Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to speak in favor of H.R. 238, the Commodity End-User Relief Act.

I thank Chairman Conaway for his leadership and his continued commitment to positive reforms through the Agriculture Committee. It has been a privilege to work with him on issues impacting our Nation's rural communities.

I also thank Subcommittee Chairman Austin Scott for his work in bringing this bill to the floor yet again.

This bill will provide much-needed relief to the end users of this country in the wake of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform bill. End users in the bill are the farmers and ranchers and public utilities across our country. When costs increase for them, they increase for all Americans. The farmer was not the reason for the economic recession that began in 2008. The rancher was not the reason, nor was the power company.

So why bring them under the umbrella of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform?

Rural America is not Wall Street. It is this view held by some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that has alienated so many in rural America.

The Agriculture Committee has approved this measure four times through regular order in the committee. Its commonsense reforms have

garnered bipartisan support in the 114th Congress and the 113th Congress. It is my hope that with this new administration taking office next week, these commonsense changes will finally be signed into law.

I implore my fellow colleagues to listen to rural America. Remember, they are not Wall Street.

I thank Chairman Conaway, Subcommittee Chairman Austin Scott, and Ranking Member David Scott for making this a priority. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, today is National Human Trafficking Awareness Day, an issue close to my heart.

Human trafficking is nothing more than modern-day slavery. Last Congress, the Foreign Affairs Committee shined a light on this scourge that affects millions around the world and passed into law the International Megan's Law, which attacks child sex tourism by child sex offenders, improves international law enforcement cooperation, and improves notices of child sex offenders traveling to the U.S.

We have come a long way in creating awareness, but more must be done. According to the Polaris Project, from 2007 to 2015, over 25,000 cases of human trafficking were discovered in the United States, and 7,700 of these were minors. Over 100,000 calls were made to the National Human Trafficking Resource Center hotline.

We all know this is an issue that does not discriminate. It can affect everyone. In north Florida, over Christmas, a man was arrested for trafficking a woman across five county lines. This case started with him luring her to Florida over the Internet and ended when law enforcement were able to save the victim after seeing her in adult advertisements online.

I want to thank all those who were involved in bringing this person to justice.

On this National Human Trafficking Awareness Day, we in Congress will not look away. We will continue to fight the scourge called human trafficking.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Walker) for hosting this Special Order. The American people have spoken, and it is time. The ACA, the Affordable Care Act--which it is not, and we know that.

I want to take you back, a little history here. Back prior to 2009, before the Affordable Care Act came out, 85 percent of the people in America had health insurance either through their employer or on their own. Fifteen percent did not have health insurance.

Yet, Congress, in their infinite wisdom, instead of fixing it for the 15 percent and getting them into the pool of people that had health insurance, said: No; we are going to change it. We are going to change it and disrupt the whole healthcare market and 20 percent of our economy.

This is the epitome of legislative malpractice. This Congress was controlled by one party, the Democratic Party, through the House, the Senate, and the executive branch. They passed a 2,900-page bill at the end of the year that nobody read. You can't do that in any other business without going to jail.

President Obama sold us a bill of goods on a lie. If you want to keep your doctor or your insurance, you can and your price will go down $2,500.

Let me share three real-life stories. One was a 54-year-old man that came into our office, single, making a six-figure income, could afford insurance. He was going through the exchange. He changed his plan and wanted to pay for it right then. They said: Don't worry about it, we will send you a bill. They never sent him a bill, and his insurance got canceled. He could not buy insurance because it was through the exchange and the sign-up period had expired. He got fined whatever the fine was. He got fined trying to do the right thing.

Another one is a friend of mine who owns a restaurant franchise. He has 500 employees. He says: I can't afford to pay for the health insurance. So he moved people from working 32 or 40 hours a week down to 26 hours.

I could tell you a real personal story about a couple I know real well. They came to Congress. Their policy got canceled. Their premiums went up by over $11,000. Their deductibles went up and their coverage went down. I know that couple real well because it is my wife and myself.

