Marsha Blackburn

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Madam Speaker, at this time I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise), who chairs the Republican Study Committee.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Madam Speaker, at this time, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlelady from Missouri (Mrs. Hartzler).

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Madam Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds. When we talk about what is dangerous and wrong, let me tell you what is dangerous and wrong: condoning the actions of Kermit Gosnell or Doug Karpen or what transpired in New Mexico or what we found out from Delaware or from Virginia or from West Virginia. The house of horrors goes on and on. At this point, I would like to yield 3 minutes to a member of our House Republican leadership team, the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Wagner).

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Madam Chairman, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to one of our bright young attorneys, the gentlelady from Alabama (Mrs. Roby).

Mrs. BLACKBURN. At this time, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte).

Mrs. BLACKBURN. I yield 15 seconds to myself to respond. A USA Today-Gallup poll: 64 percent, abortions should not be permitted in the second 3 months of pregnancy; 80 percent, in the third 3 months. The polling company on March 3, 2013: 63 percent of women believe that abortion should not be permitted after the point where substantial medical evidence shows the baby can feel pain. At this time, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. Bachmann).

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Madam Speaker, at this time, I yield 3 minutes to one of our great pro-life advocates, Mrs. Black from Tennessee.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I have to tell you, Madam Speaker, so often we come to the floor and we will hear Members say, we are doing this for the children or that for the children, and I have to tell you, this is one of those days that we truly can stand and say, yes, indeed, we are taking an action that will enable so many children to enjoy that first guarantee, that guarantee to life. And indeed, that is the reason that we stand here. The Unborn Child Protection Act is based in science. This is an area that has overwhelming public support, and it is, indeed, an appropriate response to Kermit Gosnell's house of horrors and the similar stories that we are hearing emanate from across the Nation about what is happening in these abortion clinics. What this does is to limit abortion at the 6th month of pregnancy and includes exceptions so that we can send the clearest possible message to the American people that we do not support more Gosnell-like abortions. It does nothing to ban abortion before the 6th month of pregnancy. It does not affect Roe v. Wade, and we know that it is a step that needs to be taken to protect life. You know, scientific evidence tells us that unborn babies can feel touch as soon as 8 weeks into the pregnancy. They feel pain at 20 weeks. Indeed, some of these marvelous, marvelous fetal surgeries that are performed, they administer an anesthesia to these unborn babies. And as I said, public opinion polling shows that 60 percent of all Americans, Madam Speaker, they support limiting abortion during the second trimester, and 80 percent during the third trimester. So we think that it is incumbent upon this body to take the step that we bring before the Chamber today and to recognize science, to bring the law in line with the majority of public opinion, and to stand against what has transpired in the Kermit Gosnell-like abortion clinics. Indeed, I think it is so noteworthy that Mr. Gosnell's attorney, Jack McMahon, stated that he thought the law should be back to 16 or 17 weeks. He said that 24 weeks was not a good determiner, and that it would be a far better thing to have that ban at 16 or 17 weeks. We're not pushing back that far. We're at 20 weeks. We think that this is an appropriate step. At this time, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Today, I stand to support keeping the money--that $5 billion--that we need for readiness, and here is why: I think it is absolutely immoral that we would sign up, suit up and ship out men and women in uniform and not give them the readiness and the skills and the training that they need. The flying hours program is a great example of that. In the $5 billion that the gentleman would like to cut is the money for the flying hours program--37,000 flying hours. It would equip us with 500 aviators, whom we need. Let's fund these efforts for the men and women in uniform.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, when Congress created the Transportation Security Administration in 2001, we defined ``TSA security screeners'' in law as ``Federal security screeners.'' Their role, as defined by the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, is to screen passengers and luggage at airports across the country. However, beginning in 2005, TSA administratively reclassified ``TSA security screeners'' as ``transportation security officers'' and proceeded to upgrade their uniforms to reflect those of Federal law enforcement officers with metal officer badges. My concern and those of many of my constituents is that, despite their appearance, TSA officers do not have any Federal law enforcement training to reflect their current title and appearance. This can be confusing to the traveling public as they interact with TSA officers at airports and now on the highways, at rail stations, ferry terminals, bus stations, and at other mass transit facilities across the country. I strongly believe that Congress has an obligation to ensure that the title and appearance of Federal employees properly reflects their training and background. Until we are able to pass a legislative fix to correct TSA's administrative decision, we need to use the power of the purse to ensure that TSA screeners are not abusing the current perception that they are trained Federal law enforcement officers. I would like to commend Chairman Carter and committee staff for their due diligence and dedication in working with my office to address this issue. I am pleased that we were able to reduce screener uniforms by $18 million, a 20 percent decrease, so that we can continue to monitor this issue. I look forward to continuing to work with Chairman Carter and his staff in moving forward on finding a permanent solution. