Earl Blumenauer

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, my vote on January 22 is the same as my vote the prior time: No. The situation is the same as it was then, except there is one week fewer to actually get something done. This legislation represents a fundamental failure on the part of Republicans to govern. This bill does next to nothing for Community Health Centers, the Children's Health Insurance Program, our veterans, our pension systems--some of which are in a state of crisis, and the victims of natural disasters. Hundreds of thousands of people in Puerto Rico remain without power. And, most glaringly, this bill does nothing to improve the situation of two-thirds of a million Dreamers, who deserve certainty and protection but whose lives Trump's reckless actions have turned upside down. The situation continues to be outrageous, and it doesn't have to be this way. The priorities I'm fighting for are broadly supported by the American public. We should be able to address them directly and quickly, but I fear that we will be in the exact same spot in three weeks.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, with the passing of our dear friend Roy Sampsel this past November, we lost a legend in Oregon tribal politics. His Celebration of Life was held in Portland Wednesday, January 24th. Roy understood that honoring and protecting tribal rights is a critical component of a just society. For tribes along the Columbia River and across the Pacific Northwest, Roy fought to ensure that tribal voices, values, and traditions were woven into the fabric of natural resource policy. He was a compassionate and dedicated advocate whose gift of leadership made him effective as a tireless protector of tribal resources. His lifetime of work with state and federal governments, the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Portland State University, and beyond pointed us all in the right direction, and continues to make a difference today. While he will be sorely missed, his legacy will live on through the works of the many he mentored.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I share the frustration of the American public who overwhelmingly support protecting young DREAMers, authorizing the Children's Health Program and the community health centers that serve them, and funding government long term, not week to week. Part of the solution is obvious: Donald Trump should not be in the negotiations, in part, because he doesn't understand the complexities. Indeed, it appears he doesn't even understand the basics. He frequently changes his mind, agreeing with what he last saw on FOX News or heard from the last person he talked to. The weekend news was filled with accounts of his confusion and how destructive his participation has been, acknowledged by Republicans and Democrats alike, even frustrating his own staff. Maybe it is time to just ignore Donald Trump and his tweets, send him lots of cheeseburgers, and keep this news off FOX. Without Trump's participation, we will reach a better solution, and we will do it faster.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, today is the first anniversary of complete Republican control of our government--the President, the Senate, the House. When they wanted to deliver their tax plan, the largest transfer of wealth to the richest Americans, they could move with lightning speed. Bipartisanship? Democrats were completely shut out. Although, to be fair, Republicans didn't even know what they were voting on. DREAMers weren't here illegally until Donald Trump ended the DACA program. If the Republicans had the courage to allow bipartisan legislation on the floor to fix this problem, it would pass overwhelmingly. The Republicans had known for months that the important and popular CHIP program would end this fall. If they would allow the reauthorization on the floor, it would pass with 400 votes and save us $6 billion over the next 10 years. Republicans should use their complete control of government to govern. And if they can't agree amongst themselves and want our help, then work with us, but don't hold the American public and their government hostage to your most extreme Members and their radical ideas.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, today friends, coworkers, and admirers of Jim Piro gathered to acknowledge his 37 years of service to Portland General Electric and to our community. For the last eight years Jim has been president and CEO of Oregon's largest public utility. In that role he has worked to help advance that utility's efforts to contribute to Oregon's clean energy standards. During his tenure, PGE worked to strengthen its portfolio of clean energy, and is scheduled to be coal free by 2035. By 2040, half of Oregon's electricity will come from renewables and PGE will play a significant role in that transition. Jim was one of the first business leaders to denounce the Trump Administration's decision to withdraw from the Paris climate accord, stressing the importance of national and international actions on climate, which are becoming more urgent over the last decade. He has provided business and civic leadership that has made a difference in the Portland community and beyond. We wish this proud Benson High School engineer well as he transitions into this next phase.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, here we are again, facing the possibility of a government shutdown. It is one of the most foolish acts possible. What we have seen in the past when this occurs where there are some people who decide they want to force the government to shut down. It only hurts our employees, and it hurts the public, having a denial of service in many instances. The employees are sent home. They are off the payroll temporarily. But what has always happened is that we always end up paying them because it is not their fault, and, as a result, the taxpayer loses twice. They lose the services, and they end up having to pay, essentially, public employees to take a forced vacation. Now, the current controversy is largely about the fate of almost 700,000 undocumented young people who were brought here as children. This shouldn't be a matter of major debate. We can take care of the immigration issues if we allow the process to work. Remember a couple years ago the Senate passed a bipartisan immigration reform bill--not perfect, maybe a C-plus on the scale, but it would have fixed the problem in the short and intermediate term. Unfortunately, the House leadership never allowed us to vote on it, probably because they knew it would pass. Now we are facing anxiety again. We have had people arguing about what vulgarity the President used or who is acting in good faith, but the fact is that we have a proposal from Senator Durbin and Senator Graham, a bipartisan proposal, that met the broad outlines that the President earlier talked about that looks as though it will pass the Senate, and we have a strong possibility of passing here in the House. Now, there is some controversy. People are suggesting Democrats want to shut the government down. Absolutely not. My Republican friends are in complete control of the House and the