The American people have spoken and given us the majority for a reason, and that is to fix health care and allow the best healthcare providers, the best medicine, the best research and the institutions in America to provide that for all Americans and deliver that care to all Americans.

The Republican Congress has a better way, and it starts with putting health care back into the hands of the physicians to the patients. It has a better way increasing access, the cure, the quality at a lower cost with a stable transition so no one is left out. And it starts with the repeal of ObamaCare.

I appreciate Chairman Walker doing this. This is a message we are going to drive home and home and home. We are going to fix this, and the American people will be better off and our economy will be better off.

Mr. Speaker, today I will reintroduce my bill, the State Sponsors of Terrorism Review Enhancement Act. This legislation passed the full House last Congress unanimously. I hope this Chamber will once again take up this commonsense legislation and pass it as soon as possible.

The designation of a foreign government as a ``State Sponsor of Terrorism'' is one of the United States' most powerful statements that we can give on another statement.

Besides imposing sanctions, the stamp of ``State Sponsor of Terrorism'' labels a state untouchable to the international community.

This pariah status is much deserved as these are states that support the killing of innocent people as a matter of policy.

Under current law, in order for a state to be delisted, the President of the United States only needs to certify that the country being considered for delisting has not engaged in supporting terrorism for a paltry 6 months. We are talking 6 months to be delisted. Considering the heinous acts of violence these countries have supported in the past, we should not be allowing them to be delisted after only 6 months.

To address this, my legislation will--and, again, it passed last Congress unanimously--quadruple the time a designated country must refrain from sponsoring terrorism, before the President can remove it from the sponsor list, from 6 to 24 months; increase congressional oversight by doubling the time Congress has to review the President's proposed removal from 45 to 90 days; establish a uniform process through which Congress can disapprove of the President's decision to remove a country from that list; and require the administration to notify and brief Congress upon initiating a review of a designated country's potential removal from the list.

This legislation will assert congressional scrutiny and oversight and hopefully bring to an end politically motivated delistings. Successive administrations--both Republican and Democrat alike--delisted countries based on their presidency's legacy rather than the facts. This will stop absurd delistings like that of North Korea in 2008.

North Korea was delisted in exchange for their promises of dismantling their nuclear program. However, 9 years and 5 nuclear tests later, they remain off the list. This rescission from the list has enabled North Korea to engage in supporting terrorism abroad. By increasing the amount of time for a state to not be engaged in terrorism and increasing congressional oversight and scrutiny, my legislation will not allow mistakes such as this delisting of North Korea's to take place.

I want to remind people that this passed unanimously, and we hope that we will get the support again.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize and congratulate the other Gainesville--the University of Florida's Machine Intelligence Laboratory Engineering Team.

On December 12, 2016, the University of Florida's Machine Intelligence Laboratory Engineering Team won a world championship and beat 12 teams from five countries at the Maritime RobotX Challenge in Hawaii. This team, which is comprised of UF students, designed a vessel that completed a number of different obstacles, including navigating through buoys and self-parking--all without human intervention.

As a supporter of scientific research, I am proud of the inspiring work being done in Florida's Third Congressional District. The dedication displayed by these students and professors is an outstanding example of the success that comes from hard work. It is the dreams of the students and scientists, like these of today, that will propel them to go on and create the innovations of tomorrow that will make this country great again. I am honored to announce their accomplishments, and I look forward to witnessing their continued success.

As a UF alumnus, I would be remiss not to say, ``Go Gators.''

Mr. Speaker, the 115th Congress has a unique opportunity to clean the swamp, especially of Members who were convicted of committing felonies while serving in office and drawing a retirement check from the taxpayers.

I reintroduced the Trust Restored to the United States Taxpayer Act, which eliminates the taxpayer-funded portion of congressional pensions for Members who were convicted of a felony while serving. I applaud the 10 fellow Members of the House who cosponsored TRUST, and, in doing so, demonstrated they were willing to hold themselves accountable to their employers, the American taxpayers.

