Michael Burgess

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 931, the Firefighter Cancer Registry Act. In 2015, a 5-year study of nearly 30,000 firefighters found that these individuals had a greater number of cancer diagnoses and cancer- related deaths than matched controls in the general population. While this built upon prior studies that have examined the link between firefighting and cancer, our understanding of this connection is still limited. To improve our ability to alleviate the health risks that these public servants face, Representatives Collins and Pascrell introduced H.R. 931. This will authorize funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to create a national registry for the collection of data pertaining to cancer incidence among firefighters. This national registry will fill the void in our understanding of the health risks that our firefighters face and better prepare us to care for them. Yesterday did mark the 16th anniversary of the September 11 attacks. We are reminded of the firefighters' willingness to run toward danger to help anyone who is in harm's way. Across our country, firefighters answer the call whenever our families or our communities are in need. Supporting these important public health bills is one way we can give back to these heroes, and I urge all Members to join me in supporting H.R. 931.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Chair, tonight I am proud to introduce an amendment that will fully fund the National All Schedules Prescription Electronic Reporting program, colloquially known as NASPER. NASPER has long provided us with an opportunity to help prevent the spread of opioids across the country; however, until now, we have not funded it. NASPER funding supports the development and maintenance of a State- run prescription drug monitoring program. These prescription drug monitoring programs allow for doctors and pharmacists to electronically interconnect with one when prescribing opioids, allowing for the providers to confer and ensure that the patient is not receiving a duplicate opioid prescription that the patient may then divert or sell. Prescription drug monitoring programs work because they engage providers and they successfully prevent individuals from exploiting weaknesses in the healthcare system. During any epidemic, it is important to first help those in need and provide support to individuals and first responders who were impacted by the epidemic. Last year, the Energy and Commerce Committee and the Subcommittee on Health did exactly this. We worked to put forth the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act to provide support for those impacted by the opioid epidemic by increasing access to those in need. No epidemic response, however, is complete without preventative measures, and that is why NASPER is so important to this fight. We must prioritize programs like NASPER that are preventative and can ensure that errant prescribers and bad actors do not fall through the cracks. If we want to end this epidemic, we must commit resources to programs that will promote prevention and encourage safer prescribing of prescription drugs. As the subcommittee chairman for the authorizing committee that has been tasked with the public health response to a crisis that claimed more than 60,000 American lives last year, I am committed to further working to oversee the implementation of our initial response efforts and to develop any supplemental responses that may be needed to prevent future unnecessary deaths. I encourage my colleagues to take this opportunity to support the work of the Subcommittee on Health on the Energy and Commerce Committee in authorizing this and allow Congress to approve funding for NASPER. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, the country has stood, first, in awe of the power that was unleashed on the Texas-Louisiana coast, and then in admiration of constituents up and down the Texas and Louisiana coast as they face this difficulty and work together to get through it. This bill today is also a product of people working together. Through at least two sessions of Congress we have now come with self-driving vehicle legislation that is going to change our economy. This bill will allow developers room to grow, while making certain that the technology is safe for consumers. This act will create jobs and ensure that we remain the global leader in innovation. Most importantly, the self-driving vehicle legislation has the ability to save lives. Throughout my life, I have seen the lifesaving effects of advancements in vehicle technology, starting with the seat belt, to the air bag, to antilock brakes. Self-driving vehicles are the next step in this trajectory. The Energy and Commerce Committee has dedicated a lot to this technology and its ability to save lives, and, certainly, the last term of Congress, the Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade Subcommittee that Mr. Latta now chairs. I am proud to see the product of our work come to the floor.