Michael Burgess

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, Dr. Roe, for yielding and for convening this hour. I think it is so important that the people hear directly from us, the doctors who are serving in the United States House of Representatives. When Dr. Roe was delivering his remarks, I was reminded of how the information about this illness came to us and how serious it seemed that a city in China, a city of 10 million people, would be shut down. Clearly, this was a significant illness and must be taken quite seriously, but I will say the committee on which I serve, the Subcommittee on Health for the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the very committee that the Congress before had worked on the reauthorization of the Pandemic All-Hazards Preparedness Act, would not hold a hearing on this during the month of February. It was a missed opportunity. We had created the legislation that reauthorized pandemic preparedness. The President had signed that into law in June 2019. Now, 6 months later, we are faced with this possible worldwide pandemic. You would think there would have been enough curiosity on the committee to do some real-time oversight. Did we get it right? Were we focused on the right conditions? Were we responding to the right signals? But we don't know because we didn't look. We had to do hearings on flavored tobacco, horse racing, ticket stubs, all kinds of other things. It was not until the end of February, tacked on to the waning moments of a budget hearing, that we heard from the Secretary of Health in the principle subcommittee that deals with health in this United States House of Representatives. Dr. Roe also has talked about the speed with which the development of the vaccine is progressing, and it is truly remarkable. Just as a data point, for people who may not remember, when Ebola was careening through western Africa, in August 2014, we basically had a vaccine that was at the same place as our candidate vaccines were at the end of August 2014, the end of phase 1 trials. The final approval by the Food and Drug Administration came in December 2019. Clearly, that 5-year time horizon is just too long in this situation, and the administration recognized that. The President recognized that and leaned into the process of developing a vaccine. One of the more remarkable things I have seen is that the Food and Drug Administration is going to license the production of appropriate vaccine candidates prior to their approval. Now, they can't be sold until they get that final approval, so there is a financial risk that is taken by the companies that proceed with the production of that vaccine. But for those who remember the fall of 2019, when H1N1 was such a problem in this country, remember the vaccine was developed and then another month went by before there was sufficient quantity of the vaccine to begin vaccinating the most vulnerable populations. That is not going to happen under the watch of Donald J. Trump. I, for one, am grateful for the leadership that the President has provided in this regard. I am grateful for the leadership that the House Doctors Caucus has been providing as we go through this very difficult time. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Tennessee for yielding.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the professional achievements and service of Michael Leavitt, City Manager for the City of Highland Village, Texas. Mr. Leavitt is retiring following more than thirty-three years of exemplary service to the public. Upon graduation from Truman University in Kirksville, Missouri with a B.S. in Industrial Science, Mr. Leavitt worked for the cities of Kirksville, Missouri and Denton, Texas. In 2000, Leavitt moved to the City of Highland Village, first serving as the public works director followed by his appointed as City Manager in 2003. A true advocate for public safety and fiscal responsibility, Leavitt spearheaded the transformation from a volunteer fire department to a full-time professional department. Under his leadership as City Manager, the ad valorem tax rate was reduced, and tax exemptions increased by fifty per-cent for those with a disability and those over the age of 65. Through his capable direction, sales tax revenue has grown from just over $400,000 in 2003 to $4 million in 2020, accomplishing a goal set by the City Council to increase funding available for city improvement. This tremendous growth was spurred by the construction and development of premier dining and shopping districts: The Marketplace at Highland Village and The Shops at Highland Village. The quality of life for Highland Village residents has been raised during his tenure as City Manager. Leavitt has overseen extensive improvements to the City's recreation infrastructure with the addition and growth of the City's biking and walking trails and the purchase and development of the City's principal park, Doubletree Ranch Park. While local in nature, many of these projects also involved federal interests where I was honored to work with Mr. Leavitt and the City. Among these included the continuation and expansion of FM 2499 and the widening of I-35 East, a priority project I worked with Mr. Leavitt, local leaders and Deputy Secretary of Transportation Thomas Barrett to highlight during a media day from Highland Village's Copperas Branch Park. A couple of years later in 2010, I worked with Mr. Leavitt and the Highland Village Police Department to secure 707 Highland Village Road. Ultimately deeded to the City as an outcome of an IRS seizure involving federal charges of racketeering, obscenity, fraud and income tax evasion, it allowed City Manager Leavitt the opportunity to replace a home that had attracted criminal activity to this beautiful lakeside community with its first lakeside park. Only a couple of years later, the Double Tree Ranch, another city park improved in large part through Mr. Leavitt's coordinated efforts with myself and local officials, was the appropriate site in 2017 to finally celebrate the Phase 1 completion of the I-35E project. Michael Leavitt has been an outstanding public servant to the residents and businesses of Highland Village. His professional leadership, innovative vision, and passion for excellent customer service will be missed throughout his community and all of North Texas. On behalf of the 26th District, I wish him the best in his next stage of life.