility. I once again call on the chairman of the committee to hold hearings on elections, on Russian interference in our elections, on threats to our democracy, on violations of the Emoluments Clause, obstruction of justice, and the firing of the FBI Director.

The FBI is under our charge. We should have hearings. We should have hearings on emoluments. We should have hearings on all of these issues and not be complicit. Being complicit is the same as being guilty.

Mr. Chairman, I ask that we pass the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, this House and its committees will discuss what is being called tax reform, what is being told to the American public is a middle class tax break.

Well, I am here to tell you it is a con job. It is a tax giveaway to the wealthiest people in this country like never before at the expense of people in the middle class, lesser incomes, who will not get benefits, and if they do, it is chump change. It is the change you give somebody at a restaurant when you get your meal.

Billionaires will get to get away without having to pay an estate tax, like Donald Trump--billions of dollars they will not have to pay to the government to help fund Pell grants, LIHEAP, and other programs that help people who need something. That is something they will not come off of.

They may raise a little rate and say: We are going to put a little higher rate on the wealthy because it is not in there now.

They may say: Give the State and local income tax exemptions back.

But they are not going to go back on the estate tax because that is for the superwealthy, and that is who this bill is for.

Wake up America. It is a con job.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Horse Transportation Safety Act, a bill I introduced earlier today along with my esteemed colleague, Rep. Jones from North Carolina, to ensure the humane and safe transportation of horses.

The Horse Transportation Safety Act seeks to end the exploitation of a regulatory loophole designed to ban the transport of horses in double-deck trailers, whereby drivers have an incentive to inhumanely transport horses to assembly points, then reload them into single level trailers just outside their final destination.

The practice is dangerous and inhumane not only to the horses, it poses a threat to the travelling public.

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, ``double-deck trailers do not provide adequate headroom for equines, with the possible exception of foals and yearlings. We do not believe that trailers that have two or more permanent levels that are not collapsible can be adequately altered to accommodate adult equines, especially tall equines.''

The legislation is strongly supported by agricultural interests and animal protection groups alike. Among the organizations endorsing the bill are the Humane Society of the United States, the Animal Welfare Institute, the National Black Farmers Association, and Return to Freedom Wild Horse Conservation.

Moreover, in 2010 the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure unanimously adopted this bipartisan legislation.

This is common sense legislation, and I urge my colleagues to support the swift passage of the Horse Transportation Safety Act.

Mr. Chair, the other day, a young man who lives in my neighborhood came over, and he asked me to try to teach him how to drive a car. And I told him: Son, it is real easy to drive a car. It is just kind of like these budget proposals you will see in Congress. If you want to go forward and do things down the road, you put the car in D, like Democrat, for drive, and your car will go forward. But if you want to go backwards and reverse back to the 1950s, you put it in R, like a Republican.

He learned quick, and that is what these budgets are about. If you want to

go forward, you go with the Democratic budget--forward on building highways, school construction, broadband expansion; research, research on the deadly diseases that are killing each and every one of us and our children in time to come, and research by the National Institutes of Health that are cut by the budget. There is nothing more important that can be in the budget than moneys for the National Institutes of Health, yet they are being cut. Cancer, Alzheimer's, AIDS, stroke, diabetes, all are going to come at us and our relatives.

Some will say, and I said this one time before, and Mr. Kingston on the other side said: Well, our children and our grandchildren will have to pay for it. Who do you think is going to get the cures and the treatments? Our children and our grandchildren and generations to come.

And they cut research. They cut opportunities for America. You talk about taxes and the debt, the Republican plan gives billionaires the biggest cuts in history, over $50 billion with estate tax elimination for people like the Koch brothers and the Waltons and all those folks, and that money will never come back.

The alternative minimum tax is eliminated. That is the only thing that made clear that President Trump paid any taxes in the only tax return we know about. If it weren't for that, he wouldn't have paid anything. We are talking multimillion- and billion-dollar tax cuts for the richest that create deficits in the future, but that is okay when it is giving money to those who already have it.

Franklin Roosevelt was right. You judge a society not by what it does for those who have an abundance, but you judge it by what it does for those who have the least.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Police Creating Accountability by Making Effective Recording Act, also known as the Police CAMERA Act, a bill I introduced earlier today with more than a dozen of my colleagues here in the House and in coordination with Senators Brian Schatz and Rand Paul who introduced the bill today in the Senate. If enacted, this bill would establish a grant program to assist state and local law enforcement with the deployment of body-worn camera programs.

Safe communities require good police.

Good policing requires public trust.

Unfortunately, in far too many communities, that trust has become strained.

In the wake of recent police shootings, our nation is facing sobering questions about the basic fairness of our criminal justice system. We face sobering questions about race.

Over the past several years, the wider availability of video has shined a much-needed light on police use of deadly force. Without video of places like North Charleston, Staten Island, Chicago, Cleveland, Baton Rouge, Tulsa and Falcon Heights, Minnesota the world might never know what occurred.

The more we see of these types of videos, the more we are left to wonder about all the incidents that were not recorded.

Had there been better video of the shooting of Darrius Stewart in my home town of Memphis, it might have helped to better inform the grand jury that, sadly, refused to indict the police officer who was responsible.

Justice is supposed to be blind, but it is not supposed to be blind to the facts.

Police body cameras can help provide evidence and restore some much- needed trust.

They can protect both police and citizens alike.

The vast majority of police are well meaning, dedicated public servants, and we depend upon them to keep us safe from criminals. They have dangerous jobs, as we have seen all too frequently.

But the fact remains some officers go beyond the law in a callous disregard for due process. Their actions damage the public trust that is essential for good police to be able to serve and protect our communities.