Senate and the White House, and they can, as they did recently with the short-term extension, pass it themselves. But if they want to work with us, they ought to include us in this effort. I would suggest that we stop governing behind closed doors and having the majority party cater to a small handful of people who are making demands that would not be acceptable to the broad House and probably aren't even acceptable to most Republicans. Let's bring the best approaches forward. It is pretty simple. Allow the House to vote on the Graham-Durbin proposal. I understand there is one from our friend Mr. Goodlatte, Congressman McCaul. Bring them forward. There are legislative processes--queen of the Hill, king of the Hill--where you can have multiple votes on issues that are related, and at the end there is one that is left standing that represents the majority. I would suggest that there is no reason to play games with the integrity of government services, play games with our employees, and play games with providing key services to the public; and, most importantly, stop using almost 700,000 young people and millions of their family members, their employers, and their fellow workers as pawns. Let's bring the proposals forward, allow an up-or-down vote, and resolve this rather than threaten the possibility of wasting money, wasting services, and further frustrating the American public. They deserve better. This is a simple resolution that was in our capacity this week.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, Congress has sometimes made the difficult job of the intelligence community harder by not providing adequate controls and oversight. We have created a vast Department of Homeland Security, a vast security sprawling intelligence network that results in the collection of data that my friend, Mr. Poe, talked about. Yes, warrants can sometimes be inconvenient, but we have judged it as a small price to pay to protect Americans from government overreach. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support this amendment.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, one of the phrases one often hears is, ``I hate to say I told you so.'' And it is delivered with a feigned sincerity, but usually people actually like to say, ``I told you so.'' I must confess that I have some of those feelings myself, as repeatedly during the few hours the Ways and Means Committee met, rushing through the massive tax cut, the largest transfer of wealth in our Nation's history, which will be paid for on the backs of our children and grandchildren with increased debt and benefiting people who in the main don't need it--I said at the time that each week after this bill passed, if it did, we would have a series of embarrassing stories about mistakes and oversight and special interest provisions that were stuck into it. Well, actually, the fact is that that was somewhat understated because we are seeing, literally, every day people understand what was tucked in the bill: mistakes, oversight, and special interest provisions. For example, there is a provision in the bill that was, we were told, designed to help small craft brewers. That is important to me and the people I represent, and there is broad support for minor provisions that would be able to help them by reducing their tax liability. But the provision that ended up in the final bill has massive opportunities to benefit large producers--a little bit for small craft brewers, but for large, international distillers, an opportunity to reconfigure how they do business to take advantage of multiple opportunities for that tax break. There was an article yesterday talking about how the tax rate for American companies that manufacture overseas, the tax on that activity will be half as much as if they were manufacturing in the United States, providing an incentive to offshore jobs at a time when most of us would like to make sure that it is, here at home, at least, a level playing field, not to disadvantage people manufacturing here at home. And, of course, there is another story in today's Wall Street Journal, ``Tax Law's Effect Fuels Farm Outcry,'' because there was a provision inserted in the bill that would give farmers a more lucrative deduction when they sell agricultural products directly to farm cooperatives. There is a story about one gentleman in there who felt that this could put him out of business. It is going to sting large agribusinesses like Cargill and Archer Daniels Midland. The new provision could reshape parts of the agriculture economy and sharply reduce many farmers' taxes as well as scrambling these individual businesses. John Power, a North Dakota accountant who was the accountant for the small grain operator who is going to be hammered, said: ``It is kind of hard to imagine they intended to make farming tax free. Fixing it becomes difficult because they don't think it's something that can be fixed with regulation.'' There are a variety of these provisions that are a result of not following what we call ``regular order,'' without having hearings on the provision, of allowing lobbyists and staff to be able to draft the bill on the fly without having members of the committee--not just Democrats, but Republicans--fully know what was in it. That is legislative malpractice. It is one of the reasons why, despite giving over $3 trillion of tax cuts, the bill remains unpopular. Americans are nervous about increasing our national debt over $2 trillion, and they know that the benefits for average citizens are going to go away in a few years and some are actually going to see tax increases, but the benefits for the top 1 percent and the largest corporations are permanent. People know that it is not fair, that it is unnecessary, and that it is going to have more and more problems here, not just in States like mine where citizens are no longer going to be able to fully deduct their State and local taxes, property taxes, resulting in significant inequity, in scrambling property values, not just in Oregon, but it is across the country where people are going to be facing these problems.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, Friday, the Trump administration declared war on State legalization of marijuana as they come out on the wrong side of history and the American public. The Obama administration recognized that the vast voter-driven movement to legalize marijuana at the State level was something that couldn't be stopped and, in fact, that the Federal Government shouldn't interfere. Their Justice Department issued guidance, known as the Cole amendment, that, as long as these voter-approved State legalization efforts were enforced rigorously and thoughtfully, the Federal Government wouldn't interfere with what the voters wanted. Friday, Sessions and the Trump administration overruled that guidance and declared open war on the part of 93 U.S. attorneys to feel free to interfere with what local voters have decided. This is strongly opposed by the American public. Over 60 percent in poll after poll show that Americans favor legalization of marijuana. When it deals with medical marijuana, that percentage is over 90 percent. We have seen State after