Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, what this bill is about is taking women who can't afford to get an abortion and not allowing them to use taxpayer- funded money to get it. The assumption on the other side is they won't have money, because people who are in dire straits won't have money to get it, and therefore they will have these 2 million children they are talking about.

What we are talking about--let's make it clear--is they are talking about poor women who they think can't afford to get to a doctor or to an abortion provider and force them to have children that they can't have because of economics.

So women, poor women, do not forgive them for they know what they do. They are trying to put you at their mercy and make you have children because you are poor. If they get their ultimate desire--and that is the repeal of Roe v. Wade--then poor women will not be able to get an abortion, but wealthy women will.

Trump said, yes, if they outlaw abortion, go to another State. Easy to say when you are a billionaire, but not a thing to say to the middle class and poor women of this country whom they want to force, through their economic disparities, to bear children.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 27th anniversary of ``Black January'' in Azerbaijan, a day that commemorates Azerbaijan's stand against Soviet soldiers for independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity over all lands under Azerbaijani jurisdiction, and freedom from communism and dictatorship.

On the evening of January 19, 1990, the U.S.S.R. Supreme Soviet Presidium backed by then-President Mikhail Gorbachev declared a state of emergency in response to the growing national independence movement in Azerbaijan. In response to the Azeri people's stand against Soviet aggression, Soviet troops stormed the Azerbaijani capital city of Baku and indiscriminately fired on peaceful demonstrators, including women and children. That night, more than 130 people died with over 700 injured, 841 arrested and five going missing.

While Soviet invaders attacked peaceful protestors, they also targeted critical infrastructure and workers. According to a report by Human Rights Watch entitled Black January in Azerbaijan, ``among the most heinous violations of human rights during the Baku incursion were the numerous attacks on medical personnel, ambulances and even hospitals.'' Additionally, the Soviet attack served as an act of intimidation for all then-Soviet countries with independence ambitions. The Human Rights Watch report concluded that, ``indeed the violence used by the Soviet Army on the night of January 19-20 constitutes an exercise in collective punishment. The punishment inflicted on Baku by Soviet soldiers may have been intended as a warning to nationalists, not only in Azerbaijan, but in other Republics of the Soviet Union.''

Azerbaijani citizens, however, refused to succumb to Soviet aggression. Instead, the invasion gave new life to their nationalism and fight for true independence. In the days after the invasion, thousands of Azerbaijanis surrounded Communist Party headquarters demanding the resignation of the republic's leadership, the Baku City Council demanded that Soviet troops withdraw from Azeri territories and the legislature in Azerbaijan threatened to call a referendum on secession unless Soviet troops were withdrawn within 48 hours.

Soviet troops eventually withdrew and January 20th became known as ``the Day of the Nationwide Sorrow.'' It would not be for nearly two years, however, before Azerbaijan gained political control from the Soviet Union. In October 1991, Azerbaijan's parliament--the National Assembly--declared its independence.

While Azerbaijan still faces challenges from its neighbors, today, Azerbaijan has developed into a thriving country with double-digit growth, in large part due to a freely elected president and parliament, and free market reforms led by the energy sector that helps support energy security in Israel and Europe. I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing the tragic events of Black January that precipitated the independent Republic of Azerbaijan and the fall of the USSR.

Mr. Chairman, I have been listening to the debate, and I see the buzzwords that have been used about the repeal of the Affordable Care Act: ``patient-centered''--that sounds good--and ``against bureaucrats''--that sounds good. What they don't tell you is that it is for the insurance companies.

They say it leaves it patient-centered and for the people to deal with it, not the government--because the people will have to deal with the insurance companies in the future. The people don't want to have to deal with insurance companies when their claims are denied, when they won't pay them, when they won't allow them to have certain procedures. That is what the American people are against.

The Affordable Care Act was insurance reform on steroids. And you can't have all of the insurance reform on steroids without government action looking out for the people versus the insurance companies.

They also don't tell you about rich people, who the other side is always concerned about, who could use tax credits and get a lot more money for their tax credits because they are at a higher tax rate than others. So, in essence, they are going to get more out of this.

What we ought to be doing--it is what this alternative budget is about--is trying to create jobs, jobs for people in infrastructure, construction jobs for people out there in middle America.