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, this bill, H.R. 8015, does seem to be rushed. And here is the biggest thing, it is not going to address the core problem that exists in the United States Postal Service. This bill appropriates a $25 billion bailout using emergency supplemental funding, removing it from the previously agreed to bipartisan budget agreement numbers, and prohibits the Postal Service from making any reforms until next year at the earliest. So if this bill is intended to improve efficiency or effectiveness of the Postal Service, I would just simply ask: How in the world is it supposed to do that if it is prohibited from making any changes? The Postal Service is in trouble, every Member of this Chamber, Republican or Democrat, understands this. We should be deeply concerned about the precarious position of the Postal Service. But despite the narratives, this problem has been decades in the making. The Postal Service's operational pains have been festering literally for decades. Since 2007 mail volumes have fallen year after year as American consumers and businesses have chosen digital communication over letters and mailed advertising. Over the same period, the number of addresses requiring delivery and retirement obligations for retired Postal Service employees have continued to grow. So in very simple terms, revenues have fallen, and costs have risen for over a decade. This novel coronavirus' impact on the economy is only exacerbating this situation. The Postal Service lost $2.2 billion in the second quarter of this year. H.R. 8015 kicks the can down the road and forces the Postal Service to continue to sustain financial losses. No reforms to modernize the Postal Service, so we should expect its fiscal health to worsen. Now, in spite of all the heated rhetoric today, the Postal Service will not collapse tonight. The Postal Service has informed Congress that it has enough cash on hand to remain solvent through August 2021. That is a year from now if you are doing the math at home. And Congress has already provided an additional lifeline by raising the Postal Service's loan authority by $10 billion. Instead of voting on this rushed and partisan bill, Members of this Chamber could work together to solve the problem. Congress has time to work through the proper committees, provide the proper oversight, provide the proper reforms, and preserve this essential service. Let's vote against this bill today, a dictatorial bill brought to us by the Speaker of the House, H.R. 8015, and work together in finding a meaningful and lasting fix for the United States Postal Service.

Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. There is a sudden sense of urgency to address the financial stability of the Postal Service, but I would simply ask the body: Where was the sense of urgency from our House Democratic leadership at the start of the pandemic? Look, I recognized in January this deal over in China was a bad deal, a novel virus, biological behavior not known, not worked out. The Postal Service's problems did not surface this week. They have been going on for years. But the Postal Service will not go bankrupt tomorrow, and yet we have been called back here to vote on an issue that, quite frankly, is not going to get solved from today's activities. But I called on the Committee on Energy and Commerce last February to do hearings on this novel coronavirus. My requests were ignored and then subsequently dismissed because we had other important work to do: horse racing, flavored tobacco, ticket stubs--any number of things-- other than work on the novel coronavirus. But we could have provided support in the form of funding for vaccines and testing and more. We have done some of that in the short- term sense, but we could continue to support our Nation's pandemic response in additional ways, which is why I have introduced legislation that aligns with the legislation already existing in the Senate, where we could come together and provide our country with some of the critical resources necessary to fight this novel coronavirus. Unfortunately, the House Democratic leadership does not acknowledge or seem even to be curious as to whether or not they are up to the task. So this legislation provides $29 billion for the Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund to develop additional medical countermeasures and vaccines. A safe and effective vaccine is the strongest arrow in our quiver to help society return to normal. Importantly, the bill would provide $2 billion for the Strategic National Stockpile and $2 billion for the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority for use in developing medical countermeasures. But you have to ask yourself: The business plan as promulgated by the Speaker of this body, why is it antithetical to that development? Could it be because the nominee of their party this week in a very important speech promised the American people ``no miracle is coming''? Is that because you are going to cut off the funding for BARDA? for the Strategic National Stockpile? for research on vaccines? Look, there are commonsense, bipartisan ways to help our Nation and help our Nation respond to the coronavirus, but House Democratic leadership has turned their backs on the needs of America. Madam Speaker, I urge Members to vote against the previous question. Allow us to debate and pass this measure. It is of critical urgency. Indeed, a miracle could be coming.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar), chairman of the Congressional Western Caucus.

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Stauber).

Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Emmer), a valuable member of our Republican House leadership.

Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I thank Ms. Shalala for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, the bill we are debating today, in some ways I am reminded of a Clint Eastwood movie. We have some good, some bad, and some really ugly. But this bill gives consideration for fiscal year 2021 appropriations, as the gentlewoman from Florida just outlined: State and Foreign Operations, Agriculture, Food and Drug Administration, Interior, Environment, Military Construction, and Veterans Affairs Administration. It is appropriate that we are considering these bills. The fiscal year ends on September 30, and we need to provide funding for the next fiscal year; and without the appropriations bills, that doesn't occur. But we never did a budget this year, and since we never did a budget, House Democratic leadership decided to go without a budget. The only budgetary reference we can make is to the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019, which did include spending limits. But, unfortunately, today, many of those limits are going to be jettisoned. So division A of this bill appropriates $65 billion for State and Foreign Operations, including $8 billion in cap-exempt Overseas Contingency Operations funding and $10 billion in emergency coronavirus funding. Funding is continued for important global programs to support maternal and child health; combat AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria; contribute to vaccine administration; and for the PEPFAR program. Funding to the northern triangle countries of El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras is provided to help those countries create economic opportunities for their citizens, reduce violence, and strengthen the rule of law. The Secretary of State is required to certify that these countries meet certain conditions before 50 percent of that funding can be obligated. The good news is they have made some recent progress, but we are obligated to continue the oversight of taxpayer-funded foreign assistance to ensure that the citizens of the recipient countries, the citizens, are benefiting and that we are effectively working to combat the drivers of illegal immigration. It is unfair to ask our taxpayers to have to subsidize this activity twice. However, this division also prohibits the use of funds to implement the Mexico City policy, which requires nongovernmental organizations to certify that they will not perform or actively promote abortion as a condition of receiving United States funds. It also removes conditions that promote transparency and accountability at international organizations, including the World Health Organization. We know that China withheld information from the World Health Organization. We know that that contributed to the excesses of the global pandemic, under which we now suffer. It is disappointing that these partisan provisions were included in this bill. We could have had a bipartisan bill to provide for the American people. The poison pill provisions virtually guarantee that that will not be the case. The Agriculture and Food and Drug Administration division appropriates nearly $24 billion in discretionary funding, $487 million over the fiscal year 2020 level. In the midst of a global pandemic, it is critical that our Food and Drug Administration be fully funded and staffed to stand at the ready to process applications for medical countermeasures as they are developed, things such as therapeutics and vaccines against this novel coronavirus. The bill continues to fund the FDA Innovation Account. This was part of the 21st Century Cures Act and the various user fee arrangements that have proven to be so successful. But, again, you have to have concerns about the attempts to include authorizing language in the appropriations bill, issues that authorizing committees have not yet debated. One of the issues is giving the FDA mandatory recall authority. Currently, manufacturers typically recall products if the FDA requests that they do so, because if they fail to act on a voluntary recall, guess what? Big liability for them. But the FDA also has other tools to keep a product off the market. The section of code that this appropriations bill seeks to amend is specific to controlled substances, which may not be an appropriate place to incorporate such a policy. Future considerations of such policies should happen within the committee of jurisdiction, which would be the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Agriculture is the lifeblood for many American families, especially in rural communities. This coronavirus pandemic has greatly impacted our Nation's food supply, and this bill works to strengthen food security and promote agricultural research. That is good. As communities continue to work through the ``new normal'' we are experiencing, with many people working from home and remote learning, efforts to bolster rural broadband are, indeed, critical. Once more, rather than simply providing for the American people, this bill includes language that would permanently prevent any administration--Republican or Democrat--from making changes to the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program. This policy would result in working age, nondisabled adults without children not being required to seek employment in times of low unemployment in order to seek benefits. When we are in the middle of a national emergency, flexibility is appropriate. However, the administration should not be permanently barred from making the program more beneficial to both the recipient and the taxpayer. Next, division C of this bill includes provisions that ensure that our Nation's environment and public lands are preserved for future generations. These funds will be used to combat invasive species, mitigate harmful algae blooms, stop the trafficking of endangered animals. They will also provide essential resources to maintain our Nation's national park system. Unfortunately, the bill threatens the advancement of fundamentally pro-business and pro-worker policies. It adds unnecessary barriers to administrative efforts to reduce regulation. Eliminating bureaucratic red tape will be the key to unlocking future economic growth, which I would submit is still important. Division C also threatens the continued development of America's energy resources, thus its energy independence and the thousands of jobs tied to the energy sector. Specifically, it prohibits Federal funds to be used for oil and gas sales on Federal lands and offshore leases in Federal waters. These projects are important to America's economic recovery, they are important to America's national security, and they are important to America's energy independence. We, in the House, should not be limiting the economic opportunities in the middle of a global recession. Division C of this bill contains many important provisions, but it is pro-regulation and anti-energy in ways that will harm our economy and thus hurt jobs throughout the country. I would last like to discuss the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs division. As a historically bipartisan committee, I am grateful for the