State, approve medical marijuana including Florida, with a 71 percent ``yes'' vote in November of 2016. If the question is, regardless of how you feel about marijuana, should the Federal Government interfere with what the voters have decided, three out of four voters say the Federal Government should keep their hands off it. Luckily, at least as far as medical marijuana is concerned, they are protected from interference by the Justice Department because of the amendment that I have authored with my friend Dana Rohrabacher. It is in the continuing resolution. It needs to be in any long-term funding bill. In fact, we should embrace an amendment by our colleague Tom McClintock from California, that would expand those protections to any State legal marijuana activity. The Justice Department is not just on the wrong side of history and the American public, they are missing a chance to cure the damage caused by selective and cruel enforcement of marijuana laws. We are still arresting tens of thousands--mostly young men of color, especially African-American men--for something the majority of Americans now think should be legal. We miss a chance to win the war against opioid death and addiction. In States that have medical marijuana--surprise--there are fewer pills prescribed. The longer the States have had medical marijuana, the lower the overdose deaths. In California, which has had medical marijuana the longest, there are a third fewer opioid deaths. We are missing an opportunity to build on that. We are missing the opportunity to increase the hundreds of millions of dollars that are now going to the State tax coffers to deal with education and addiction and law enforcement through State legal efforts and away from the drug cartels and the black market. Indeed, if we clean up this mess, we will have billions of dollars to devote to public purposes and further undermine the strength of drug cartels that use the black market to fund their efforts. It is past time that Congress steps up and fixes this mess. The good news is this reckless action by the Trump administration and Jeff Sessions will accelerate the time that we support what State and local governments should do: rationalize our cannabis policy and stop this ineffective, failed prohibition.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, today I'd like to highlight the achievement of a group of young people in Northeast Portland. In 2014, fourteen 6th grade girls at Beverly Cleary School formed the Grant Park chapter of Jane Goodall's ``Roots and Shoots'' youth service organization. Their goal was to raise funds for orphaned chimpanzees at Goodall's Tchimpounga Rehabilitation Center in Africa. The girls' idea was to produce a vegetarian cookbook with sales benefiting the chimpanzee sanctuary. They wrote letters to chefs across the country asking for recipes and then spent most Friday evenings together cooking the food and taking notes. They also created artwork and bios for the chefs to go along with each recipe. Three years later, these young women are in 9th grade and the cookbook, called ``Saving Pan,'' is done. A first printing of 400 copies of Saving Pan was sold out in a week and raised $4,000 for the Sanctuary. For meeting their goals and making a difference, congratulations to Brooke Abbruzzese, Talia Baskin, Lily Buckenmeyer, Martha Bulkeley, McKenzie Caldicott, Ruby Cooper-Karl, Emma Francioch, Willa Gagnon, Maeve Larco, Matisse Nash, Maya Rashid, Charlotte Stoeger, Hanna Stokes and McKenzie Tell.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, it has come to this: Republicans are poised to pass the largest transfer of wealth in our Nation's history, financed by mortgaging our children's future with a mountain of increased debt. What is wrong with this picture? Well, first of all, nobody really knows everything that is in this bill. It has been written over the last few days to satisfy donors and win the final few votes necessary for Senate passage. It is not tax reform. It is not even a policy, but a collection of special interest provisions being sold on a false set of promises. It is, decidedly, not middle class tax relief. It is permanent, massive tax reductions for the largest corporations and wealthy individuals. Every independent expert agrees and the American public understand that the benefits of this bill flow not primarily to the middle class, but to people like Donald Trump. The vast majority of Americans get little and temporary tax reduction, only to see the bottom 80 percent of our taxpayers, on average, actually facing a tax increase when the bill is fully phased in. The permanent, massive tax reduction for the privileged few comes at a very high cost for the rest of America. Despite false promises, it will not remotely pay for itself through economic growth. We start with a massive increase in national debt; increased interest costs; a total increase of $2.3 trillion, and likely very higher as the accountants and lawyers discover how to fully exploit the many new loopholes created by lobbyists. This bill is not tax simplification. It greatly complicates the Tax Code. Look at trying to understand just the passthrough provisions. Also, we have an IRS that is struggling right now because my Republican friends have cut its budget 17 percent since 2010. They have 23,000 fewer employees, an outmoded data processing system, and more taxpayers--10 million more returns. It is not clear the IRS can even administer this bill. Middle America will pay with increased economic insecurity, as it will increase insurance premiums an average of 10 percent a year. It will destabilize the health insurance market and increase the ranks of the uninsured by 13 million people over the next 10 years. Most Americans will pay the price with the massive increase in debt, making it harder for everyone who wants to borrow money to start a business, finance a college education, or buy a home. It increases the likelihood of sending even more American money overseas to pay for the foreign holders of American debt that has increased. It does not address the problem of offshoring our economic activities and the resulting revenue loss. It provides more incentives for this to continue and even get worse. The increased debt will make it even harder to rebuild and renew America and to meet the needs of our aging and growing population. After the wreckage of the Amtrak train in the Pacific Northwest, Trump pointed out the need for infrastructure investment to rebuild and renew the country. That is not going to happen. It is already triggering an automatic $25 billion cut in Medicare. Republicans are scrambling to figure out how to avoid that. We are hearing from Republican leadership that this increased debt illustrates the need to cut back on programs that meet the needs of average Americans and low-income citizens while we are showering increased tax benefits on the wealthy. It has been a bonanza for all the attorneys, accountants, and lobbyists finding ways to further enrich the most privileged. In the weeks to come, we will find out more special gifts used to nail down the last few votes. I don't know whether the Corker kickback is true or not, but it leaves the public wondering why the immediate about-face from the Senator from Tennessee when nothing has changed except there have been a few provisions added. No wonder the American public is opposed. They are right, and the Republicans are wrong.