America used to be first in infrastructure, and now we are 28th in infrastructure. We need to have an infrastructure that gets goods to market and goods to the public for sale. That helps create jobs further. Jobs is what is important, and it is where America used to be first--in infrastructure jobs.

America has always been last in health care. We were the only industrialized country in the world without a national healthcare policy, and the Republicans never wanted a national healthcare policy until now.

So the Affordable Care Act did good because it woke the people up on the other side of the aisle to the fact that we needed to have a policy to make sure people got health care because they have never, ever cared about it.

Teddy Roosevelt cared about it in their party. Richard Nixon cared about it in their party. Mitt Romney cared about it in their party. But they were mute. They didn't say a word about it. All of a sudden-- because they found something they thought is good.

Two-thirds of the people in Tennessee like the Affordable Care Act. Don't repeal it.

Pass this alternative budget and create jobs.

I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Chairman, these bills are a group of bills that have been considered for many years and have passed on partisan votes in the House. What you do when you repeal regulations or make it harder to have regulations is you make it better for business, better for the Chamber crowd, better for the manufacturing folk.

But there is always a cost for everything. I think it was Isaac Newton who said: ``For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.'' You take these regulations off, increase business, and make it easier; but there is an equal and opposite effect in that Newtonian law as the consumer of the products.

Whether it is food and food safety, whether it is water safety and purity, whether it is air safety, whether it is toys and manufacturers' defects or automobiles and safety in transportation--it could be airplane transportation--there is always a side that loses; and the side that loses is that of the consumers and the folks who will be injured and/or killed because of lack of regulations.

I don't know how much one life is worth. If it is mine or one of my loved ones or one of my constituents--I am getting a little political here--it is worth a lot, but it is worth a lot no matter who it is, and there are going to be lots of people who will not survive some of these regulations. There are going to be injuries in the workplace because regulations for safety aren't there. There will be food products that are defective because regulations aren't in place, and people will eat food that is not appropriate, not pure.

I had an amendment I proposed here on civil rights, and I think civil rights is one of our most precious rights--one that has been neglected on many occasions. That amendment would have said that this would not affect any civil rights rules, but it was not put in order; but it includes people with disabilities. Those are areas in which we should have exempted and not had anything stop our steadfastness toward securing civil rights and securing opportunities for people with disabilities.

I am against the bills. I am for the consumer. I think there might be a measured way to do this, but this is a heavy-handed way to do it, and the consumer loses.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of a constitutional amendment I introduced today to eliminate the electoral college and provide for the direct election of our nation's President and Vice President.

As Founding Father Thomas Jefferson said, ``I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might well as require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.''

For the second time in recent memory, and for the fifth time in our history, the national popular vote winner will not become President because of the electoral college. This has happened twice to candidates from Tennessee: Al Gore and Andrew Jackson.

The reason is because the electoral college, established to prevent an uninformed citizenry from directly electing our nation's President, no longer fits our nation's needs.

When the Founders established the electoral college it was in an era of limited nationwide communication. The electoral structure

was premised on a theory that citizens would have a better chance of knowing about electors from their home states than about presidential candidates from out-of-state. Electors were supposed to be people of good judgment who were trusted with picking a qualified President and Vice President on behalf of the people. They held the responsibility of choosing a President because it was believed that the general public could not be properly informed of the candidates and the values each held.

That notion--that citizens should be prevented from directly electing the President--is antithetical to our understanding of democracy today, and our electoral process has not evolved to match our abilities to communicate, collect information, and make informed decisions about candidates. The development of mass media and the internet has made information about presidential candidates easily accessible to U.S. citizens across the country and around the world. The people no longer need the buffer of the electoral college to be knowledgeable about and decide who will be president. Today, citizens have a far better chance of knowing about out-of-state presidential candidates than knowing about presidential electors from their home states. Most people do not even know who their electors are.

While our ability to communicate has evolved so has the electoral college, but not in a positive way. Electors are now little more than rubber stamps who are chosen based on their political parties and who represent the interests of those political parties, rather than representing the people. Most states legally bind their electors to vote for whomever wins that state's popular vote, so electors can no longer exercise individual judgment when selecting a candidate.

In our country, ``We the People,'' are supposed to determine who represents us in elective office. Yet, we use an anachronistic process for choosing who will hold the highest offices in the land.

It is time for us to fix this, and that is why I have introduced this amendment today.