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Madam Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Madam Chairman, as I have stated earlier during the floor debate, TSA transportation security officers are not Federal law enforcement officers. They do not have any Federal law enforcement training, nor are they eligible to receive Federal law enforcement benefits. When Congress created the TSA in 2001, we defined TSA screeners in law as Federal security screeners. Their role as defined by the Aviation and Transportation Security Act is to screen passengers and luggage at airports across the country. However, beginning in 2005, TSA administratively reclassified TSA security screeners as transportation security officers and began to upgrade their uniforms to reflect those of Federal law enforcement officers with metal officer badges. Time magazine contributor Amanda Ripley succinctly summed up the transition by stating that TSA was ``outfitting frontline employees with new gold badges and royal blue shirts as part of a broader effort to improve their image and make people, to put it bluntly, hate them less.'' The problem is that TSA officers do not have any Federal law enforcement training to reflect their officer title or appearance. Law enforcement personnel for air transportation security are clearly defined in section 44903 of title 49, U.S. Code. U.S. Code states that ``law enforcement'' means individuals who are authorized to carry and use firearms, vested with the power of arrest, and are identifiable by distinctive marks of authority. TSA officers do not meet these basic requirements of our law. Their training consists of 2 weeks in a classroom to learn how to screen passengers and bags, followed by 2 to 4 weeks of on-the-job training. That is why it is troubling to me and many of my constituents that TSA is allowing their officers to take part in DHS VIPR team operations outside our airports. These operations are currently taking place on our Nation's highways, in our rail stations, ferry terminals, bus stations, and other mass transit facilities across the country. Adopting this amendment would end this practice. The American public should be outraged that our national security strategy to prevent a horrific attack at a mass transit facility includes randomly sending people with no Federal law enforcement authority to randomly select and search citizens without any actionable intelligence. I strongly believe that Congress has an obligation to ensure that the title and appearance of Federal employees properly reflect their training and background. There are already enough well-documented concerns questioning whether these individuals can even carry out the basic functions of their jobs within our airports. Here is an example: Last year, a TSA officer whistleblower in Nashville produced documents showing that TSA officers in charge of screening a passenger's bags were receiving failing grades at being able to identify potential threats and were not receiving remedial training. Another example is a GAO report, which I have with me right here, published in January, which shows that the TSA is failing to deploy passenger-screening canine teams to airports and terminals with the highest risk as determined by the agency's high-risk list. Furthermore, the report lays out concerns that the current protocols in place ``are not appropriate for a suicide bombing attempt requiring an immediate law enforcement response.'' If that's not concerning enough, there is a DHS Office of the Inspector General report released just last month on TSA's Behavior Detection Officers--and Mr. Thompson of Mississippi referenced this earlier--which only consists of TSA's Transportation Security Officers, and it raised concerns about their performance: TSA senior airport officials at airports contacted raised concerns regarding the selection, allocation and performance of the BDOs. TSA does not use an evaluation period to determine whether new BDOs can effectively perform behavior detection. For these reasons, we should end this program and restrict them to the airports. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, there are citizens making up this great country who never cease in offering themselves to their communities while improving the quality of our lives. They are the lights of our neighborhoods and families that bring hope long after they are gone. I rise today to celebrate one such glorious light and honor the legacy of Chaplain (Lt. Col.) Charles Currie, Ret. Chaplain Currie dedicated his life to the calling of the Almighty and in service to the country he loved. During World War II, Currie played the trombone in the 11th Airborne Division Band. He returned to the Army as a Chaplain after graduating from Dallas Theological Seminary with a Master's Degree in Theology. He preached of the goodness and hope of the Almighty at Ft Bragg, Ludwigsburg, Germany, Fort Campbell, Pajori, Bayreuth, and Nuremberg, Germany, Vietnam, and Fort Knox. He retired as a Lt. Colonel with more than 20 years of service and began to travel the world serving and leading mission trips to more than 38 countries. From all of Judea to the ends of the Earth, Chaplain Currie's legacy will be long remembered. Mr. Speaker, the Tennessee 7th Congressional District is better for his lasting goodwill. I ask my colleagues to join with me in honoring the life and service of Chaplain Charles Currie.