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, this bill will be the largest transfer of wealth in our Nation's history, financed by mortgaging our children's future with a mountain of increased debt. It is not really even a policy. It is, rather, a collection of special interest provisions being sold on a false set of promises. It is not middle class tax relief. It is, instead, permanent and massive tax reduction for the largest corporations and wealthy individuals like Donald Trump. Eighty-three percent will flow to the top 1 percent. Everybody else will receive only a small, and temporary, tax reduction. Ultimately, 86 million Americans, middle class Americans, will have their taxes increased. This legislation fails utterly to invest in the American people for this $2.3 trillion. But it is a bonanza for the attorneys, the accountants, and the lobbyists finding ways to further enrich the most privileged in America. And, for weeks to come, we are going to learn more about the special gifts hidden within this bill to nail down the last few votes. No wonder the American public is opposed. They are right, and the Republicans are wrong.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, had I been present for the vote today on the Democratic Motion to Recommit H.R. 2396 (Roll Call No. 681), I would have voted aye. The motion would require financial institutions found to have engaged in deceptive or fraudulent practices to continue to annually report their policies and practices regarding the disclosure of nonpublic, personal information. Additionally, had I been present for the vote on H.R. 2396 (Roll Call No. 682), I would have voted no. This bill would ease the annual privacy notice requirements for financial institutions that share consumers' non-public personal information with nonaffiliated third party companies, weakening important consumer protections. I'm deeply frustrated that the House has, yet again, decided to take up a measure intended to violate U.S. obligations under the Iran nuclear agreement. Though the nuclear agreement explicitly commits the United States to resuming the licensing of new commercial aircraft sales to Iran for civilian use, H.R. 4324 would impose additional certification requirements on the Treasury Department in order to carry out these current obligations. Given Trump's clear disdain for having to take affirmative action to keep the agreement intact, this attempt by Congressional Republicans to force his administration to act further on the sale of commercial aircraft is shameful. Thus, had I been present for the vote on the Motion to Recommit H.R. 4324 (Roll Call No. 683), I would have voted aye. Had I been present for the vote on final passage of H.R. 4324 (Roll Call No. 684), I would have voted no.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlewoman's courtesy, and I appreciate her advocacy on this. This is serious business. There are people--no secret--in the administration and there are people in Congress who would like to undermine this agreement. The mixed signals that have been sent by the administration are truly disturbing. One has to wonder what North Korea is thinking about, that there are people who suggest that we ought to go ahead and blow it up when, in fact, they are abiding by the terms of the agreement, and officials in the administration agree with this. What sort of deterrent is that to North Korea in terms of its reckless action with nuclear weapons? It seems to reinforce that behavior. But there are also elements in Iran, hardliners who didn't agree with this agreement, who felt that it was too evenhanded, who felt that the leadership gave up too much, and who don't want closer relationships with the United States or the other Western powers that worked with us--including China and Russia--to enact this historic agreement, which, as I pointed out, was agreed to even by officials in the Trump administration that Iran has abided by. Are they a nation of bad actors? Absolutely. There are forces within the government that are very destructive. But the point is we focused on something that all of us agree is absolutely critical, and that is not having Iran rushing forward to become another nuclear state. We have seen that the breakout time under this agreement has lengthened. It is acting as we intended. It was also one of those rare areas where we actually had Germany, Great Britain, France, Russia, and China working with us to negotiate an agreement. Now, this is going to be perceived as an effort by the United States to undermine the agreement. Should we give them and the hardliners in Iran an excuse to walk away because we violated it? What is going to be the assessment of our allies who are deeply committed to this and have resisted efforts to unravel it? We need all the help we can get in the international arena. We have watched this administration systematically isolate us, this last week with the reckless decision to go ahead and relocate the Embassy--or at least claim we are going to relocate the Embassy--condemned by virtually everybody else in the world. We are standing alone with an action to destabilize a very volatile situation. This comes forward at a time when Iran is abiding by it, to go ahead and crank up the report on the assets of a variety of Iran's senior political, religious, and military leaders, including people who aren't subject to the sanctions. It is placing, it has been mentioned, strain on the Department that has finite resources--it needs to focus on things--taking away resources from efforts to target on actual sanctionability. It seems to be decidedly wrongheaded. It is interesting that Congress had until this week to reimpose the sanction lifted under the agreement per Trump's decertification in October. Congress chose not to. I think that was a wise decision. To me, it indicates, at least, that the agreement has been largely successful. But, if we are going to jeopardize the framework, giving the hardline elements an opportunity to claim that we are repudiating, while giving a green light to some of the folks there who have no intention of being able to work on a cooperative basis, we ought not to fan the flames. We ought to be trying to nurture opportunities for cooperation. We should focus on areas where they are doing things we don't agree with. If you want to target some specific sanctions that we somehow haven't imposed that are within the purview of the framework and wouldn't violate it, go ahead. But having these actions, I think, sends the wrong signal. It is the wrong resource. Mr. Chairman, I think it is important to reject this legislation.