Since our nation first adopted our Constitution, ``We the People,'' have amended it repeatedly to expand the opportunity for citizens to directly elect our leaders:

The 15th Amendment guarantees the right of all citizens to vote, regardless of race.

The 19th Amendment guarantees the right of all citizens to vote, regardless of gender.

The 26th Amendment guarantees the right of all citizens 18 years of age and older to vote, regardless of age.

And the 17th Amendment empowers citizens to directly elect U.S. Senators.

We need to amend our Constitution to empower citizens to directly elect the President and the Vice President of the United States.

Working together, I know we can make our electoral college fit the world we live in today, and make our Constitution better reflect the ``more perfect Union'' to which it aspires.

Mr. Chairman, I don't know if I can live up to those words, but I certainly appreciate them.

I was the ranking member on this committee, and I was chair at one point. We have had this bill over the years. It is indeed a monkey wrench or a monkey in the wrench, as John McCain might have said. It will mess up the entire system that we have of Congress passing laws, delegating, giving the executive the ability to enact them in ways that make them functional and appropriate and come up with the details that the Congress does not have enough expertise to do.

The other side refers constantly to people that prepare these rules-- which take many, many years and have much, much input--as bureaucrats, as if it is some type of pejorative. Bureaucrats are government employees who have expertise in certain areas and who study an area and become so much more expert than we are on the subject that they can come up with fine-tuned laws that are checked and balanced to make sure that the laws are implemented in the way that Congress intends. If Congress doesn't like it, Congress can pass a bill by both House and Senate to repeal it. We have already got that possibility.

Under this unique approach, either one of the houses of Congress can stop a regulation, a rule from going into effect because both Houses would have to approve a rule and the President would have to sign it before it could go into effect. That gives one House the ability to veto, basically, an executive action.

It is the executive in our system that has the power to veto acts of the legislature and not vice versa. We can pass laws in a bicameral spirit, which is what our Constitution has, when the House and the Senate agree. But neither House, independently, is given any power to veto laws or legislation. This would break that and, I believe, be unconstitutional. That is why I oppose H.R. 26, the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2017.

Indeed, the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act is most appropriate this year as we start, because in 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020, we are, indeed, going to have an executive in need of scrutiny. So I thank the Republicans for naming this bill appropriately because we are, indeed, in the times of an Executive in need of scrutiny.

We need scrutiny over income tax returns that have been hidden from the public that might disclose conflicts of interest or loans from characters that might be considered oligarchs and have some type of an influence over our foreign policy and our domestic.

We need an Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act that deals with these conflicts, with income taxes that haven't been released, with businesses in the District where people could go to hotels and curry favor with the Executive.

Indeed, we do have an Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act, so I appreciate the well-named bill that the Republicans have brought us and the awareness that, through this bill, they have seen that we need some concern about the Executive coming because he certainly needs scrutiny.

This bill, though, is the worst of corporate special interest because it will give corporate special interests the opportunity to override rules that take effect unless both Houses pass them. It is difficult enough for this House and the Senate to get legislation passed in the days that we often give to legislation, but to have both Houses have to agree, in which case if you can't, it is, in essence, a pocket veto, and it doesn't even have to be scheduled for a

vote because the House would have to positively pass and the Senate positively pass. So if the Speaker doesn't want to do it, the Speaker can pocket veto the regulation. It doesn't even have to be scheduled.

This is not draining the swamp. It will heighten the influence of corporate lobbyists in Congress where they can come to the Speaker and ask that agency rules they don't like that might protect the lives of children because they are regulations dealing with toys that seem to possibly be defective, or automobiles where they need safety devices, or other consumer protections that interfere with business interests-- business is good and important, but sometimes businesses do things that are injurious to the public.

To give this opportunity to stop rules and regulations from going into effect that protect the public is wrong. It was suggested maybe it will help the economy, but at what cost? What is one life worth--or several lives--if lives are lost because safety regulations are not approved by this House and the Senate, or one or the other, and then don't go into effect? As I mentioned, this is seriously constitutionally defective.

Mr. Chairman, the ranking member mentioned Justice Scalia. I will mention Chief Justice John Roberts who criticized nearly identical legislation in the 1980s when he was a White House lawyer because it would ``hobble agency rulemaking by requiring affirmative congressional assent to all major rules'' such that it would ``seem to impose excessive burdens on regulatory agencies.'' That was John Roberts.

