Kelly Armstrong

Mr. ARMSTRONG

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Madam Speaker, I thank Congressman Johnson and Congressman Gianforte for their efforts to make our Federal Government more efficient and accountable with these commonsense reforms. The Republican Study Committee's GEAR Task Force report is a solutions-based plan to reduce the government's size and inefficiency. Anyone who has dealt with the Federal Government knows the frustration that the bureaucratic process can bring. Unnecessary government delays to infrastructure projects have a particularly damaging effect on economic growth and job creation. Madam Speaker, I thank the Republican Study Committee for including my bill, H.R. 3671, the Federal Permitting Reform and Jobs Act, in the report. This bipartisan bill will streamline and modernize the Federal infrastructure permitting process. The Federal Permitting Reform and Jobs Act will build on the reforms that were included in the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act of 2015, otherwise known as FAST-41. My bill would make permanent the FAST-41 provisions and enact additional reforms, such as a 2-year deadline for the permitting process. FAST-41 ensures coordination among several Federal agencies to streamline the permitting process for the largest infrastructure projects. The Federal Permitting Reform and Jobs Act would expand these types of projects that would qualify for this streamlined process: simply put, more projects completed in a shorter period of time at a reduced cost. This is a win for jobs; this is a win for infrastructure improvements; this is a win for reforming the Federal bureaucracy and providing Americans with a more efficient and effective government.

Mr. ARMSTRONG

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to congratulate the NDSU Bison football team for winning the FCS National Championship. On January 11, NDSU defeated James Madison University 28-20 in a thrilling game that came down to the final seconds. Bison quarterback Trey Lance racked up 166 yards on the ground during the game and finished the season with 28 touchdowns and zero interceptions. He is the first freshman ever to win the Walter Payton Player of the Year Award and the Jerry Rice National Freshman of the Year Award. Bison safety James Hendricks intercepted a pass on the goal line to ice the game and ensure another Bison National Championship. They finished the season 16-0, the first NCAA team to do so since Yale in 1884. During this unprecedented run, NDSU has won eight championships in 9 years and compiled a record of 128-8. They have lost only eight games in 9 years, and they have defeated five FBS schools along the way, two of which were ranked at the time they played NDSU. Congratulations to the players, coaches, and fans of the most dominant college football program in this country. And a special happy birthday to Bison fan Jessica Unruh.

Mr. ARMSTRONG

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I rise today in support of H.R. 4500, the Promoting United States Wireless Leadership Act. American companies have time and again proven themselves as global leaders in developing and deploying new technology. To ensure we maintain our competitive edge and advance future wireless capabilities, the government must work with the private sector to position the U.S. as a global leader in the development of 5G standards. H.R. 4500 fosters this relationship by encouraging companies and other stakeholders to participate in international standards-setting bodies while also offering technical assistance to participants. With China seeking to erode our technical advantage at every turn, it is more important than ever to promote American leadership and innovation in our telecommunications networks. I thank Mr. Walberg, Mrs. Dingell, and Mrs. Brooks for sponsoring this important legislation.

Mr. ARMSTRONG

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hurd).

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert).

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis).

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Baird).

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Kevin Hern).

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Madam Speaker, I would just point out that, to believe everything that was just said, you have to also believe that President Zelensky is a pathological liar. I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Duncan).

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. It is nice to see you here, Chairman Schiff. It would have been nice to have either you or the whistleblower present in either the Judiciary or the Oversight hearings. I think we are continuing to neglect the four key facts of this. The transcript is out. Everybody can read it. The American people can read it. There is no conditionality or aid discussed on that call. The two principals on that call, President Trump and President Zelensky, have said there was no pressure. President Zelensky has basically screamed from the rooftops on numerous occasions that there was no pressure, no bribery, no quid pro quo. The Ukrainian Government got the money and didn't know the aid was being paused, and no investigation was announced and a meeting with the President took place, and the aid was released.

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith), my friend.

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentleman.

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time remains on each side.

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the detail. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Johnson).

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Madam Speaker, I would like to point out very quickly that the only Republican witnesses allowed in the Intelligence Committee hearings were on the Democrats' preapproved list. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Rice).