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, by now, enough of the harsh reality of the Republican tax plan has been discovered by Americans. That is why most are opposed. They oppose a huge transfer of wealth to those who don't need it from the majority of middle class Americans who do need help. They are against giving hundreds of billions of dollars to the largest corporations and the richest Americans with increased borrowing on our children and grandchildren. Their proposal would cost about $2.3 trillion in increased debt and interest. They are raising taxes on almost 9 million middle-income people with very high medical bills. The Alzheimer's tax is a bad idea and people hate it. People noticed that the huge permanent tax breaks for businesses and the wealthy--they have got theirs--but the tax relief for middle-income Americans is temporary and will disappear over time. By 2023, the average American who makes $30,000 a year or less will see a tax increase. By 2027, all tax brackets under $75,000 are going to see a tax increase. Because the Republicans will change the way that tax brackets are adjusted for inflation, we are going to see people pulled up into ever higher tax rates--a stealth tax increase. For middle class Americans, their tax relief is a political football while the rich and the powerful are protected. Of course, there are other strange things that are going to come out on an ongoing basis because of the crazy way this has been put together, and it is still being massaged behind the scenes. For example, we found just last weekend that some professionals who make between $500,000 and $650,000 a year are going to pay a marginal tax rate of over 100 percent. For that extra $100 they make, they are going to pay $107 in taxes. Absolutely insane. People are noticing that this proposal is triggering spending cuts for Medicare--$25 billion scheduled for next year--and Medicaid cuts for the elderly and disabled are on the horizon. There are more reasons to oppose this proposal than I have time to list here this morning, but perhaps the most fundamental flaw has not been given nearly enough attention. The Republicans would change taxation based on how you make your money, not how much you make. The very highest taxes will be on the way that 80 percent of Americans make their income. W-2 salary and wages are going to pay the highest rate. It is going to be collected on each paycheck and very hard to cut corners. This is going to open a whole new industry when people find that a CPA who works for a corporation making exactly the same money as somebody who is an independent professional doing exactly the same job but pays far more in taxes, people are going to cash in on a whole new industry in terms of how people can change how their income is characterized. There will be a professional corporation, a passthrough business, a proprietor, partnerships, and closely held corporations. They will all be treated differently based on ownership, the day-to-day level of involvement, and the organizational structure. In short, all the people who employ lobbyists are going to be able to find a way to pay a lower tax rate than people who just get a paycheck for salary and wages. Since when does reform of the tax system take this perverted form? In fact, those people who are going to be changing the form to those other structures will be able to deduct, as corporations will, their State and local property taxes, but individuals will not. It is unfair and it is unwise. This massive transfer of wealth to the people who need it the least, financed by our children and grandchildren with higher debt, and creating a different class of taxpayer based not on how much you make but how clever you are to be able to utilize differences that are created by the army of lobbyists who are at work here on Capitol Hill. It should be rejected.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, as I listened to the House Democratic whip lay out the case for the American public, I was struck by how stark the choices are and how much we are looking at failure at home and abroad. We are watching the reckless action of Trump with his declaration that we are going to move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, further isolating America. We are alone in this instance. People who are in the Arab world, European allies, are deeply concerned that this will have a destabilizing effect. We are watching the countdown here as we are kind of scrambling to keep government open, when, for heaven's sake, these have been clear for months. Republicans occupy all the levels of power. Why can't they simply act to be able to send clear signals so the appropriators can work and government operates. We have watched the expiration of the Children's Health Insurance Program, wildly popular with people across the political spectrum to be able to have this significant enhancement of health for children in this country, even more important because of the Republicans' relentless assault on the Affordable Care Act and destabilizing insurance markets. Yet State after State, including my home State of Oregon, is facing the difficult task of sending out notices to families that they are no longer going to have access to this critical healthcare. In the backdrop of all of this, we are watching a Republican tax program which would be the largest transfer of wealth in our Nation's history paid for by mortgaging the future of our children and grandchildren a trillion and a half extra debt. When you put in the fact that we will have to pay interest on that, $2.3 trillion to be able to give some of the largest corporations and the wealthiest Americans even more tax benefit, and we are neglecting fundamental responsibilities. $2.3 trillion tax benefits for some who don't need it, and we still don't have an infrastructure plan, which the President promised a trillion dollars of infrastructure spending to rebuild and renew America. Well, I will tell you, there would be bipartisan support for any reasonable plan going forward. In fact, we have people in the American transportation industry who are saying: Raise our taxes. The fuel tax has been raised in over half the States, including a number of red Republican States. There is a deal to be had when AAA and the American Trucking Associations say: Let's provide the leadership, make the investment, put hundreds of thousands of Americans to work in ways that will enhance the environment, improve the economy, and give people a sense of pride that we can actually come together and get something done. It is waiting there. Yet we are spending $2.3 trillion to largely benefit the top 1 percent and the largest corporations, and we are ignoring needs like that. The Treasury, we are told, has been doing studies that will prove that this will just pay for itself, and the Secretary of the Treasury has been asked: Show us the studies. What is the research? Where do you pick this number out of the air that is rejected by virtually every independent economist as well as past experience? We see nothing. The tax bill is constantly in flux. That is one of the prices that we pay, because they never followed regular order, they didn't attempt to work on a bipartisan basis. There were no hearings held on this bill. As a member of the Ways and Means Committee, I was shocked. This bill changed sometimes hour by hour. They still don't know what they have passed. They are talking about changing corporate tax rates, they are talking about dealing with some of the deductions that have been taken away, like for State and local taxes. It is in a state of flux. What we do know is what was passed in the House is wildly unpopular. How do you take a tax cut that is unpopular by 75 percent of the population? It is because people are starting to look at it, and the closer they look, the more they are going to find it distasteful. I am hopeful that we will be able someday to come to our senses, work together on things that will actually make a difference for the American public rather than make things worse.