Some of the underlying facts given were about the economy. No matter what you say, President Obama has been effective on the economy. We saved the housing market. We saved this country from the Great Recession. We brought about recovery. That is not something we should disparage but we should praise. The stock market has gone up to record highs. Unemployment is down. Jobs are up. The automobile industry has been saved.

I ask Members to reject this bill because it is unconstitutional. It will cost lives of American citizens because safety regulations won't be passed.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member and chairman in the past, my chairman.

This bill has come up over many years when I served on this subcommittee and was the ranking member and the chair at one time. Mr. Issa suggested it might only be six or seven regulations. If that was the case, they could take them individually.

There is a process where regulations can be brought before the House, in the Congressional Review Act, and each one studied individually, and the House could overrule them. I can't fathom that they are bringing this bill for just six regulations which they could do individually. But even then, that is wrong to put them all together. We know what is going to happen is they are going to pass. They are going to pass the House. Whether they pass the Senate is another issue.

These are not midnight regulations. These are regulations that go back to last June. So the term ``midnight regulations'' is a misnomer. To say that these are just decisions made by bureaucrats, you would think bureaucrats were something out of a medical dictionary that was highly contagious. Bureaucrats could also be called experts, specialists, dedicated government officials.

There are people who study these issues that, to be implemented, need to be fine-tuned to fit into society, sometimes to protect consumers, sometimes to protect commerce, and it takes years and years and years, often, for these regulations to take effect. Some of them protect animals--the soring industry.

A great majority of this House was in favor of a bill to protect walking horses, but it didn't get a vote because there were some people in this House that were against it and against it so much that they worked to get one of the finest Members I have served with, Ed Whitfield, out of this House. That was despicable. I suspect that same power that might have had that effect could bring that type of regulation up to be nullified. I would fear that, and I would find it wrong in the spirit of Ed Whitfield and fairness.

I like Ed Whitfield a lot. A lot of us did. He was a great guy. It was wrong, what happened, the way he was forced out because a majority of this House wanted a vote on that and it could be put in this regulation and it would go.

Tobacco regulations, toys, protections for children, all potentially in jeopardy, as well as other regulations protecting four-legged friends.

I can imagine when this comes up and the decision is made which bills to put into this omnibus bill, you are going to have lots of lobbyists coming and wanting the bills that affect them adversely, their industry is put in it, and you are going to have fundraisers right around it. It is going to be a fundraising trough for the Republicans to use and bidding basically on who wants to have their regulation put in our bill and have it nullified. The nullification acts back in the 1830s with John Calhoun are back, not the midnight judges of President Adams.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and medical contributions of renowned surgeon, innovator and ``father of middle-ear surgery,'' Memphian Dr. John Shea, Jr. A graduate of the University of Notre Dame and Harvard Medical School, Dr. Shea served in the Korean War before returning to Memphis and taking over his father's medical practice in 1952. Two years later, he traveled to Vienna, Austria where he began extensive research into otosclerosis that would lead to his inventing the world's first prosthetic stapes--the tiny stirrup-shaped bone in the middle ear--and performing the groundbreaking stapedectomy procedure, which has since been used by doctors world-wide.

While in Vienna, he read German manuscripts on otosclerosis, which is a condition of the inner ear that causes calcification of the stapes and is considered a leading cause of deafness. Although the medical community ended surgical attempts to address this condition 50 years earlier, Dr. Shea had a vision to combat this cause of deafness in middle-aged adults by replacing the calcified bone with a prosthetic. While many of his colleagues questioned the procedure as dangerous, Dr. Shea was convinced through his research that the revolutionary surgery would work. On May 1, 1956, he successfully performed the first stapedectomy and went on to repeat the procedure nearly 50,000 times during his career before retiring in 2011.

In addition to inventing the prosthetic stapes and developing the stapedectomy, Dr. Shea contributed to otology surgical instruments including drills and microscopes, and intratympanic perfusion treatment for Meniere's disease or spontaneous vertigo. His ingenuity earned him a spot on the London Times list of ``1,000 Makers of the Twentieth Century'' and a 1962 featured cover article in LIFE magazine as one of five people who were recognized as part of ``The Takeover Generation.'' In 2013, he donated 406 papers, including over 300 published articles, documenting his life's work to the local Memphis Public Library's Memphis Room. Dr. Shea belonged to more than 50 scientific societies, and was a clinical professor in the otolaryngology departments of the University of Tennessee, the University of Mississippi, the University of North Carolina and Tulane University. Additionally, he received honorary doctorates from Memphis schools Christian Brothers University and Rhodes College, and an honorary fellowship from the Australian and English Royal College of Surgeons.