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the dedication of the Bowden Center in Keller, Texas on Sunday, August 20, 2017. This space was generously donated by Don Bowden and the late Linda Bowden, and now is operated by the Greater Keller Women's Club Foundation. The Bowden Center is an event space that will allow local charities and schools to hold functions, as well as host weddings and other social gatherings. All profits from the Bowden Center will go to the Greater Keller Women's Club Foundation, which will direct the funds back into the community through charities the club supports. Through the generosity of the Bowdens, the Greater Keller Women's Club Foundation will have sustained opportunities to enrich the Keller community. This building and its dedication pay tribute to Linda Bowden, a very special leader in our Keller community, who passed away in May 2017. This building honors her legacy, and furthers her life work of giving back to others. From her years at the PTA to this year, she never stopped seeking out ways to help others. The dedication of this space is a fitting tribute to thank Linda Bowden for her generosity, not just with the new Bowden Center, but all she did for the people in Keller, Texas. We are grateful to Don and Linda Bowden, and look forward to using this space to honor their spirit of generosity and further support the good work achieved by the Greater Keller Women's Club Foundation.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to prevent the distortion of the free market by the Federal Government. Since its passage in 2007 of the Energy Independence and Security Act, I have heard from virtually tens of thousands of constituents about the language in that act and how it will take away consumer choice when constituents are deciding which lightbulbs they will use in their homes. Mr. Chairman, they are right. Mr. Chairman, in the interest of time, I want to point out this exact amendment has been accepted for the past 6 years by the House. Three of those years it was accepted by voice vote. It was included in the annual appropriations legislation signed into law by President Obama every year since its first inclusion in 2011, and has been a priority of the Republican Conference since its adoption into law. It allows consumers to continue to have a choice and to have a say about what type of lightbulb they will put into their homes. Congress should fight to preserve the free market. It is common sense. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Chairman, I will disagree on the economics that were just presented. But apart from the economics of the lightbulb mandate, that is, in fact, only part of the story. With the extreme expansion of Federal powers undertaken in the last administration, when the Democrats were in charge of Congress for 4 years, Americans have just now begun to see how far the Constitution's Commerce Clause has been manipulated from its original intent. The lightbulb mandate is a perfect example of this manipulation. The Commerce Clause was intended by our Founding Fathers to be a limitation on Federal authority, not a catchall in order to allow for any topic to be regulated by Washington. Indeed, it is clear that the Founding Fathers never intended for this clause to be used to allow the Federal Government to regulate and pass mandates on consumer products that do not pose a risk to either human health or safety. Mr. Chairman, in December of 2007, when this bill was first passed, the columnist George Will observed on television one Sunday morning that it is the job of the Federal Government to defend the borders and deliver the mail. But instead of keeping up with those two tasks, we instead decided to ban the incandescent bulb. It was wrong in 2007. It is wrong in 2017. Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3178, the Medicare Part B Improvement Act of 2017. This bill represents a series of bipartisan reforms from the Committees on Energy and Commerce and Ways and Means that will provide targeted reforms to improve access to care for Medicare beneficiaries. Home infusion patients are oftentimes our Nation's sickest and most vulnerable, and maintaining access to these services in home settings has proved invaluable in ensuring that patients can continue to effectively receive the care that they need. Under last year's 21st Century Cures Act, we took the necessary steps to ensure that taxpayers and beneficiaries were no longer overcharged on the acquisition and dispensing costs associated with home infusion. Additionally, we took complementary steps to recognize the unique education needs associated with receiving infusion in the home. However, as my subcommittee learned in a hearing on this issue just last week, there is still more that must be done to integrate these two policies without jeopardizing access to patient care. Therefore, today's bill creates a bridge to connect these critical policies and to resolve the issue. Additionally, H.R. 3178 takes an additional needed step to protect home health services by expanding opportunities for individuals to receive home dialysis. Access to services like home infusion and home dialysis has had a significant impact in my home State of Texas, and I am encouraged by today's bill, as it will build upon these additional successes for Texans and all Americans. I would like to thank Chairman Brady, Chairman Tiberi, and Chairman Walden for their leadership on the bill. They rose to the challenge to address these tough policy decisions. This bill is a product of their hard work, as well as the hard work of all the staff involved at the subcommittee and full committee level, and I thank them as well.