support that the committee has provided for important veterans' programs, particularly in veterans' health and military construction, and for prioritizing military family housing. We have learned during the past couple of Congresses about the unacceptable condition of private military housing that is part of the military housing privatization initiative. Some reforms were included in last year's National Defense Authorization Act, and my hope is that we can continue the funding and the oversight necessary to ensure that our Armed Forces and their families feel safe in their homes on their bases. Although I agree with and support the veterans' healthcare programs, I am encouraged by the robust mental health programs and the opioid abuse prevention and treatment assistance included in the bill, it is also a time when we must be at least cognizant of where the Federal Congressional Budget Office estimates are taking us with the budget deficit exceeding over $3.7 trillion for this fiscal year. So I do share some of the other Members' concerns on designating the $12.5 billion as emergency funding and disregarding the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019. Again, we are functioning without a current congressional budget in this session of the House. Why do we even work on spending caps in the first place if we are only going to ultimately disregard them for partisan priorities? Furthermore, I have serious concerns regarding provisions which would restrict funds for military construction projects, specifically a prohibition on funding for any type of border barrier. These restrictions unfairly jeopardize our military's safety and well-being. We are in the middle of a global pandemic. Mexico agreed to limit border crossings with the United States. So legal and illegal entries have been significantly reduced, limiting unexpected coronavirus transmission to domestic cases. Despite our best hopes, coronavirus cases are increasing, particularly along our southern border and our southern States. Now is not the time to restrict the ability of the President to act to further protect the country. Last, I would like to note report language that presents pro-life concerns. The language grants flexibility to the VA without pro-life protections, thus including abortion referrals for those referred to outside care resources for services not provided by the Department. Again, this appropriations package incorporates many provisions that both Democrats and Republicans can agree on. But it disregards the Bipartisan Budget Act agreement and includes poison pill policy provisions that, frankly, I will find, and many Republicans will find difficult to support. I hope my Democratic colleagues will come to the table and negotiate so we don't abandon the American people as the end of the fiscal year approaches. With that, I urge opposition to the rule, and I will reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Curtis), my good friend, to speak on the amendment.

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Arizona.

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to sanction any senior foreign official who conceals information about the outbreak of a pandemic, including this current coronavirus pandemic. We know that China delayed reporting what they knew about this coronavirus. They withheld information from the World Health Organization and attempted to silence doctors, silence researchers who had alerted local health authorities. China's continued attempts to avoid national humiliation resulted in a pandemic that has killed well more than 600,000 people globally. It is unacceptable, and we must hold China accountable. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of this amendment into the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, we really do not have time to waste. Not only must we provide for the American people, but we have the added responsibility of continuing to fight and recover from the coronavirus pandemic. I hope my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will see the futility of passing purely partisan appropriations bills. That being said, there are provisions included in this bill where we can all agree, and I hope we can sit down and negotiate with the other side so we can prevent a disruption at the end of the fiscal year for the American people. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question, ``no'' on the rule, ``no'' on the underlying measure, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, the Affordable Care Act, for the last 10 years, really has been anything but affordable. Prices have gone up every year in spite of what we were promised. It has only been the last 2 years that premiums have actually begun to reduce, and that is because of some of the policies enacted by the current administration expanding the usability of limited duration plans, expanding association health plans. So when we talk about this bill to expand the Affordable Care Act, what we are really doing is increasing the unaffordability of healthcare in this country. Now, H.R. 1425 establishes a new reinsurance program, and it is going to cost $10 billion per year forever. There is no end date. This reinsurance program does not include some of the longstanding protections that ensure that Federal funding cannot be used to pay for abortions. If we want to pass a bipartisan reinsurance policy, Energy and Commerce Republicans have a bill, H.R. 1510, which includes reinsurance coupled with structural reform of the Affordable Care Act and gives States more choice on how to repair their markets that have been damaged by the Affordable Care Act, and it is offset by stopping bad actors from gaming the system. Importantly, it does include the Hyde protections and, therefore, protects life. H.R. 1425 also punishes States that choose not to expand Medicaid by cutting their Federal share of Medicaid funding. So let's be very clear about this. A State such as mine that did not expand Medicaid reevaluates year by year, but if they choose not to expand, if they say they can't afford what this expansion would bring to the State, now this bill proposes to reduce the funding, the Federal match, for the traditional Medicaid populations. And who are they? Blind, aged, disabled, medically fragile, children, women. Why would we want to do that? Now, look, remember the reason that we have some States expanding Medicaid and some not is because of a Supreme Court case, National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, which ruled that threatening States' Medicaid funding for not expanding is unconstitutional. Sections 204 and 205 of this bill would violate those very same principles and coerce States rather than incentivize them to expand Medicaid. This will be struck down by the Supreme Court as well. Lastly, this bill uses offsets that would actively harm our Nation's coronavirus response by using offsets from H.R. 3 that would require the government to set prices and confiscate dollars from pharmacologic developers. The Congressional Budget Office analysis found that such policies would lead to substantially fewer new drugs coming to market. We really can't afford a world without the next remdesivir.