My father, Dr. Morris D. Cohen, knew Dr. Shea and his father as he, too, was a physician and operated the Children's Clinic at 1155 Madison, down the street from Dr. Shea, Sr.'s Ear Nose and Throat Hospital. He told me about the hospital and spoke admiringly of Dr. Shea and his father. Memphis has long been home to many great medical institutions, including Campbell Clinic, the University of Tennessee Health Science Center, the Elvis Presley Trauma Center at Regional One Health (formerly The Med) and the Shea Ear Clinic. Many Memphis physicians have received national acclaim but none have been more renowned than Dr. John Shea, Jr.,

In 1985, Dr. Shea opened the Shea Ear Clinic at Poplar and Ridgeway in Memphis where his son, Dr. Paul Shea continues the family practice today. Dr. Shea, Jr. was a pioneer in the field of otology and a legendary doctor who helped usher in a new era of treatment. He came from one family of physicians and leaves behind another. Memphis will miss John Shea, Jr., and I send my condolences to his wife Lynda Lee Mead; sons Paul and Dr. John Shea III (private practice otologist); daughters Susanna Shea and Wendy Canarios; seven grandchildren and three great grandchildren; and his friends and loved ones. I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing the life and medical contributions of Dr. John Shea, Jr. His was a life well-lived.

I want to thank Ms. Sewell for having the foresight to bring this proposal. This is most fitting that we honor the foot soldiers. They were Americans, all races, who came together and saw injustice and wanted to right it. They risked their lives. Some died in the efforts. Miss Liuzzo was killed right after the march to Montgomery. Schwerner, Chaney, and Goodman were killed over in Mississippi in conjunction with this with the Freedom Riders.

Thousands of people came to the South to see that people got the right to vote. It is hard to believe that people were denied the right to vote in this country, but they were.

I was touched by the remarks of my colleague from Alabama. It was historic. But you don't just have to see the movie and experience it to honor these people and give them a Gold Medal; you need to live it.

People are being denied voting rights today in this country. The Supreme Court emasculated the Voting Rights Act just recently. It needs to be reinstated. There are civil rights that can be performed and enacted in America today. The movement isn't over. The movement continues. A medal is good, but the spirit must continue on this floor to see that all people have their right to vote, their right to participate, and their rights not to have State judges with their lips dripping with interposition tell probate clerks not to enforce a Federal law.

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman said this is the time to pass it. It is not the time to pass it. The time to pass it is after all the reports and studies are in. The State Department hasn't completed its study.

It is kind of like what we are doing in this Congress. We are not going by our regular procedures. We are not having bills in committee and opportunities for amendments on the floor because we bring things up here to make it the political issue du jour.

This is not the time for the bill, just like it is not the time for the Prime Minister to come and speak from that well. It should be after his election and after the negotiations with Iran are over. This should be after the State Department has told us what their opinion is, and then let the President make his decision.

We should go back to regular order. I hope the House will return to regular order.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize George Stevens, Jr., an American writer, director, producer, playwright, author and founder of the American Film Institute and the Kennedy Center Honors. With an impressive, creative and innovative career spanning nearly 65 years, Stevens has contributed greatly to American filmmaking and diplomacy, and has elevated artistic standards and appreciation to new heights. It is therefore with profound gratitude for his dedication to the arts and yet sadness that December 2014 marked Stevens' last year as producer of the esteemed Kennedy Center Honors that I am speaking today.

In 1978, Stevens founded the Kennedy Center Honors, which is an annual TV special that recognizes a wide cross-section of artists who have contributed to American culture through dance, the theater, music, film and television. The Kennedy Center Honors, however, is more than just a TV special. It is the brainchild of George Stevens and it was influenced by his hero and friend, President John F. Kennedy, who said, ``I look forward to an America that will honor achievement in the arts the way we honor achievement in business and statecraft.'' Through personal dedication and a labor of love, Stevens committed much of his adult life to the Honors, which is a significant part of his legacy and contribution to the arts.