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, why should the United States of America be the only rich country in the world that cannot protect our families from gun violence? It doesn't have to be this way. In fact, there are a number of States that have enacted gun safety protections. And in those States that have done so, there are fewer gun deaths and there are fewer gun injuries. My State of Oregon is one of those that has enacted them, in part, because of votes of the people, not politicians. This proposal would strip away protections of Oregonians because there are 12 States that, basically, if you are 21 and have a pulse, you can carry a firearm. Others have much less-restrictive proposals. This eliminates the ability of States to protect its own citizens. It is shameful. It is wrong. Someday, Congress will come to its senses and enact reasonable gun safety legislation for the country. But until we do, for heaven's sake, don't punish States that have accepted their responsibility to protect their families.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, it is sad to watch the Trump administration leading America in retreat, withdrawing positions of international leadership, hollowing out the State Department, crippling us for years to come. Last night, there was an example of that retreat right here on the floor of the House as our Republican friends were unable to address their plan for raising taxes for Americans in every State by restricting their ability to deduct State and local taxes. Why force millions of Americans to pay taxes on taxes? Why, Mr. Speaker, is there a proposal to destabilize insurance rates across America, leading to 10 percent premium increases year after year, and to have up to 13 million additional uninsured Americans over the course of the next 10 years? They have no answer as to why to mortgage our children's future for greater benefits for the richest and most privileged Americans. When corporations are recording record-high profits and have trillions of dollars of profits overseas, why are we borrowing to provide more benefits to the largest corporations and wealthiest people while we are ignoring the people who visit our offices every day seeking not a sympathetic ear, but action, for example, action on the opioid crisis and the epidemic of opioid deaths claiming 64,000 Americans last year? Our former colleague, Patrick Kennedy, whose advocacy is informed by his own struggle to overcome opioid addiction, will testify today in the other body that we could easily productively spend up to $200 billion more dealing with the crisis, helping people with recovery. The Senate is proposing to increase one ten-thousandth of that amount--not $200 billion, but $20 million--to deal with this crisis because we don't have the money, yet we are borrowing $1.5 trillion to give additional tax benefits to those who need them the least. We are not being able to adequately help our veterans, whose needs are clear to anybody who visits the Veterans Administration hospital in their State, or provide investments in roads and bridges and transit or in water and sewer that would strengthen every community, make it safer and business more competitive. Good policy and effective investment is possible if we are not mortgaging our children's future, borrowing vast sums of money to lavish more tax reductions on people who don't need it, while ignoring the needs of people who do, who visit offices every day here on Capitol Hill. America does not have to be in retreat, claiming poverty, that we are helpless to meet the needs of the American people, if Congress finds the courage and the will to do its job.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I listen to my friend from Arizona, and I wonder what planet he is on. He is concerned about his little 2-year- old, yet they finance the largest transfer of wealth in our Nation's history by adding more debt on the backs of his children, our grandchildren, and generations to come. They want the public to have more of their money, yet they are not supporting our motion to instruct that would stop this notion that we are going to jack up premium prices 10 percent a year by destabilizing the insurance markets, the notion of these ugly surprises that the lobbyists have snuck in, and we will find out about them every single week going forward. Reject this misguided approach. Let's work together. Rebuild and renew America? The States can raise a gas tax. We refuse to acknowledge a straightforward proposition to do that here. Let's reject this atrocity.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, Congress will once again take up the Farm Bill--a massive piece of legislation governing U.S. agricultural policies that is debated every five years. The Farm Bill affects everything from human health to the environment, from our national debt to the price of a gallon of milk. I've long argued that it is one of the most important bills that Congress regularly considers. Time and time again, I've watched big agriculture businesses dominate Farm Bill negotiations, with the voices of those. who care about small and mid-sized farmers, conservation, research, and healthy food drowned out. Frustrated by the process, I've spent the past two years asking Oregon's farmers and ranchers, people in health care, nutrition, conservation, food processing and distribution, local government, and education, what they think the Farm Bill should look like. There is clear consensus that Congress really can do better when it comes to our nation's food policy, but that will require a stronger, more unified approach. Today, I am introducing an alternative Farm Bill, the Food and Farm Act. My bill follows four key principles to reforming our nation's food policies--focusing resources on those who need it most, fostering innovation, encouraging investments in people and the planet, and ensuring access to healthy foods. The legislation gets rid of certain expensive and inefficient subsidy programs so they can't be abused by wealthy agribusinesses. It also doubles funding to support environmental protection, invests in helping new and socially disadvantaged farmers, and ensures animals are more humanely treated. I'm looking forward to continuing the conversation in the coming months to make sure that Congress sets a food and farm policy that works for everyone.