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Madam Speaker, once President Trump was sworn in, Articles of Impeachment were introduced almost immediately. In 3 years, House Democrats have introduced 10 resolutions, getting support of over 100 of their Members, and all of that before the July 25 phone call. But also during that time, the Russia conspiracy hoax was exposed. Obstruction of justice charges were abandoned after the Mueller hearings fell flat. So, after 2 years, 19 lawyers, 40 agents, 2,800 subpoenas, 500 warrants, and 17 lies in a FISA warrant application, they had nothing to show for it. Undeterred by the facts and uninterested in governing, the beat marched on. So here we are today. We have no quid pro quo, no bribery, no extortion, no crimes alleged in the articles at all. But don't worry, because we have a brand-new, 632-page report alleging all kinds of things, some for the very first time. This isn't a somber, solemn process. This is a political drive-by. They just want President Trump gone. But this never-ending march toward overturning the 2016 election has consequences, because you are telling 63 million voters that you don't respect their vote. Voters in States like mine, who not that long ago used to send Democrats to this august Chamber but, recently, have found no home in the Democratic Party, feel that their values have been replaced by a liberal, elitist agenda and feel that partisan points are more important than practical solutions. Your never-ending impeachment quest is a constant reminder to them that you don't trust their judgment, you don't understand their way of life, and you couldn't care less about the issues that are important to them. As Chairman Nadler has so ominously stated, if you are serious about removing a President from office, what you are really doing is overturning the results of the last election. Well, they were serious. They spent the last 3 years talking about it, unwilling to accept the results of 2016. I wonder if my colleagues recognize the irony that their impeachment vendetta is the greatest election interference of all, and it was homegrown right here in the Halls of Congress.

Mr. ARMSTRONG

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3942, the Preventing Online Sales of E-Cigarettes to Children Act. This bill can be summarized in this way: If minors can't buy e- cigarettes in a store, they shouldn't be able to buy e-cigarettes online. Today, anyone who purchases alcohol or tobacco at a brick-and-mortar retail store is subject to age verification requirements. Online retailers of alcohol must also verify a purchaser's age to ensure the sales comply with State and Federal law. However, online retailers of e-cigarettes are exempted from verifying the age of their customers. When the PACT Act was passed in 2010, it did a great job of curbing youth smoking. Unfortunately, e-cigarettes were not in existence yet. This loophole exists at a time when youth vaping is at epidemic levels. Today, one in five high school students is using e-cigarettes. Kids can have e-cigarettes delivered right to their door without requiring an adult signature. Teen vaping rates have doubled since 2017, and over 3 million minors used e-cigarettes last year. The lack of age verification requirements is hurting kids. The Preventing Online Sales of E-Cigarettes to Children Act would require age verification upon delivery of online purchases of e- cigarettes and other vapor products. It closes the online delivery loophole and will prevent the underage purchase of e-cigarettes online. This bill has a broad coalition of support. I thank Representative Rosa DeLauro for her partnership on this legislation to protect the next generation, as well as House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Doug Collins. This bill also has bipartisan support in the Senate, with Senators Dianne Feinstein, John Cornyn, and Chris Van Hollen all on board. Patient advocacy organizations like the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network and the American Lung Association also support this legislation. Business and trade associations like the National Association of Convenience Stores, the Petroleum Marketer Association of America, and the Convenience Distribution Association all also support this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Speaker, I have a 12-year-old daughter; I have a 9-year-old son. There are schools across the country that are removing doors on bathroom stalls and banning hoodies. Teen vaping and youth vaping is a real issue. This bill is a small step forward to start canceling that. At its simplest, this bill works to modernize Federal law to treat e- cigarettes the same as any other nicotine product, and that is a good thing. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ARMSTRONG