For thirty-six years, Stevens produced the Honors and made it the premier show of American arts appreciation. In 2008, his son Michael joined him as a producer of the show and it remains one of the most highly anticipated events of the year, showcasing some of the best talents America has to offer. Last year's Honors recipients included Tom Hanks, Sting, Lily Tomlin, Patricia McBride and singer/songwriter Al Green from my home of Memphis, Tennessee. The show was an amazing celebration of these artists and a testament to Stevens' love for the arts. I was glad to be among the attendees at the historic 2014 Honors.

In 1962, former CBS Newsman and head of the United States Information Agency (USIA) under the Kennedy Administration Edward R. Murrow reached out to Stevens to join the Agency to help inform the world about the U.S. through film. It was during this time that he formed a lasting relationship with President John F. Kennedy and his family, and began laying the foundation that transformed how American films and the arts are recognized and appreciated today. After creating nearly 300 short films for the USIA and following the President's assassination, Stevens produced the heartfelt and well-received documentary about the life of President Kennedy entitled Years of Lightning, Day of Drums. At the time, the National Board of Review named the documentary ``one of the ten best films of the year'' and in 2013, Stevens worked with Warner Bros to restore the film and release it on DVD.

George Stevens, Jr. was born no stranger to Hollywood and American filmmaking. His grandmothers and grandfather were all actors, having starred alongside Charlie Chaplin and in silent films. His father, George Stevens, Sr., was a legendary Hollywood director who made more than 50 films and earned an Oscar for directing the 1951 motion picture, A Place in the Sun. At age 17, the younger Stevens began working with his father reading scripts and stories for potential films, including the 1953 Western classic Shane, which received five Academy Award nominations, and the 1959 film version of the Pulitzer Prize winning play, The Diary of Anne Frank. Between 1959 and 1961, Stevens directed episodes for the television series Peter Gunn and Alfred Hitchcock Presents. In 1967, he, along with Sidney Poitier and Gregory Peck, founded the American Film Institute, which serves to preserve original prints of American films.

Stevens continues to produce some of the most important works in American culture. In 2013, he produced American editorial cartoonist Herbert Block's documentary entitled Herblock: The Black & the White, and in 2011, he adapted Thurgood, his 2006 one-man stage play about the first African-American Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, into a feature film. In 2009, he was the executive producer of the TV special We Are One: The Obama Inaugural Celebration at the Lincoln Memorial.

Stevens is an American icon whose dedication to the arts is unwavering. He has won 13 Emmys, two Peabody Awards for Meritorious Service to Broadcasting, eight Writers Guild of America awards, the Christopher Award and The Writers Guild of America's Paul Selvin award for his writings on civil rights and liberties. In 2011, President Barack Obama appointed him Co-chairman of the President's Committee on the Arts and Humanities.

George Stevens continues to serve and represent the arts community well. Because of his steadfast efforts to celebrate and promote American art, the Kennedy Center Honors is always at the top of TV ratings. I ask all of my colleagues to join me in congratulating him on more than 65 years of dedication to the arts and thirty-six years of producing the Kennedy Center Honors.

Mr. Speaker, few Americans have heard the term ``Black January,'' yet it is imbedded in the memory of all Azerbaijanis. Black January marks the evening of January 19, 1990, when at midnight Russian troops stormed the capital city of Baku. Armed with a state of emergency declared by the U.S.S.R. Supreme Soviet Presidium and signed by then President Mikhail Gorbachev, the invasion was intended to suppress a growing independence movement, but the result was the opposite. This violent incident inflamed Azerbaijani nationalism and contributed to the breakup of the Soviet Union.

Leading up to Black January, the national independence movement had gained momentum with growing demonstrations for independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity. Emerging democratic groups were leading the political agenda and were projected to succeed in upcoming Parliamentary elections in March 1990. The Soviet Union sought to ``restore order'' by indiscriminately firing on peaceful demonstrators in Baku, including women and children. The protesters were calling for independence from the Soviet Union and the removal of Communist officials. More than 130 people died that night and in subsequent violence, over 700 were injured, 841 were arrested, and 5 went missing.

According to a report by Human Rights Watch entitled ``Black January in Azerbaijan,'' ``among the most heinous violations of human rights during the Baku incursion were the numerous attacks on medical personnel, ambulances and even hospitals.'' The report concluded that `indeed the violence used by the Soviet Army on the night of January 19-20 constitutes an exercise in collective punishment. The punishment inflicted on Baku by Soviet soldiers may have been intended as a warning to nationalists, not only in Azerbaijan, but in other Republics of the Soviet Union.''