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the achievements of Michael Penaluna, Emergency Management Coordinator for the City of Denton, Texas. Mr. Penaluna is retiring after serving the public for over thirty years. Penaluna began his education at North Central Texas College, where he earned his Associate of Science degree and training as an Emergency Medical Technician. He served an internship with the City of Bowie and received his Bachelor of Science degree in Crisis/Emergency/Disaster Management from the University of North Texas (UNT) in 1988. This milestone was the foundation for two of his lifelong professional passions: Emergency Management and the University of North Texas. His first position in this field was with the Caddo-Bossier Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness in Shreveport, Louisiana. During his fifteen year tenure with this department, he rose to the position of Assistant Director, served as President of the Louisiana Emergency Preparedness Association, and earned a Masters degree at Louisiana Baptist University & Theological Seminary. The second chapter in Penaluna's career began in 2004, when he becamed the Emergency Management Coordinator for the City of Denton. Over the next fifteen years, he was instrumental in broadening and strengthening the city's Emergency Management Program. Penaluna is well-respected by his peers, and he has served as Chair of the Denton Emergency Preparedness Advisory Committee and Co-Chair of the North Central Texas Council of Government's Emergency Management Working Group. He has been a sought after guest lecturer at UNT and Texas Woman's University. Penaluna has been an esteemed mentor and intern supervisor for many students over the years who are now his professional colleagues. In 2015, he was recognized by UNT as the Outstanding Alumnus in Emegency Administration & Planning. Penaluna's legacy will continue to shine brightly as his namesake Michael A. Penaluna Endowed Scholarship in Emergency Administration & Planning at UNT will afford many more students the opportunity to train for the profession he holds so dear. Throughout his career, Michael Penaluna dedicated over three decades of his life to public service. His expertise and leadership will be sorely missed not only by the citizens of Denton, but also by his colleagues across Texas and beyond. He has truly been an outstanding public servant, and on behalf of the 26th District, I wish him all the best in retirement.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, let me just say, to start, I don't often agree with my colleague from Florida, Mr. Hastings, but I find myself in agreement with him on two points this morning. One was his eloquent praise for the gentleman from Georgia, and we will indeed miss his eloquence here on the floor. It is always hard to follow the gentleman from Georgia, which I frequently do in the Rules Committee, because he is able to speak so clearly on an issue. Another point I would agree with the gentleman from Florida on is that we did spend a long time in the Rules Committee yesterday. It was a marathon hearing, but it was important because so many of these things had had no hearing and no chance for debate in the so-called regular order. About 60 or 70 percent of the bill, H.R. 1425, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Enhancement Act, which, as the gentleman from Georgia points out, allocates a significant sum of money to the Affordable Care Act in order to save the Affordable Care Act, something that is now over a decade old. It is a sign that the law has failed and failed to provide for Americans as it was originally described. The House of Representatives should be leading at a time of crisis. We shouldn't be making a halfhearted attempt to fix a broken law as a present for its 10th birthday, and we certainly shouldn't do that without the proper work from the authorization committee; in this case, the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Last fall, before we could have ever predicted the emergence of this novel coronavirus, we debated a proposal here on this House floor. It was called H.R. 3. It was a Speaker's proposal that would require the government to set drug prices. In the consequence, if American innovation was a casualty of that, then that was judged to be acceptable collateral damage toward their political goal. But it was a bad bill; it was the wrong time. Unfortunately, some of those very same policies have found their way and have been intruded into this bill. In fact, I very much regret that such policies would receive any consideration during this pandemic. Let's be very clear: American biomedical innovation in the form of new treatments and cures is going to lead us to victory over this novel coronavirus. We will beat this virus. We always do. We will emerge on the other side victorious. But one of the paths to that victory is American innovation, American biomedical innovation, American pharmaceutical innovation. A vote for this bill today is a vote against a cure for the novel coronavirus. A vote for this bill today is a vote against a vaccine to prevent this or future illnesses. If this body wants to make an impact on drug prices, there are ways to do that. We could sit down--in fact, our ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Walden, has a bill, H.R. 19, which has a number of bipartisan proposals, which means they have both a Republican and a Democratic cosponsor, and it does so in a way that doesn't harm innovation. So what does this bill do to States? Well, it really hurts States when they are already down. State Medicaid budgets are really, really out of control right now. In fact, we should be helping, not hurting, the States. The Foundation for Government Accountability published a report in June of this year titled ``States are about to be hit by a Medicaid tidal wave,'' saying that this coronavirus is putting extra budget pressure on States at the same time their general revenues, because of demand destruction by the virus, are expected--State tax collections are expected to decrease by 20 percent. The bill before us today would reduce State's administrative FMAP if they do not expand Medicaid. Punishing States in this way would further hurt State budgets that are already being pushed to the limits. So many of us remember the Supreme Court case in 2012, the case titled National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius. The Court ruled that threatening States' Medicaid funding for not expanding that program is, in fact, unconstitutional. Sections 204 and 205 of this bill would violate the same principles and coerce States, rather than incentivize States, into expanding Medicaid. This bill will actively damage State Medicaid programs like those in Texas. H.R. 1425 also wastes taxpayer dollars on Affordable Care Act outreach and enrollment and navigators that have already been proven to not have a high return on investment. It is one thing if they want to improve policies, but let's not go back to bringing policies back from the dead that, in fact, are not working.