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from 17 environmental organizations opposing this legislation. November 8, 2017. Dear Representative, on behalf of our millions of members and activists, we write to urge you to oppose the Republican leadership's tax legislation, the misnamed Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (H.R. 1). This plan would lavish huge and permanent tax cuts to the richest 1% and corporate polluters that are destined to be paid for by the health and environmental well- being of communities across the country. The bill's debt- busting tax cuts for the wealthiest are sure to mean deep cuts to federal and state programs and safeguards that protect our air, water, lands, and wildlife that benefit people across this country every day. The plan puts at risk our clean energy future by preserving tax breaks for dirty energy sources while slashing them for cleaner forms of energy. And if the tax plan itself weren't harmful enough, it is also being packaged in the Senate with unrelated, controversial legislation that hands over the pristine and sacred Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to exploitation by Big Oil. This plan steers most of its tax breaks to the wealthiest people in this country and corporations and adds at least $1.5 trillion to the deficit. Americans across the country will suffer because those tax cuts are likely to be paid for by slashing services and safeguards that our government provides, from healthcare to education to environmental protection. The health of communities across the nation will suffer if the Environmental Protection Agency is further hampered in its mission to protect public health and hold polluters accountable for violating laws like the Clean Air Act and Safe Drinking Water Act. The people who work in and benefit from America's thriving outdoor recreational economy will take a hit if the national parks and other lands stewarded by the Department of the Interior are forced to suffer further cuts because of this reckless tax plan. This tax plan also steers our nation's energy policy in the wrong direction by leaving in place the vast majority of existing tax preferences for polluting industries like oil, gas, coal and nuclear and reducing, phasing-out, and eliminating incentives for cleaner sources of energy. Permanent tax breaks for fossil fuels dwarf those for renewables by a margin of 7:1, yet this bill would suddenly eliminate the tax credit for purchasing an electric vehicle, disrupt the wind industry by reducing the credit for future projects by a third and placing into jeopardy the eligibility of existing projects, and eliminate the commercial solar investment credit. While some clean energy technology credits are reintroduced, they, too, are set to phase out. Meanwhile, oil companies will receive a new billion dollar hand out while only the smallest of existing preferences for fossil fuels are eliminated--leaving more than $14 billion in permanent annual federal subsidies untouched. Despite rhetoric from GOP leaders that the tax code shouldn't pick winners and losers, this bill very clearly picks polluting energy sectors as winners yet again, putting at risk the impressive growth of clean energy and robbing us and our children of a cleaner future. The GOP leadership's plan is to package this tax legislation in the Senate with unrelated, controversial legislation that would open up the iconic Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling. This legislation would irreversibly damage one of America's greatest wild places and is only being included in a desperate attempt to secure enough votes in the Senate for tax cuts for corporations and the wealthiest Americans. The Arctic Refuge's spectacular landscape of rugged mountains, boreal forests, and wild rivers supports more than 250 species including polar and brown bears, musk oxen, and birds that migrate from all 50 states and 6 continents each year. The indigenous Gwich'in people call the refuge's coastal plain ``The Sacred Place Where Life Begins,'' an area that serves as the calving grounds for the Porcupine Caribou Herd which they rely on as a primary source of food, and for cultural and spiritual needs. This provision is being included in an attempt to generate $1 billion in government revenue to pay for the package's tax cuts for the wealthy, but multiple analyses show that it is unlikely to raise anywhere close to that amount. In short, including drilling in the Arctic Refuge in the tax legislation is both environmentally and fiscally irresponsible. For these reasons, we urge you to oppose H.R. 1 and instead work together on legislation that will truly benefit our communities, power our economy with clean, renewable energy, and protect the environment that we all depend upon for our health and well-being. Sincerely, 350.org, Alaska Wilderness League, Center for Biological Diversity, Clean Water Action, Earthjustice, Environment America, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, Hip Hop Caucus, League of Conservation Voters, Natural Resources Defense Council, Oil Change International, Public Citizen, Sierra Club, The Wilderness Society, Union of Concerned Scientists, Voices for Progress.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, Donald Trump is going to be on Capitol Hill rallying Republicans to vote for his tax bill perfectly designed for his benefit: eliminating the alternative minimum tax, one of the few ways he pays any tax at all; abolishing the inheritance tax, allowing him to pass on tax-free hundreds of millions of dollars to his family; and expanding access to the lower passthrough tax rates for many large and profitable businesses. Donald Trump lists hundreds of passthrough entities on his financial forms. Donald Trump is the king of debt, and this monstrosity of a tax bill is fueled by increasing the national debt $2.3 trillion and cutting taxes for the wealthy financed by increased debt burden on our children and grandchildren. Of course, details are starting to leak out, such as special deals for baseball teams. Breaking a bipartisan commitment to the wind energy industry is already causing their stock prices to fall, jeopardizing billions of dollars of projects and putting tens of thousands of jobs at risk with the only retroactive provision in the bill breaking a bipartisan commitment that many of us worked on with the energy industry. The Republican proposal showers riches on the wealthiest Americans and most profitable corporations who are not going to create jobs and raise wages. What they are going to do is buy things and make more money. What is going to happen is that, in the years ahead, taxes are going to rise for millions of Americans and even more in the future. Now, this tax perhaps has the most cruel element--what I call the Alzheimer's tax--repealing the medical expense deduction used by over 9 million middle class Americans who saved almost $90 billion in 2015-- gone. This stunning action places additional burdens on many elderly and vulnerable middle-income Americans trying to plan ahead for the crushing financial burden dealing with Alzheimer's. We never had a hearing on anything like this. It wouldn't stand the light of day. The American public will be cranky about this.