In the days after the invasion, thousands of Azerbaijanis surrounded Communist Party headquarters demanding the resignation of the republic's leadership. The Baku City Council demanded that Soviet troops be withdrawn. The Soviet legislature in Azerbaijan condemned the occupation as ``unconstitutional'' and threatened to call a referendum on secession unless Soviet troops were withdrawn within 48 hours.

Soviet troops were eventually withdrawn from Baku, but political control was maintained for almost another 2 years until Azerbaijan's parliament declared independence in October 1991. Today, Azerbaijan has developed into a thriving country with double digit growth, in large part due to a freely elected president and parliament, free market reforms led by the energy sector, and, most importantly, no foreign troops on its soil.

January 20 is the day on which Azerbaijani citizens stood up to Soviet soldiers and martyrs gave up their lives for freedom from communism and dictatorship. I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing the tragic events of Black January that precipitated the independent Republic of Azerbaijan and the fall of the USSR.

Madam Speaker, I, too, am against this bill for I am for a woman's right to choice. This bill is the second bill that has been brought in the last few days to show the Republican side's intent to repeal Roe v. Wade. That is what they would like to do: repeal Roe v. Wade.

What is most important is to understand the theater that this bill has shown that the majority party has made this historic hallowed hall of Congress today.

Today is the March for Life, lots of pro-lifers here. They wanted to give them something, so they scheduled a bill--we could be legislating on jobs, on minimum wage, on infrastructure. They wanted to give them something, so they came with a bill called ``fetal pain'' to get around the viability requirements of the Supreme Court.

Their caucus found that bill too extreme to get the votes--even their caucus. Now, the leadership wouldn't listen to the Democrats of the Rules Committee, and it wouldn't listen to the Democrats on the floor, and they didn't have the good sense to realize it would make them look as they are: antiwoman and out-of-step with reality.

It took some women and maybe a few men--but mostly women--in their caucus to finally go ``no,'' so they brought up a retread of a bill. That was a retread too, but they brought up another one, a substitute bill, because they had to have something to give as a gift for the March for Life pro-life caucus.

This is theater. This is drama. That is what this has become. A woman's right should not be theater; it shouldn't be drama. A woman's right should be preserved. If any case, if there is any question about them, it should go through regular process, go through committees.

Let the Members know about the bill with notice, not have, within 72 hours, a bill brought to this floor. Regular order has been destroyed because of theater and messaging, and that is what you are going to see for the next 2 years.

The American people will be very disappointed in this Congress because it has become the theater of the absurd.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Memphian Logan Guleff on winning the second season of ``MasterChef Junior.'' At age 11, Logan was among thousands of children ages 8 through 13 who auditioned for the show. His culinary experience helped him to not only be selected as a show participant but to also triumph over his competitors and take home the grand prize.

When Logan was nine, he traveled to New York to compete in a Jif peanut butter contest as a semifinalist and at age 10, he had lunch at the White House and a meeting with President Barack Obama after winning a state contest. Additionally, Logan has already become a culinary entrepreneur, offering his own line of seasonings called Logan's Rub and providing dining reviews on his blog, orderupwithlogan.blogspot.com.

For Logan's final competitive meal on ``MasterChef Junior'', he chose to highlight his talents by preparing all seafood dishes, including grilled spot prawn with a smoked saffron aioli and olive tapenade for his appetizer and a salt crusted branzino with a chimichurri sauce for his entree. ``MasterChef Junior'' host Gordon Ramsay commented that Logan's dishes were the most unusual ones the show has ever seen, to which Logan replied, ``Go big or go home.'' His vision, creativity and all-or-nothing spirit certainly paid off.

Logan's accomplishments are significant for a young man of only 12 years of age, and he represents the Memphis culinary community well. I ask all of my colleagues to join me in congratulating Logan Guleff on winning the title of MasterChef Junior.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the life and accomplishments of Memphis record producer, John Fry. Fry, a son of Memphis, was an example of the innovation, creativity and daring that is uniquely Memphis, as embodied in such Memphians as Abe Plough, founder of Plough Inc. and creator of St. Joseph's aspirin for children and the Coppertone skin care line; Fred Smith, founder of Federal Express; Kemmons Wilson, founder of Holiday Inn; Clarence Saunders, founder of Piggly Wiggly--the first self service grocer; and Sam Phillips, the father of rock and roll and founder of Sun Studio and Sun Records--the recording home of Elvis Presley.