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Madam Speaker, only in Congress can we fight about something that I think we all generally agree on. The bill the House is considering today will reauthorize the Debbie Smith grant program. I strongly support reauthorization. But this law has a 15-year history of nearly unanimous support in Congress under both Republican and Democratic majorities and Presidents, but more importantly, it has a 15-year history as a standalone bill. So my question is: What changed? When did it become so essential to become a part of VAWA? And if it is essential to be a part of VAWA, then why did we pull it out, and why are we voting on it again as a standalone bill? On May 16, the Senate continued the bipartisan tradition and they passed a standalone reauthorization. We sat on that bill for months in the House. House Republicans--I know; I was part of it. I was on the floor arguing for it before the last break, before the September 30 authorization lapsed. We tried twice to get it voted on. As stated by the founder of the Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network, the House is using the Debbie Smith Act as leverage to get the Senate to pass other things that have nothing to do with DNA testing. So, finally, today we brought the Debbie Smith Act to the floor, but even today, it is the wrong bill. The bill we are considering today has some serious flaws, but, more importantly, it is making changes to the Senate bill that nobody ever asked for. Just like the Senate, it extends the program to 2024. However, for some reason, we have inexplicably omitted accountability provisions that Congress has required for these grant programs for nearly a decade. These accountability measures are important. They include mandating a report on the effectiveness of the grant program to reduce the backlog of unanalyzed DNA evidence in sexual assault cases. They require recommendations to enhance the grant program, and they require the National Institute of Justice to define goals of the DNA Capacity Enhancement and Backlog Reduction program and develop performance measures for each one of these goals. All of these are worthy.

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Madam Speaker, I can't think of an issue where accountability matters more than when we are collecting DNA evidence to get convictions of violent sexual offenders and to give some semblance of justice. I am going to support the bill. I hope we get it back quickly. I hope we get to some resolution with the Senate. This needs to be done as quickly as possible.

Mr. ARMSTRONG

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Speaker, Savanna's Act, which we have talked about, is named in honor of Savanna LaFontaine-Greywind, a 22-year-old pregnant member of the Spirit Lake Tribe who was murdered in my home State of North Dakota in 2017. Her disappearance and suspected murder not only devastated the Spirit Lake Nation, but it also devastated the community of Fargo and was truly a horrible issue felt by every member of my State from one end to another. For 8 days, her family, friends, and the community searched for her, hoping that she would be found alive. As we all know, she was not. Thankfully, her baby was found alive after surviving the attack and literally being cut from the womb. Savanna's murder brought to light that data on missing and murdered indigenous people--women and girls in particular--is scattered around government agencies or it is completely nonexistent. Savanna's Act attempts to address this issue. It requires the Justice Department to develop protocols to address missing and murdered Native Americans, including information-sharing and training for law enforcement. We must do more to bring justice for victims and prevent these crimes from happening, and the reason is that the statistics are staggering. On some reservations, Indian women are murdered at a rate of more than 10 times the national average. Native Americans are two-and-a-half times as likely to experience violent crimes and two times more likely to experience sexual assault crimes. The number of unsolved crimes on Native Americans on reservations is significantly higher than even the most crime-ridden cities we have in the country. More than four in five Native American women, around 84 percent, will experience some form of violence in their lifetimes. The reasons and factors for this are varied. We deal with poverty, and we deal with rural communities, in general. We deal with jurisdictional fights between different organizations, addiction, and a history of racial abuse. None of these things matter to the people who are missing and to the family members and the Tribal members who are missing. In Savanna Greywind's case, the perpetrators were found, and justice was served, but that will never bring her back. I would be remiss if I didn't mention this. At the same time this was captivating the entire State of North Dakota, Olivia Lone Bear went missing from the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation in October 2017. Her body was found almost an entire year later in Lake Sakakawea on July 31, 2018. As of today, that case has not been resolved. Communication breakdowns from one end to the other have caused frustration. Her family members, the Tribal governments, and the State of North Dakota have no resolution to this case. I wish these were two isolated stories, but we all know they are not. When we are here and working toward things, I get it that we are in a polarized environment, and we deal with lots of different things, but this is absolutely the purview of Congress. This bill has had broad bipartisan and bicameral support, and there is really no excuse not to get Savanna's Act passed. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Washington for doing this today. I thank Congresswoman Torres and Senator Murkowski for authoring the bill. I thank Senator Cramer and Senator Hoeven. I say thank you to former Senator Heitkamp, who really did champion this issue during her time in the Senate. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to pass Savanna's Act. It is simple. Sometimes we can do the right thing.