Mr. BURGESS. Lastly, this bill fails to protect life. The bill establishes a Federal reinsurance fund, and this reinsurance fund is for individuals in ACA exchange plans. The fund is fiscally irresponsible. It is $10 billion a year forever, so we don't even know what the final CBO score is. But it also does not include longstanding Hyde protections and, therefore, fails to ensure that Federal dollars would never be used to pay for abortions. The Energy and Commerce Committee has worked in a bipartisan way this Congress on numerous policies that would make a real difference in American healthcare. It is disappointing that the Democratic leadership is pushing this partisan proposal ahead of providing Americans with real support. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia for his kindness.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Madam Speaker, I do want to point out that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978--note the first word is ``Foreign''--the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 provided authorities for the collection of foreign intelligence information to protect the United States from foreign threats. These authorities were expanded after 9/11, and their use has exceeded the original intent. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court provides authorization via court order. Inspector General Horowitz's recent report revealed intentional abuse of the FISA process by FBI officials investigating the Trump campaign, investigating the Trump campaign for alleged collusion with Russia during the 2016 Presidential campaign. After extensive study by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, no such connection could be found. In addition, agents of the FBI reportedly used official meetings with then-President-elect Trump and incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn for the purposes of gathering information on them, intelligence information. These politically driven actions by the FBI were highly irregular; inappropriate; and, in the case of inaccurate FISA court applications, actually criminal. It is not legal to lie to a FISA court judge. Yet, no one has been held accountable. No one has stood trial. Certainly, no one has served a sentence to account for these crimes. Madam Speaker, what is the point of passing a law if the enforcement agency is the one abusing it? This is malfeasance of the highest order, and it certainly must not go unpunished. Let's be clear: We all want to protect the American people. Part of that responsibility includes authorizing certain activities by our intelligence agencies to obtain critical information on foreign targets. But, no, Americans' civil liberties should not be jettisoned for that effort. When the House first passed H.R. 6172, the reauthorization of the USA FREEDOM Act, I supported the bill because of the improvements that were made to the FISA process. But since then, we have learned details that indicate that the abuse was much more widespread and much more deliberate than initially reported. Given that, rather than place some additional requirements on the exercise of existing authorities, I think we must fully reevaluate the FISA authorities to resolve the right balance between protecting our Nation and the rights of the American people. In addition, the administration does not support this bill in its current form, which means that this is going to be yet another in a long line of activities undertaken by the Democratic majority that is not going to be successful.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. Madam Speaker, today's rule contains a resolution that will really fundamentally change the proceedings of this House of Representatives. Once that passes--and it will, because this House is ruled by the majority--we will then take up a $3 trillion assistance bill. It is not the first time this week that the majority Democrats have trampled on the rights of the Republican minority. Allowing multiple Members to vote by proxy does not seem like representative government. I, for one, will not give away the vote of the people of the 26th District to someone they did not elect. Governing is difficult, but we sought the jobs and we need to get back to work. Far too many American lives have been lost to the pandemic. This novel coronavirus continues to wreak havoc on our healthcare, as well as our economy. There are plenty of things we could have done in the House on the Committee on Energy and Commerce during the last several months which were undone. We passed a bill called the Pandemic All-Hazards Preparedness Act. This was a good bill, and it was signed into law in June of 2019, 6 months before the pandemic started. We could have had a realtime oversight of this bill that we had just passed in the month of February ask the questions: Is it doing what we thought? Are we achieving what we attempted to achieve with that bill? Here is a realtime test, a stress test, but we chose not to do it. We had hearings on flavored tobacco and horse racing instead. In an effort to show what we should be working on, I wrote a series of hearing request letters this week to the Committee on Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee chair, including work on the Strategic National Stockpile, mental health, racial disparities, provider relief, and testing. We should be working through authorizing committees to improve our Nation's public health response to this pandemic. State testing capacity has gotten substantially better, but we must reflect on what went wrong so we make sure that it does not happen again in the future. I, frankly, do not understand what happened at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the month of February of this year. We have never really asked the question at the committee level. We should have. If we don't understand what went wrong, how do we prevent it from happening again if the virus makes a resurgence, if some other virus makes an appearance? Congress, recognizing the importance of widespread diagnostic testing, did take action to encourage the development of testing strategies, and billions of dollars have been directed towards testing in our four previous response bills. But now we are poised to push $3 trillion of taxpayer money out the door, and we should evaluate, we should have the evaluation of what is the current state of our response and our recovery, including our testing strategy. Madam Speaker, we have to get this right for the American people.