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I will vote against the conference report to accompany H.R. 2810, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2018 (Roll no. 631). This bill is far from fiscally responsible. We've yet to reach a bipartisan budget agreement, thus, this NDAA's base budget authority is $77.4 billion above the cap set in the Budget Control Act. The GOP has demonstrated no concern for what this continued policy of budget-busting will do to our country's deficit. It will inhibit our ability to respond to future threats and will hollow out benefits for military personnel and veterans. Of deep concern to me is the bill's full funding of nuclear weapons modernization and maintenance programs. The Congressional Budget Office released a report just last month highlighting that the true cost of these programs over the next 30 years will be $1.2 trillion dollars. That's more than 20 percent higher than earlier estimates. This bill fails to make the tough decisions it needs to about our defense spending. The legislation does take several steps in the right direction. It expresses a sense of Congress that climate change is a direct threat to national security, raises military pay by 2.4 percent and includes measures to counter Russian aggression. The bill also authorizes 3,500 visas to the Afghan Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) program--a program I worked to establish to help our Afghan allies seek refuge in the United States after they become the target of threats because of their assistance to U.S. personnel. However, the fiscal reality of enacting this legislation is deeply troubling. On balance, the costs of this bill outweigh its benefits and I cannot support it.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, after spending a bizarre week in the Ways and Means Committee with a moving target of the Republican tax plan, we find out, amazingly, that it is actually getting worse and worse. We have just discovered that the Senate is going to repeal the individual healthcare mandate to to provide funding for more tax cuts for America's wealthy. The cost of that? There will be 13 million additional uninsured Americans, and everybody in the individual market will see their premiums increase another 10 percent next year and every year therefafter. Well, tomorrow, Trump is going to come to Capitol Hill to hold a rally with Republican Members to try to make some of these nervous people feel a little more comfortable. No wonder Donald Trump is eager to see this bill pass. It is designed for Donald Trump. First, he is the self-proclaimed king of debt. Well, you got it in spades with this bill because the Republicans have raised the debt ceiling $1.5 trillion to finance these tax cuts for people who, frankly, don't need them. Because you have to pay interest on that, it is a $2.3 trillion additional burden on our children and grandchildren. It eliminates the alternative minimum tax. Even though Trump refused to honor his commitment to release his tax returns, one was leaked to David Cay Johnston, and it showed the only reason he paid substantial taxes in 2005 was because of the alternative minimum tax. Getting rid of that would save him $31 million in one year. There is a special break for passthrough entities. It is, theoretically, for small businesses, but many of the passthrough entities are not small businesses. They include hedge funds. Donald Trump's disclosure form lists hundreds of passthrough entities. That is how he does business. Of course, the biggest and most outrageous loophole is to completely eliminate the inheritance tax over the next 10 years. This will save a couple thousand people, extraordinarily wealthy people, $172 billion that would otherwise come to the government to be able to fund programs for our veterans, deal with the opioid crisis. Donald Trump will be able to pass off hundreds of millions, maybe a billion or two, tax free. Remember, most of that money had never been taxed in the first place. You don't become a billionaire on W-2 income. It is all appreciated, untaxed capital. Well, it also shatters a bipartisan agreement for alternative energy. Donald Trump is doubling down on energy of the past, trying to breathe life into a failing coal industry. Their bill would break a bipartisan agreement for wind energy, which we carefully negotiated on a bipartisan basis, and the industry has gone ahead and pledged billions of dollars. Eliminating that agreement, the only retroactive provision in the bill, puts at jeopardy billions of dollars of investment and tens of thousands of jobs. Score one for Donald Trump. But the worst element of this bill, I think--and there is a lot to choose from--is its Alzheimer's tax. It would deny the medical exemption to over 9 million middle class families to be able to deduct extraordinary medical expenses. Think of a family that is trying to cope with the challenges of a loved one with Alzheimer's. This costs them tens of thousands of dollars, sometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars in a year. It takes away the tax deduction from them. This is an outrage. It is made for Donald Trump and large corporations, but, sadly, it increases taxes on many middle-income Americans, especially with the Alzheimer's tax, denying some of the middle class families in the most difficult circumstances a little tax relief. It is inexcusable. They couldn't defend it in committee. Let's see how the Republicans defend it on the floor of the House. But more important, let's see how they defend that to 9 million American families.

Mr. BLUMENAUER

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentlewoman's courtesy. I was listening to our friend from Louisiana, and I sympathize with much of what he was saying. I have been working on flood insurance reform for 20 years. We are caught in a dynamic here where it is never really good enough and there are challenges for people who played by the rules at the time. The problem is that we are not doing a good job of evaluating, moving forward, and making the changes. It is true that some of this has an impact on Louisiana. I am sensitive to that. But at the same time, there are policies that have been resisted by some of those same state leaders. We must swallow hard and understand that we are on a path here that impacts people all across the country. We do not have accurate flood maps, and people resist updating them. We have many people who are paying far less than the actuarial costs for their flood insurance. There are millions more who are subsidizing all this because they are paying unfair premiums. We do not invest in pre-disaster mitigation. We will save $4 in disaster relief for each dollar we invest upfront to protect property and lives. I am prepared to support the underlying bill. It is not perfect. There are changes that I would make. I understand some of the challenges that people are going to suggest in terms of the impact on some lower-income citizens. I sympathize with that, but the answer is not to continue to keep people in harm's way. The answer is not to rebuild people's homes right back where they are going to be putting their property and their families at risk. We should not continue to resist reform, because it is hard. Ultimately, that adds to the price tag and it adds to the dislocation.