We are willing to hold ourselves to the same standards we hold those who serve in our military and elsewhere. If Members of Congress are serious about cleaning up Washington and are truly accountable for their actions then supporting this bill is common sense. If we break the law and break the trust of the people who have placed us in power as their representatives then we should be willing to forfeit the taxpayer-funded portion of our retirement.

We are not above the law. If anything, we should be held to a higher standard. I encourage my colleagues to support this.

``. . . to provide and maintain a navy;

``To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

``To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions; . . .''

Mr. Chairman, I stand here today with an urgent plea to my colleagues. We were elected by the good men and women of the United States who believe in our vision of America and who believe in our dedication to doing whatever it takes to ensure the American Dream is alive and achievable. It is for these reasons the REINS Act must pass.

Federal regulations imposed on American the job creators and households, an estimated $1.9 trillion burden in 2015.

Who pays that?

The American citizen does. It costs on an average, as Chairman Goodlatte brought up, $15,000 per U.S. household.

Could that money be better used to offset the cost of a college education or maybe the staggering cost of health care due to the Affordable Care Act?

Let me give you a real-life illustration from my district. A couple of years ago, a constituent, a dairy farmer, was targeted by an incredibly vague, broad, and costly EPA rule called WOTUS, Waters of the United States. The EPA sued and won this case not due to environmental damage, but due to the vagueness of this rule and the determination in court. It cost my constituent over $200,000 in fines and court costs for a natural depression in his pasture that the EPA determined could qualify as navigable waters.

The rule states that any water or any land that becomes seasonably wet is affected. I live in Florida. We get 54 inches of rain a year. That is my whole State of Florida.

This is downright outrageous. This is just one example of the many times the EPA has overstepped its authority by enforcing vague regulations unfairly on individuals. The REINS Act will prevent these costly job-killing regulations from going into effect and safeguard against Federal bureaucrats imposing the heaviest burdens on the American economy, and this will increase the livelihood of the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Chairman Royce and Ranking Member Engel.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the nation of Israel, one of our greatest allies in the Middle East.

I urge my colleagues to support H. Res. 11, Objecting to United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334.

U.N. Security Council Resolution 2334 calls for a Palestinian state but not a Jewish state. It does nothing to condemn or stop the Palestinian Authority's pay to slay, as we have heard talked over and over again, that rewarded over $300 million to terrorists in Israeli jails last year for crimes committed against Israeli citizens and others. It legitimizes additional efforts to isolate and sanction Israel. It declares the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem, where the City of David has been excavated, and the Western Wall, Judaism's holiest site, as occupied territories.

This is absurd. Furthermore, the Obama administration refused to veto it. This shameful move broke with years of bipartisan U.S. efforts to protect Israel from deeply flawed and biased U.S. resolutions.

H. Res. 11 reasserts the U.S. position that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can only be resolved through direct negotiations between the two parties. H. Res. 11 must pass to send a clear message to the outgoing Obama administration, to the U.N., and to the world that the United States stands with Israel.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the life and achievements of Leroy Baldwin. A true American original, Leroy Baldwin was born and raised in Ocala, Florida, on December 15, 1932. Not coming from a family with a rich ag background, Mr. Baldwin bought his first calf when he was 6 years of age from the money he earned delivering newspapers.

Mr. Baldwin served honorably in the U.S. Army from 1952 to 1955 during the Korean war. After the war, he pursued his lifelong project, the Baldwin Angus Ranch. Starting with 40 acres, the ranch now spans 620 acres and has taken the Florida Angus breed all over the world.

Mr. Baldwin thanked God each and every day for the blessings his family and business enjoyed.

God, family, and country are the words he lived by, words vitally important to our Nation today. We have lost a true giant.

Mr. Baldwin, may God bless you, your family, and thank you for what you have done for Florida and our Nation's agriculture.

I appreciate you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I stand in support of H.R. 596. The ACA was passed not in open, transparent government; it was passed with not one Republican's support behind it.

We hear on the other side how we are repealing it again. I think you ought to take heed to that notice that the American people sent the largest majority of Republicans back to Congress primarily to repeal this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I have seen my own story. My family's policy--my wife's, our kids', and mine--got canceled because of ObamaCare, and through the House exchange as a Member of Congress, my premium went up $870 extra a month. That is almost $11,000 extra it is costing me with decreased coverage and increased deductibility, and the price went up. It was a fabrication that the prices would go down.