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the exemplary work and life of service of Kenneth Leveno, MD with Parkland Hospital in Dallas, Texas. Dr. Leveno was instrumental in developing a number of the innovative programs that are an integral component of Parkland's Women and Infant's Specialty Health division for decades. He earned his undergraduate degree at Notre Dame University and his medical degree from Chreighton University School of Medicine. Dr. Leveno joined the Parkland medical staff in the 1970s and passionately sought to provide the best obstetrical care for patients entrusted to Parkland's care. His clinical studies demonstrated that access to prenatal care could mitigate health disparities among patients who face high levels of socio-economic hardship. He collaborated with medical, nursing and administrative leaders to create a highly organized, evidence-based system of care that led to excellent clinical outcomes and became known as the ``Parkland Way.'' Dr. Leveno was a pioneer in the deployment of advanced practice providers to expand services to an ever-growing population of patients in need of care. In addition to the development of a low-risk delivery unit, he initiated the nurse-midwives program at Parkland. In 1987, Dr. Leveno recruited midwives across the U.S. and even abroad to launch Parkland's program, now one of the largest and most respected Certified Nurse-Midwives services in the United States. His groundbreaking research and development of innovative obstetrical care practices transformed Parkland's obstetric service and created a unified system that integrated prenatal delivery and postpartum care. Dr. Leveno devoted more than fifty years of his life to the medical profession, including serving as the UT Southwestern Jack A. Pritchard Chair in Obstetrics & Gynecology and was recognized as the Distinguished Physician Award by Parkland Hospital in 1998. His positive impact and worthwhile contributions to the medical profession will be sorely missed by the patients he so diligently served and by the colleagues who held him in great esteem. I am deeply grateful for his friendship and service and pray for comfort and peace for his wife and family.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Dr. Alex Azar, 80, of Salisbury, MD. He is remembered as a brilliant and devoted physician, passionate for his family and community. Born May 4, 1939, in Johnstown, PA Dr. Azar graduated from Westmont Hilltop High School in 1957. He attended University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown for three years before accepting early admission to Pitt's Medical School where he graduated magna cum laude in 1964. He was a member of Alpha Omega Alpha, an Honor Medical Society membership I shared with him, as well as Phi Beta Kappa. After interning at Conemaugh Valley Memorial Hospital, he served as a Captain in the US Army Medical Corps at Fort Bliss, TX from 1965-1966. He eventually completed a preventive medicine and ophthalmology residencies at the Ohio State University. In 1976, Dr. Azar joined Dr. Robert Dickey in practicing ophthalmology in Salisbury. Over the course of 40 years, he founded both the Peninsula Eye Center and the Azar Eye Institute. He discovered several new and innovative eye surgical techniques and ophthalmology care to several communities on the peninsula across southern MD and DE. He was noted for his devotion to his patients, never denying care because of a patient's inability to pay. He often made house calls in the evening, even performing eye surgery on a patient in a rocking chair on his porch on Smith Island. As part-time faculty of the Wilmer Eye Institute at Johns Hopkins University, he was voted most outstanding part-time professor in ophthalmology in 2011 and 2012. In 2015, he received the prestigious Arnall Patz Fellowship Award through the local Lions Club and the Wilmer Institute for his contributions to the field of ophthalmology. In 1996, Governor Schaeffer appointed Dr. Azar as the first and only physician member on the five member MD Health Care Access and Cost Containment Commission. He held various state and county medical society leadership positions, including President of MedChi, the Maryland State Medical Society. An active member of his community, Dr. Azar served on the Board of Directors of the local YMCA, the Board of the Three Lower Counties, the Center for a Healthy Maryland, the local Humane Society, as treasurer of the Camp Horizon Board of Directors, and as an officer of the Greater Salisbury Committee. He was also a 32nd degree Mason, a member of Wicomico Lodge #91, Tall Cedars of Lebanon, and the Scottish Rite. I am honored to acknowledge the legacy of a fellow caregiver and community servant. I join his family and community today in celebration and memory of his lifetime of meaningful contributions to humanity.