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize recent athletic victories within my district. I am proud to announce that the Argyle High School boy's golf team has claimed the title of state champions this spring. The Argyle High School boy's golf team attained their third straight state title by thirteen strokes. The Eagles three-peat performance in the UIL Class 4A state tournament was led by Coach Brady Bell. Also of note, Luke Griggs took fifth place in individual performance at the state tournament. The team has won its local district tournament for six consecutive years, and continues to excel in this area of athletics. The team effort displayed by Argyle's High School golf team in the state tournament demonstrates the continued success and dedication in District 26. It is my honor to represent Argyle High School boy's golf team in the U.S. House of Representatives. These dedicated student athletes and their coaches have represented the 26th District well, and our community looks forward to more successful seasons to come.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize recent athletic victories within my district. I am proud to announce that the Keller High School softball team has claimed the title of state champions this spring. The Keller High School Indians softball team, coached by Bryan Poehler, this season earned its second consecutive UIL Class 6A state championship. Also of note, Keller's second baseman Camryn Woodall was named most valuable player of the championship game. This is the fourth title earned by the Keller Indians in school history. This team put forth great effort in securing the 6A division state title, persevering through two weather delays in their path to championship victory. It is my honor to represent the Keller High School softball team in the U.S. House of Representatives. These dedicated student athletes and their coaches have represented the 26th District well, and our community looks forward to more successful seasons to come.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize recent athletic victories within my district. I am proud to announce that the Colony High School softball team claimed the title of state champions this spring. Coach Deana Coleman led the Colony Cougars to their first appearance in the UIL Class 5A state championship, and sophomore Karlie Charles was named the game's most valuable player. Furthermore, five team members have joined the 5A 2017 All-Tournament Team. I would like to congratulate the Colony High School softball team on its successful 2017 season, capped off by this well-deserved state championship. It is my honor to represent the Colony High School softball team in the U.S. House of Representatives. These dedicated student athletes and their coaches have represented the 26th District well, and our community looks forward to more successful seasons to come.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize recent athletic victories within my district. I am proud to announce that Krum High School Softball has claimed the title of state champions this spring. The Krum High School softball team made its first appearance in a state championship this season, led by Coach Bryan Chaney. The Krum High School softball team put forth a great effort throughout its 4A state title run. Junior pitcher and championship game MVP, Krum's Tristan Bridges, led Krum's softball team in a narrow victory. This display of success has set a winning precedent for future teams in the 26th District of Texas. It is my honor to represent the Krum High School in the U.S. House of Representatives. These dedicated student athletes and their coaches have represented the 26th District well, and our community looks forward to more successful seasons to come.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to speak in honor of our guest chaplain, Marshall Dunbar, of Cross Roads, Texas. Chaplain Dunbar is the vice president of Spiritual Life and interim vice president of Programs for Christian Community Action, one of the largest private nonprofits in north Texas. He has an extensive record of service to our country and the north Texas community, including years in active military service, law enforcement, and homeland security. Chaplain Dunbar was commissioned into the United States Army Reserve Chaplain Corps as a chaplain candidate in 2011, beginning his chaplaincy career at the VA Hospital in Dallas. In 2014, he ended his military career as a first lieutenant. Chaplain Dunbar holds a B.S. in ministry and leadership from Dallas Christian College and a master of divinity in chaplaincy from Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary. He is currently working toward his doctor of ministry degree in Christian leadership and spiritual formation at Dallas Theological Seminary. I am grateful to Chaplain Dunbar for his service to north Texans and the American people. It is a true pleasure to have him here in the House, along with his wife, Melinda, and daughter, Elle-Simone. We are grateful for his service and we welcome him to the House.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Number one, it is not germane, and it is more complicated now because the Food and Drug Administration has gotten involved in the process. I wish it were straightforward. It is something I continue to work on.