Born on New Year's Eve in 1944, Fry became a well-known and respected member of the Memphis music community, having founded the Ardent record label in the late 1950s and early 1960s along with John King and Fred Smith. Ardent was a unique studio for the region that brought high technical standards to recording, which Fry used to father a multitude of music from rock and roll and punk to soul, power pop and gospel. Under his leadership, Fry helped launch the careers of local musicians and guide the works of others from around the country.

John began recording music out of his family's garage in 1959 while he was still in high school. He committed to spending countless hours remodeling the space by building the equipment needed and inter- connecting equipment that could not be built. Out of his self-made recording studio, he recorded and released singles that were favored by locals, including The Ole' Miss Downbeats' Slewfoot and The Hucklebuck. These were the first recordings for the Ardent label. In 1962 after graduating high school, Fry and a friend built a radio station in Pine Bluff, Arkansas, and in 1964, he worked with recording artist Jim Dickinson, who had also worked with Elvis and power pop singer Alex Chilton, to begin reviving the Ardent label.

In 1966, Ardent Studios opened on National Street, where it stayed for five years before moving to its current location on Madison in Midtown Memphis. In its first four years, John invested in the studio, furnishing it with four- and sixteen-track equipment, outboard and Dolby noise reduction equipment. The technologically-advanced studio soon had a console that was the same make used by Stax Records, which enable Ardent to become a companion studio for Stax recording artists, including Isaac Hayes, the Staple Singers, the Bar-Kays, Sam and Dave and Albert King. Ardent also recorded albums for The Replacements, The Clits, The Scruffs and Elvis Presley.

One band that was close to John's heart was Big Star. Made up of Memphians Chris Bell, Andy Hummel, Jody Stephens and lead singer/ songwriter Alex Chilton, Big Star recorded three albums at Ardent Studios--#1 Record, Radio City and Third--and viewed John largely as a mentor. John showed them ins and outs of the industry and drummer Jody Stephens commented that he was ``a person who could help you make your dreams come true.'' While Big Star received little national recognition at the time, over the next four decades, the group's three albums eventually were listed among Rolling Stone magazine's ``500 Greatest Albums of All Time'' and a variation of their song In The Street was used as the theme song for the popular Fox-TV sitcom, That 70s Show.

In the late 70s, John began to focus more on the business side of Ardent Studios, but talents including Led Zeppelin, ZZ Top, R.E.M., Bob Dylan, Leon Russell, the Replacements, Freddie King, the Gin Blossoms and many others traveled to and recorded at the Memphis studio throughout the 70s, 80s and 90s. In 1995, John launched a Christian rock label, releasing 36 albums and receiving seven Grammy nominations from artists including Big Tent Revival, Skillet, Jonah33 and others. He also began operating Ardent as a learning ground for future award winning producers and engineers, including Jim Dickinson, Terry Manning, John Hampton and others.

Today, Ardent Studios continue to attract musicians both local and national from all genres. Memphis rap group and Oscar winner Three 6 Mafia has recorded at the studio as well as Memphis rapper, Al Kapone. Three Doors Down, the North Mississippi Allstars, the White Stripes and the Raconteurs are among the studio's roster of artists. Additionally, filmmakers for Hustle and Flow, Black Snake Moan and 40 Shades of Blue--all movies featuring and filmed in Memphis--went to Ardent Studios for recording their soundtracks. The studio has amassed 70 gold and platinum albums and singles.

John Fry was a recording visionary and helped propel Memphis music and that of others from around the world to a higher level. His contributions to the industry are numerous and will continue to inspire future generations. In 2006, he said, ``If you acquire knowledge or skill or even wisdom, and you just keep it, then when you die, that dies with you. But if you share that with other generations--who in turn will share it and share it and share it--you're doing something that lasts.''

John Fry passed away on December 18, 2014 in Memphis at 69 years of age, and is survived by his wife, Betty Fry. He and Betty were advocates for laws concerning humane treatment of animals, and they treasured and cared for horses, dogs and cats with the dignity that people who respect all life would. He will be remembered by all who came in contact with him and whose careers and success benefited from his mentorship. I ask all of my colleagues to join me in recognizing his life, accomplishments and contributions to American music. His was a life well-lived.