If this is happening to me, it is happening to everybody around America, which leads to the quality of our lifestyle decreasing, and health care is not improving because the majority of the people getting care through this are on the Medicaid system.

If you look out at the outcome around the world, our Medicaid health system is at the bottom, and that is why we need to repeal this bill and replace it with reforms we have.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my distinguished colleague from the great State of South Dakota.

I rise in solidarity with the growing coalition that is united in the global fight against human trafficking. The numbers are overwhelming. We have all heard the estimates of over 22 million people being trafficked worldwide; sometimes, though, they seem far away. People often say: That kind of stuff doesn't happen here. It happens overseas. It doesn't happen right here.

No, Mr. Speaker, this is happening in our own backyards. There is an estimate of over 1 million teenagers running away every year in the United States. Runaways are most at risk and vulnerable to trafficking. In fact, runaways are typically picked up and pimped out or trafficked within the first 48 hours.

Just 5 days ago in my home State of Florida, a 15-year-old girl was discovered by police in a motel being sexually abused and trafficked several times a day. Her parents had been handing out missing child flyers in the neighborhood. Luckily, someone recognized her picture from an online ad and contacted authorities. That young girl went from being a runaway to a trafficking victim in less than a month.

That precious 15-year-old child could have been anybody's child. It could have been yours or mine. However, it is not just runaways that become victims of trafficking. Traffickers don't discriminate based on economic class, race, gender, or age. Traffickers are motivated by profit, solely profit.

The average cost of a slave worldwide is roughly $90. Human trafficking is a $30-plus billion industry, and it is the second largest source of revenue for terrorists around the world. As the world's fastest growing criminal enterprise, it is shocking how little people know about this horrendous practice. Furthermore, it is appalling how little is put forward in effort to stop it.

This week, the House of Representatives will pass a series of bills designed to streamline law enforcement resources, toughen penalties for offenders, and provide resources to victims. I commend the sponsors of these bills as well as all Members up here today who are willing to stand up and say enough

is enough. Human trafficking is not a Republican or Democrat issue. Taking a stand against trafficking is something we all must do, remembering that, while January is National Human Trafficking Awareness Month, we must all be vigilant and active in our fight.

No, Mr. Speaker, your neighborhood and my neighborhood are not immune. No city is exempt, and these victims are part of our daily lives, quietly suffering with almost nowhere to turn. We cannot in good conscience continue our daily routines without making every effort to stamp out the practice of forced labor, domestic servitude, and sex trafficking.

I encourage all Americans to go to the Department of Homeland Security's Web site and watch the Blue Campaign video to become familiar with the common signs of human trafficking. Let's all work to stomp out this scourge of activity on humanity.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my dear colleague, Mr. Smith, for holding this important pro-life Special Order that gives a life to the unborn.

I stand here today in defense of the thousands of unborn children whose lives were ended through no fault of their own. These children are precious gifts and cannot defend themselves. They do not have the luxury to debate whether or not society should recognize them as living beings.

As a Christian and the proud father also of three children, I strongly believe in the sanctity of life and that it begins at conception. My heart aches for the thousands of unborn children who will never have that chance to experience the wonder of life.

Life is truly a miracle granted through the grace of nature's God, and I am here today to say every life is a gift and every life does matter.

It has been 42 years since the Supreme Court made their ruling in Roe v. Wade. Since that ruling, an estimated--and I want to repeat this, an estimated--55 million lives have been lost. That is more than the total population of the northeast States. That is more than the population of the State of California.

Future generations will look back and judge us. They will judge us on our failure to protect the most innocent among us. They will judge us for allowing infanticide, human genocide of our next generation yet to come.

This week, the defenders of life in the thousands have and will come to Washington, D.C., to support the sanctity of life. This has grown into the largest pro-life event in the world. I want them to know we will keep fighting to defend the silent, unborn child.