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. My constituents are asking me this question: What does this administration have against expanding energy production? More American energy means more American jobs. We all know that that is true. It also would mean lower energy costs, stronger national security, and a boost to our economy, a boost that we badly need with 12 million Americans out of work. Yet the President has seemed to stymie the energy sector at every single turn. We're going to give him the opportunity to change that record as we bring another bill forward that would approve moving forward with the northern route of the Keystone pipeline. Now, we all know that burdensome overregulation by this administration has caused energy output domestically on our Federal lands to decrease significantly--about 30 percent. It hampers our ability to be productive.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, I do rise today to support this legislation and to support the sportsmen from Tennessee and Kentucky. And as you can see, this is an issue where there is bipartisan agreement. One of my constituents said it so well. They're so frustrated with this situation, and we've heard from so many of them on it. And they said, you know, you can turn on the TV any night and you see government overreach, whether it's the IRS admitting that they have targeted conservative groups or DOJ wiretapping reporters. And then you get home to Tennessee and, at the local level, what you see is the Corps of Engineers coming in and saying, well, by the way, we're going to change something, and you're not going to be able to fish. Fishing in Tennessee is a tradition. It is a favorite pastime. Sportsmen have been fishing along this beautiful Cumberland River for years. As Mr. Cooper said, it is a beautiful place to be. And since the dams were built, I have to tell you, there are now generations of Tennesseeans, you will see families out together fishing. We have about 900,000 registered anglers in our State, and I have to tell you, I think our office has heard from almost every one of them on this issue. They have been very persistent. One thing I would want my colleagues to know is that our sportsmen in our State are wonderful stewards of conserving our natural resources and the great outdoors, and they exercise personal responsibility and great care in protecting their favorite place to go fishing. It is really to the disbelief of the Army Corps of Engineers that we already know when it is safe or not to go fish in these tailwaters. So what we're saying is let's right this wrong, and let's allow individuals to get back and enjoy the Freedom to Fish Act. Pass it today.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, there is an old American prayer asking the Almighty to bring ``safety, hounour, and welfare of thy people; that all things may be ordered and settled by their endeavors, upon the best and surest foundations, that peace and happiness, truth and justice, religion and piety, may be established among us for all generations.'' I rise today to honor the lives of those the Almighty used to bring peace, safety, and welfare. On average, one law enforcement officer is killed in the line of duty every 57 hours. Since the first known line-of-duty death in 1791, more than 19,000 law enforcement officers have made the ultimate sacrifice. There are those souls, Mr. Speaker, whose lights guide the way even after they are dimmed. During National Police Week, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring those law enforcement officers lost in the line of duty. We join their families, friends, and communities in offering our condolences and prayers that the memory of those lost be cherished.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. This law has become 13,000 pages of regulation. It has gone from costing $800 billion to $2.6 trillion. It's so interesting to hear people talk about solutions and wanting government to do things. Mr. Speaker, the American people can solve so many of these problems. They know the answers do not come out of Washington, D.C. They come from our communities. They come from our State legislatures. They come, solutions come from employers that are fighting every single day to keep people employed. One of the biggest impediments to job growth, indeed, including the 800,000 jobs this bill will cost us, this law, ObamaCare, costing us 800,000 jobs over the next 10 years, is keeping people working full- time. We know what the problems are. We're saying, Look, admit it was a mistake. The American people don't want it. It's too expensive to afford. Let's get it off the books. And we do come forward with solutions. We come forward with keeping patient-centered, health care centermost for our constituents. That's what they want. They want options. They do not want regulation and mandates by the Federal Government, who can't seem to solve the problems that are in front of them right now, whether it's the IRS or anyone else. Let's repeal this bill and pass H.R. 45. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Messer).

Mrs. BLACKBURN. At this time I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Sanford).

Mrs. BLACKBURN. At this time I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Salmon). (Mr. SALMON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from Minnesota (Mrs. Bachmann), who is the author of H.R. 45.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. I yield myself 15 seconds to respond to a couple of things. We are working on jobs. One of the items that concerns us is that, according to the CBO, implementation of the ObamaCare bill with its 13,000 pages, 7-foot tall tower of red tape would cost this economy 800,000 jobs. We also know that it's grown to being a $2.6 trillion program. At this time I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Pittenger).

Mrs. BLACKBURN. At this time, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Rice).