Robert Aderholt

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, it is no secret that it was 50 years ago this week that three brave Americans stepped foot on the Moon. When we look at our children's toys today, it is amazing that they contain more data processing power than the systems which actually operated the Apollo vehicles 50 years ago. These three American astronauts--Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, and Michael Collins--could not really know whether they would return. They were willing to serve their country and proud for America to be leading the world in space. But even if our space program got a strong jump-start, even because of the Cold War, this mission was also about the human spirit and the need to explore. The whole world was eager to hear news of the mission. No matter what may happen in the future, this would be the first time human beings would step foot on a world other than our own home. Neil Armstrong's description of that mission was a leap, and it is as fitting today as it is instructional now. I am excited, as many of my colleagues and many Americans are, about the President's call to accelerate our plans to land again on the Moon by 2024. I am very proud of the role that my home State of Alabama has played in the development of the most powerful rockets, the Saturn family. You can still see today, if you go down to Huntsville, Alabama, a real Saturn V rocket suspended horizontally at the U.S. Space & Rocket Center in Huntsville. Likewise, I am proud of the Marshall Space Flight Center, including the Michoud Assembly Facility, as the designer and the builder of the Space Launch System. This will be the most powerful rocket in the world and is approximately 90 percent finished. The American taxpayers own it, and they will benefit from it as a national asset. It is the successful combined work of product companies and suppliers from virtually every State in the Nation. The Saturn V rocket was able to execute the Apollo mission in one launch because of the rocket's third stage propelled lander and the reentry vehicle to the Moon's orbit. Similarly, the SLS exploration upper stage, referred to as the EUS, will enable a payload delivery to the Moon's orbit, including the Orion capsule, of 45 metric tons, three to four times greater than any other launch vehicle currently in use or close to completion. It can have that EUS capability ready by 2024, but we can only have that ready if we move ahead this year with that goal. Systems like the SLS and Orion inspire innovation, and maybe one day other rockets and capsules will surpass them. But to reach our goal by 2024, we need to stay focused and complete these nearly mature systems. Some have said in recent years about our going to the Moon: We have been there. We have done that. With all due respect, I would disagree. But this new mission to the Moon, I would say: Go there, but don't stop there. Sustainability offers many future benefits, but let's not get distracted for this first human return to the Moon. Let's reach the peak. Let's make that landing. And as we ponder the future of the Moon, let's look up again and set a date, a real mission date, for setting foot on Mars.

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of this amendment and actually thank the gentleman for bringing this amendment to the floor. As I had said yesterday, I certainly understand the concerns and the potential misuse of Census data, but by law the Census Bureau cannot and it will not disclose anyone's response or share data from which an individual can be identified with ICE or any other agency. Thankfully the law is already on the books. Census data sharing is a felony punishable by up to 5 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Census data is important, and it is confidential. Fortunately, the Census Bureau is deploying expert communicators and trusted messengers all across the United States to work in each community to motivate each and every person to respond to the Census, and it would also help to spread the word that a person's response that they are not a citizen of the United States does not provide the government with really any reliable information about whether they are lawfully present in the U.S. So, even if this information was sent to ICE, it would really have no use. It would be of no use to them. A successful 2020 Census will provide a full, accurate, secure account of every person living in the U.S. while gathering the data vital to both understanding our Nation's changing demographics and bolstering the enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. Therefore, I join my colleagues in opposing any funds that would be made available to violate the confidentiality laws governing our Census, and I thank the gentleman for raising this issue and certainly support a ``yes'' vote on this important amendment. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, a vote for this amendment is a vote to effectively decriminalize the action of crossing the border unlawfully. The passage of this amendment would directly undermine the sovereignty of the United States, and furthermore, if passed, the amendment would immediately be seized upon by every criminal human smuggling organization and used as a selling point to convince migrants to come to the United States in an unlawful manner. It would trigger a flood of illegal immigration unlike anything we have ever seen, which will cause most of the most vulnerable individuals to attempt to embark on a dangerous journey. Cartels and human smuggling organizations will profit. Our borders will be less secure. And the American people will pay the cost of open borders for years to come. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, although I do not oppose the amendment.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the gentleman's amendment. I have seen firsthand the positive impacts of NASA's Space Grant College and Fellowship Program in my home State of Alabama, and because of the good work that has come out of that, I urge adoption of the amendment, to further our students' STEM education opportunities. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, it should be noted here that the comprehensive opioid addiction grants in this bill have been increased by 360 percent since they were created in 2017. Of course, opioid abuse and addiction is a very big problem in this country, and, certainly, we need to work on that, so I do not oppose the gentlewoman's amendment. But please know, it should be noted that we have increased this by 360 percent, but we want to work with both sides to make sure that we have the appropriate funds necessary to make sure we fight this opioid addiction that has taken over so many parts of the country. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, the goal of the Department of Justice is to house inmates in the least restrictive environment that is possible and at the same time provide safety and security for the staff, for the inmate population, and to the public in general. Just as in the community, disruptive individuals occasionally need to be placed in a jail or a holding facility to maintain the safety of its residents. The Bureau of Prisons has to place disruptive inmates in restrictive housing in order to maintain safety and security for the overall well-being of all the inmates. The appropriate and reasonable use of restrictive housing is critical to the safety of the staff and to the Bureau's policies and procedures, and they try to strike an appropriate balance between the safety of those individuals who are on the staff there working at the Bureau of Prisons but also for the inmates themselves. Restrictive housing involves two inmates per cell, in the vast majority of cases, and the inmates have daily access to staff and to programming. It is only in very rare cases that inmates are in a single cell in restrictive housing--for example, an inmate who has killed a cellmate or an inmate who has made repetitive or credible threats to kill anyone who is housed with him. Every year, we mourn the loss of dedicated corrections professionals who lose their lives while they are working to ensure our Nation's inmates can no longer harm members of the community and harm each other. We must not attempt to substitute our judgment here on this House floor for that of the highly trained corrections professionals at the Bureau of Prisons and the United States Marshals Service. I think to do so would be a disservice and would make their jobs even more dangerous. Mr. Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, but I don't oppose the amendment.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, but I don't oppose the amendment. I think that this is a very important issue, and I think this needs to be dealt with. Increased funding to reduce the sexual assault kit backlog is very important, so we support the amendment. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment. This administration remains committed to providing more affordable healthcare options to all Americans, and debating the prospects of future judicial action will not help us, as a Congress, deliver on our promise to bring better healthcare to our constituents. The administration has promised to ensure that, regardless of the outcome, they will support the legislation to address any legal determination. In addition, let me say, it is not appropriate for Congress to tell the executive branch what positions it should take in court. Litigation strategy is the responsibility and the prerogative of the Department of Justice. As the Attorney General recently testified during one of our committee hearings here on Capitol Hill, he said that they should be able to advance what he believes are defensible and reasonable legal positions, and I believe that certainly to be the case. The Attorney General has concluded that the position of the States that challenge the ACA and the district courts is a defensible and reasonable legal position for the Department to take. Questions of constitutionality should be determined by the courts and not through a partisan debate on funding limitation to an appropriations bill. So, therefore, Mr. Chair, I would urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, I rise as the designee of the gentlewoman from Texas, and I move to strike the last word.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Spano).