How can we as a nation--how can we as a nation--have laws that protect the embryo of a sea turtle or bald eagle but yet refuse to protect the same of our own species? Shouldn't the lives of the unborn children matter as much as these in the eyes of the law?

These lives, these gifts, these human beings deserve to be protected and defended.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the work that you have done on this, and I appreciate the attention that this has brought.

Mr. Speaker, there is a lot of consternation about this bill. I stand here today, obviously, in support of my bill, H.R. 5759, the Preventing Executive Overreach on Immigration Act of 2014. It is a simple bill. It is four pages, but yet, it has caused a lot of debate.

It just simply states that the President, Mr. Obama, does not have the constitutional authority to grant amnesty by issuing work visas to 5 million people here illegally.

I have got a list of scholars too that back up the claim that this is unconstitutional.

This bill doesn't talk about deporting anybody, as you might hear later on today that it is going to deport 9 million people. It doesn't talk about that. It doesn't talk about granting amnesty. It just stops an unconstitutional action by our President, who has taken an oath to defend and protect the Constitution of the United States, just like the rest of us in this body have.

To vote ``no'' against this bill is to vote ``no'' against the Constitution.

Harry Reid has already said he will not bring up this bill for a vote. The President says he will veto this if it makes it to his desk.

My question is, to not bring up this bill, or to not sign it, is that not a vote against our Constitution?

It is important that we address the true debate here, and that is the separation of powers. This bill is not about border security, work visas, E-Verify, or immigration reform. This is about the administration overstepping its bounds and unilaterally challenging the laws of this great Nation of ours.

Article II, section 3 of our Constitution makes very clear that the duty of the President is to ``take care that the laws be faithfully executed.'' Despite this straightforward charge, the administration is refusing to enforce our existing immigration laws for millions of unlawful aliens.

Article I, section 8 of the Constitution clearly states, ``Only Congress has the power to write immigration laws.'' And our Founding Fathers established this separation of powers to prevent an overreaching executive.

Mr. Speaker, the Supreme Court found in Galvan v. Press ``that the formulation of policies pertaining to the entry of aliens and their right to remain here is entrusted exclusively to Congress, and it has become about as firmly embedded in the legislative and judicial tissues of our body politic as any aspect of our government.''

Preserving article I, the legislative powers, this is not a partisan issue. It is not Republican or Democrat. Allowing executive action like this to slide simply because we are frustrated with a system establishes a dangerous precedent that could be abused by Presidents of both parties for any area of law they disagree with.

I would like to point out to my colleagues on the other side that if we continue to surrender, from this body, our legislative powers to the executive branch, then we could easily be standing here in 2, 5, or 10 years discussing a Republican President who refuses to enforce the employer mandate of the Affordable Care Act or uphold portions of the Voting Rights Act, and it can go on and on, and it has opened up a dangerous precedent.

Just because one might agree with the outcome does not justify overlooking or violating the process to get to that outcome.

Congress has the constitutional powers to create and write laws, and the President has a duty to faithfully execute those laws, not to pick and choose, like he does or doesn't like them. And that is according, again, to article II, section 3.

I urge Members to support H.R. 5759, restore constitutional powers to Congress, and stand on the side of the Constitution to protect this great Nation of ours.

Mr. Speaker, today we commemorate the 227th birthday of the Constitutional Convention and the creation of America's most cherished document--our Constitution. Today is Constitution Day.

On September 17, 1787, our Founding Fathers, 39 brave Americans, created a document that to this day is the foundation of our country and is admired by people around the world.

The British statesman William Gladstone said of our Constitution:

The American Constitution is, so far as I can see, the most

wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain

and purpose of man.

I wholeheartedly agree with this statement. The Framers established a new form of government that for the first time respected the rights of the individual. No longer would a king or dictator rule over their citizens. The power of the government would derive from the consent of the governed.

Responsibility of good governance is not just placed on the political leaders but on the participation of those citizens who have voted for them. Benjamin Franklin, when asked outside of Independence Hall by a curious woman as to what sort of government was created:

A republic, ma'am, if you dare keep it.