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of James Wood. Well-known in North Texas, he was businessman, veteran, and philanthropist. Mr. Wood was born on November 4, 1937, in Decatur, Texas and grew up the youngest of five children. After graduating high school in 1956, he left his Wise County hometown and went to work in a shipyard on the Harvey Canal in Louisiana. After a short time working in Louisiana, he entered the U.S. Army, serving his country for three years. Upon his honorable discharge from the military, Mr. Wood went to work at Bell Helicopter in Fort Worth. He decided to try his hand at selling cars just like his father. Mr. Wood became manager of Cocanougher Ford in Bridgeport. For a decade, with his wife Shirley, they successfully operated Tanwood Motor Sales in Decatur before taking over the General Motors dealership. In 1989, under the leadership of Mr. and Mrs. Woods, James Wood Motors became the largest GMC truck dealer in the United States. During the next decade, their dealership was the top GMC dealership in Texas. James Wood Motors built a new facility in 1989 and became Wise County's full-line General Motors. The Woods expanded their geographic footprint and vehicle offerings by purchasing a Buick/GMC dealership in Denton. James Wood Motors added Pontiac, Chevrolet, Oldsmobile, Jeep, Eagle and Mazda to their dealership portfolio and created the James Wood AutoPark by 1994 in Denton. The Woods family currently owns General Motors dealerships in Decatur and Denton, a Hyundai dealership in Decatur, as well as Neighborhood Used Car dealerships with multiple North Texas locations. Mr. Wood was recognized for his many contributions to the community as Decatur's ``Citizen of the Year'' in 1989. In addition, he was elected to the GM Presidents Dealer Advisory Council in 1987 and served as a board member of the Wise Health System for ten years. He was instrumental in founding the Champions and Blue Ribbon Club for the Wise County Youth Fair and due to his time and efforts in support of the Fort Worth Stock Show, he was elected to the Stock Show Board of Directors. While a very successful business owner and community philanthropist, Mr. Wood was also an avid farmer and rancher and dedicated family man. He enjoyed cutting horses and raising cattle but most importantly, spending time with his wife of sixty years, Shirley, and their three children: daughter Janetta, son Raymond and late son Josh, grandchildren and great grandchildren. James Wood was a respected business and community leader and a beloved husband, father, grandfather and great grandfather. He will be sorely missed by his family and friends to whom I extend my sincere condolences.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, of course, we are all observing the Attending Physician's request that we stay at least 6 feet apart. And I appreciate the Democratic Speaker's acknowledgment that it is perhaps better to address the American people without a mask. Mr. Cole, I also want to extend my sympathies to you. I know your district suffered greatly last night in the storm, and certainly our hearts are with our near neighbors in Oklahoma. So our actions today represent a lost opportunity. I am grateful that we are going to finally pass legislation that will provide more funding for our small businesses and for our healthcare providers. We should have been preparing for the needs of the American people since the first of this year. Instead, the House considered 15 pieces of non-crucial legislation and five resolutions that do not now, nor ever will, have the force of law. Six months before this crisis started in January, President Trump signed into law the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act, the product of our health subcommittee, last Congress and this Congress. But after this fire broke out across the globe, did we do any real- time oversight as to whether or not the bill that we had passed, the bill that we had labored over, was, in fact, performing as indicated? The Speaker talked about real-time oversight. We had an opportunity, but we didn't take it. The Energy and Commerce Committee held hearings on flavored tobacco, we looked into horse racing, we looked into ticket scalping. And these issues have a place in our legislative agenda, but not in the middle of a pandemic when we should have been doing real-time oversight of a bill we had signed into law a mere 6 months before. So as the leader of the Health Subcommittee on Energy and Commerce, I began calling for action in January. It was not until February 26, as an add-on to a budget hearing for Health and Human Services where there was a brief panel assembled, and only 10 Members were allowed to ask questions of this expert panel on the emerging novel coronavirus. It was a full 2 weeks later before Congress considered its first comprehensive bill. During consideration in the Rules Committee, I requested, because one hadn't been done, a survey of ventilators. We didn't know how many we had available. Now, thanks to vital steps taken by the Trump administration, to this date, no patient has been denied a ventilator that needed one. This is a testament to the administration's response. It is a testament to the private sector in this country that responded so well. And it certainly puts to shame the Democratic majority's response during January and February. We are in the middle of working to ensure patient survival and keeping our economy afloat. Now is not the time to authorize yet another partisan committee to conduct oversight in a manner that we know will only be good for the next new cycle. Early in this crisis, we forewent an opportunity to prepare. Let us not make the same mistake again. Let us not continue to waste time. Let us do the work of the American people and get to business as usual. If we had been better authorizers, less oversight would be necessary.