Police body cameras, alone, won't solve this problem. But they are an important step in the right direction.

I would like to thank Senators Schatz and Paul for their leadership on this issue and for partnering with me on this legislation.

I also thank my colleagues who have signed on as cosponsors of this legislation and I urge all Members to help pass the Police CAMERA Act quickly.

Mr. Speaker, last week we honored and welcomed back Steve

Scalise to this Chamber, victim of a horrible shooting aimed at him because he was a Congressman. It could have been any one of us.

Today the Democrats spoke on the steps of the Capitol about the need for reasonable gun law reform, and with us was Gabby Giffords, who was shot in 2011 because she was a Congressperson doing her job.

Congressman John Lewis had said that you can't go to a movie theater, you can't go to a concert, and you can't go to school and feel safe. You can't be a public official and feel safe.

What happened in Las Vegas where 58 people were murdered and over 500 injured calls on the United States Congress to take action to protect the American people.

This is the time to act for reasonable, commonsense gun reform laws. Former Deputy Prime Minister of Australia Fischer, who, in 1996, after the greatest mass shooting in Australian history, led an effort to reform the Australian laws, sent a missive to President Trump suggesting this is the time for him to act and to do something very important for American society. He said: It can be done.

After those killings in Australia, they passed laws that made automatic and semiautomatic weapons illegal. They had a buyback program that bought back over 600,000.

After the 1996 effort, which was difficult but successful, Australia has not had a killing of over five people. Prior to 1996, they had 15 or 16 shootings of that nature.

Everyone recognizes Australia's success. We need to do something besides just having continued moments of silence.

Yesterday, on a bill on this floor about the unborn taking precedence over the rights of women, quite a few Republicans came to the floor and talked about pain to the unborn and loss of their potential for life. But none have talked about the pain of the 500 who were injured and the 58 lives that were lost.

We could pass laws to eliminate bump stocks that, apparently, this murderer used to make his weapon into, effectively, an automatic weapon, where you can shoot hundreds of bullets at a time, which he did. Bump stocks should be illegal. Senator Dianne Feinstein had a bill to make them illegal in 2013, and she has one again.

We need better background checks and to make sure the mentally ill don't get guns. Unfortunately, in this Congress, in February, we passed a law that President Trump signed with passion and a flare that eliminated a rule that said that the Social Security Administration would send the names of people who couldn't manage their own financial affairs to a bureau to see to it that they were on a list so they couldn't buy guns.

If you can't successfully manage your own financial affairs, should you have a gun?

I would submit not. But that bill was passed on a partisan vote and signed by the President, making it easier for people to get guns when the Social Security Administration has found they cannot manage their own affairs.

The same for the no-fly, no-buy list. If you are considered too much of a security threat to fly on an airplane, you shouldn't be able to buy a gun. The arguments we heard against that were about due process.

Has anybody brought a bill to give the people on the no-fly list due process? Has it come to the floor?

No. It won't. It makes sense to have a no-fly list. They also should be the people that can't buy guns.

We shouldn't have semiautomatic weapons. Automatic weapons are illegal. The bump stocks make regular weapons automatic weapons.

The CDC is prohibited by law from doing a study to see if there is a connection between gun violence and mental health or our country's health. That law should be repealed. We shouldn't fear the CDC study.

High-capacity magazines also shouldn't be permitted, and law enforcement should be protected from armor-piercing bullets.

I hope that we can act to save American lives.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the time to speak on this important subject. While it is important, it is also embarrassing somewhat to us, because I listen to the other side, and the first thing that the chairman does over here is he shows a New York Times ad. And because of The New York Times ad at the time of Roe v. Wade, he suggests that we should turn over Roe v. Wade because it is antiquated.

Well, in 1791, the Second Amendment was adopted, and we had pistols, and we had guns that you could shoot one bullet at a time; and yesterday, we had a man in Las Vegas with guns who could shoot ``da da da da da da da da da'' and kill 59 people and wound 500.

If you get me an ad from 1791, those weapons were not in that ad, but do they talk about changing the Second Amendment, do they talk about protecting Americans from that type of violence? No. They come here and talk about protecting the unborn, forgetting about the rights of women guaranteed them by Roe v. Wade, the law of the land, which is the law of the land that says viability comes at 24 weeks.

They talk about what they say are medical experts and a substantial body of medical evidence. What they don't tell you is the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists are against this bill, and there is no medical group or medical society in this country that is for this bill, but they know more about medicine and about pain for the unborn than do the doctors and the scientists.

They bring this to us, an unconstitutional bill, an unconstitutional bill that the CBO estimates will cost us from $65 million to $335 million over 10 years. Their concern about the budget goes out the window.

The truth of the matter is this goes back to the Rules Committee debate on this bill. We were told: It is popular; the polls show people want this.

This is a political bill that has had no hearing in the Judiciary Committee, had no markup in the Judiciary Committee. That is called regular order, something we were promised by the Speaker, a new day in Congress. We were going to have opportunities for both sides to debate, the kind of things John McCain, a great American hero, sees as wrong in the Senate, which is just as wrong in the House: two sides coming together to debate, to vote, to amend, to discuss. No.

It comes straight to the floor because it is politically popular, more politically popular this week than having a bill to allow for silencers for weapons, which was going to be the bill du jour for this week, but it was pulled.

Instead, we got this unconstitutional law that flies in the face of Roe v. Wade, takes rights away from women and treats them without exceptions that are necessary to make a law proper concerning rape and incest.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

The bottom line is, this bill is unconstitutional, an attack on women's rights, an attack on the Constitution, and we should be looking at changes in our laws about guns and violence, at least mental health, something to respond to what happened in Las Vegas, instead of another moment of silence.