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time. Amendments En Bloc No. 3 Offered by Mr. Bishop of Georgia

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I rise reluctantly in opposition to H.R. 3055, and but let me say that I appreciate the efforts of the majority in producing the fiscal year 2020 appropriations package that we will be considering today. As my colleague from New York referred to, this bill does address many priorities and concerns of Members on both sides of the aisle and, certainly, those of us from the Republican side of the aisle. Mr. Chair, we do appreciate that. I am pleased that the bill provides critical resources for our world- class space program. It funds NASA at levels necessary to work toward the completion of the Space Launch System and the Exploration Upper Stage, and it provides strong funding to continue developing deep-space exploration technologies. This bill also includes important funding for our Federal law enforcement components and valuable support for our law enforcement partners back home. These resources will help eliminate the sexual assault kit backlog. It will support drug courts and other vital initiatives to address the opioid crisis and help put an end to human trafficking. The Commerce, Justice, Science bill that is a part of this package is a testament to the commitment that Chairman Serrano made to work together. As he referred to earlier, we worked very closely together. While we may not have agreed on everything that is in this bill, there was a lot that we could agree on. Let me add that I also appreciate the majority's attention to rural development matters when crafting the Agriculture appropriations bill. I am particularly appreciative of the continued robust funding for the rural broadband program and for what now-Chairman Bishop and I worked on together to draft in the last Congress. Yet, the fact that there are programs in this bill deserving strong support does not negate the need for fiscal accountability. Unfortunately, the bills in this package have been written to an irresponsible top-line number. The Commerce, Justice, Science bill alone, for example, includes a $7.5 billion adjustment for the 2020 Census plus an additional $2.3 billion above the fiscal year 2019-enacted level. It is money that the Department of Commerce says it does not need. I stand willing to work with the majority in good faith because if we are to avoid more continuing resolutions or even a protracted government shutdown and sequestration, we need to come together in a bipartisan fashion, along with the administration, to agree on a realistic top-line funding level. Finally, I still have many unaddressed concerns with this bill. The bill lacks additional funding requested for NASA for the purpose of establishing a permanent U.S. space presence on and around the Moon within the next decade. The bill also contravenes existing law by funding lawyers for the individuals who are here on our southern border without documentation. Also, it prohibits the Justice Department from using performance metrics to measure immigration judge productivity. Let's be honest: An immigration court system with a docket approaching 900,000 cases and no appreciable case completion goal is a system devised for those who do not have a lawful right to remain in this country. In addition, the bill eliminates several longstanding Second Amendment protections that have enjoyed historical, bipartisan support throughout the years. The bill also prohibits the Census Bureau from including a question just merely on citizenship in the 2020 Census. In closing, again, I thank Chairwoman Lowey and Ranking Member Granger for their hard work and that of their staff. Certainly, I thank Chairman Serrano for his dedication and hard work on behalf of the appropriations process and the United States of America.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Chair, I rise in support of this amendment offered by the gentleman from Louisiana. NASA's plan for facilities to support our human exploration mission is not sufficient, because nothing is more important than keeping our American astronauts alive and safe on these exploration missions. We will continue to support robust funding for NASA exploration. The funding that is mentioned here, which is part of the SLS Orion and related ground system programs, is critical and supports multiple NASA facilities and personnel, and it even allows NASA engineers to assist commercial space companies with complex engineering challenges. I urge my colleagues' support of this amendment, Madam Chair, and NASA's exploration programs. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.