Mr. ARMSTRONG

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Speaker, I understand how CRs work, but also the set-asides go away. We have a standalone bill from the Senate right now. We could put it on the Consent Calendar. Just to give a little history, the Debbie Smith Act originally passed in 2004, and in 2008, under Democrat control, the House passed the reauthorization under a suspension of the rules by voice vote. The Senate, which was under Republican control, passed the bill with an amendment by unanimous consent. The House subsequently passed the Senate amendment version, and it was signed into law by George W. Bush. In 2014 under Republican control, the House passed the bill under suspension by voice vote. The Democratic-controlled Senate passed it under unanimous consent. It was signed by President Barack Obama. So the question is: Why can't we take a standalone bill? Why, all of a sudden, in this Congress did it need to be part of a larger bill that turns into partisan gamesmanship and a fight between the two Chambers and the two parties? In 2017 there were approximately 136,000 rapes. Only four in ten rapes even go reported. That is actually an improvement. Not so many years ago it was only two in ten. Mr. Speaker, 90,671 of those rapes are unsolved. Many of them are never charged. Out of every 1,000 sexual assaults, 995 perpetrators will go unpunished. Just earlier this week I sat in the Rules Committee, and we argued on the repeal of forced arbitration. By the way, I agree with my Democratic colleagues. Sexual assault should never be forced into arbitration. But if we are going to make the argument of forced arbitration and deal with that in a civil proceeding or an employment proceeding or those types of issues, clearly, we can all agree that the single best way to put violent sexual predators behind bars in jail and in prison is with DNA testing. Mr. Speaker, I said it yesterday, and I will say it again: You have the best ability to convict criminals--the worst kind of criminals--and you have the ability to do it without revictimizing the victim through a criminal process, through a deposition, through a jury trial. Many of the reasons these crimes go unreported or unconvicted, particularly child victims of sexual abuse, are because of the trauma associated with a criminal proceeding. Do you know what happens in a criminal proceeding with DNA evidence? You get guilty pleas, because you can't beat the evidence. So conservative estimates say that the number of rape kits is around 170,000 which are untested. Every single one of those kits represents a human being, and it is somebody's mother, sister, daughter, or granddaughter. That person has gone through a horrible, terrible, and grotesque trauma, and they deserve justice. This is easy. This is easy to do. We could do it today. We could do it tomorrow before we go home. But here's the deal: it expires in 14 days, and while we are gone for 2 weeks in recess, 5,000 more rapes will be committed.

Mr. ARMSTRONG

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Speaker, I, like many people growing up thought murder was the worst crime you could have in this country. However, my career as a criminal defense attorney and as a legal guardian ad litem for victims of sexual assault has taught me that is not true. Violent sexual assault is the most terrible crime that can be committed, and, as opposed to other things, victims of that crime have to relive it when they are interviewed by law enforcement, they have to relive it when they are interviewed by doctors and nurses, they have to relive it when they are interviewed by prosecutors, and they oftentimes have to relive it as they navigate through the criminal justice system. We have all heard stories about light sentences in different areas, especially when it comes under these cases. One of the main reasons for that is because of the nature of the crime and the unwillingness of victims to continue to go through this process as they move through the courtroom. I have done this in a court of law. I have helped victims navigate this. The single biggest predicator for getting a conviction without a jury trial is DNA evidence. This puts really bad people in jail, it protects victims, it protects future victims, and, more importantly, it protects the very victims who are there from having to deal with this and navigate it. In 5 days this expires. The FBI has said that 475,000 matches have happened through this DNA testing; of that 42 percent of those are directly related to the Debbie Smith law. This should be the only thing we are talking about in this town, because I cannot imagine that we do not have broad, bipartisan agreement, and it should be the previous question on every single bill until we get it passed. I understand how we work, and I understand how things move around, but there is absolutely no reason this should be used as a bargaining chip for anything else. This is simple, this is commonsense, this is good law enforcement, and this protects victims of the most dangerous and despicable crime that can be committed on them.

Mr. ARMSTRONG

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