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. BURGESS. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BURGESS. The reason is because the manufacture of over-the- counter epinephrine inhalers has been prohibited by the EPA and the Food and Drug Administration.

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 451 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 451 provides for a structured rule to consider a bill out of the Energy and Commerce Committee pertaining to the Environmental Protection Agency's ozone standards. The rule provides for 1 hour of debate equally divided between the majority and the minority on the Energy and Commerce Committee. The rule further makes in order six Democratic amendments for consideration. Finally, the minority is afforded the customary motion to recommit. Under the Clean Air Act's National Ambient Air Quality Standards program, the EPA is tasked with setting standards and regulations for certain defined pollutants, including ground-level ozone, commonly referred to as smog. The Environmental Protection Agency has set these standards and adjusted when necessary in 1971, 1979, 1997, and 2008. Since 1980, ozone levels have declined by 33 percent, according to the EPA, thanks in large part to diligent State oversight of industries and planning, along with weather patterns and outside temperatures, which all contribute to ozone levels. Ozone has been a particular issue in the north Texas area that I represent, where hot summer days and prevailing southerly breezes cause air quality issues that affect outdoor activities and may create health concerns. In 2015, the EPA proposed changing the 2008 ozone standards that had not yet been fully implemented, despite nearly 700 national, State, and local organizations and stakeholders requesting that the EPA allow the 2008 standards to be adopted before moving the goalposts on these regulated parties. In fact, the EPA did not publish its implementation regulations for the 2008 standards until March of 2015, nearly 7 years after the standards had been issued, and then promptly that same year decided to change the rules entirely. The EPA ignored the request from stakeholders and moved ahead with lowering the ozone standard, manipulating scientific findings in order to justify the move. In fact, nearly two-thirds of the so-called benefits that the EPA claimed would result from this new standard are not based on ozone reductions at all, but instead on reductions from an entirely different pollutant regulated under a different set of rules. H.R. 806, the Ozone Standards Implementation Act of 2017, is an important step toward focusing the EPA's efforts at science-based regulating of the environment and a rejection of the politically motivated actions of the previous 8 years. The legislation phases in implementation of the 2008 and 2015 ozone standards, extending the date for final designation for the 2015 standard to 2025, aligning the permitting requirements of the Clean Air Act with the implementation schedule set by the EPA. This allows for a thoughtful and methodical implementation process to proceed at the State level to address the varied needs and nuances that exist in the States based upon industry and based upon weather patterns. The measured approach contained in H.R. 806 will allow States to pursue cost-effective and practical implementation plans to enforce the EPA's ozone standards. Further, it utilizes a process that will benefit from the States' practical experiences at implementing previous ozone standards. Nothing in the legislation before the House today changes any existing air quality standards or regulations. Let me say that again. Nothing in the legislation before the House today changes any existing air quality standards or regulations. This legislation is focused solely on providing States and businesses the proper tools, time, and flexibility to implement the EPA's regulations most effectively. This is a goal we should all support. According to the EPA's own analysis in 2015, the vast majority of U.S. counties will meet the 2015 standards by 2025, the same timeframe that the bill before us contemplates implementation. H.R. 806 is important, however, because it gives States the flexibility to focus on the most pressing environmental issues in each individual State, rather than having the EPA dictate where resources must be used regardless of need. The Energy and Commerce Committee has been reviewing the issue of finding the correct balance for ozone implementation for years and has crafted legislation that reflects that measured approach. In 2015, I wrote to the EPA's Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee expressing my concern over the EPA's expedited implementation of the 2015 standards despite concerns on how the ozone rules could affect other pollutants, namely nitrogen oxide, which has been found to actually increase inversely when ozone levels decrease. This increase of nitrogen oxide is especially present in urban environments where many at-risk populations live. Given the many implementation questions surrounding EPA's political decision to move forward with the 2015 standards, H.R. 806 is a prudent and justified course that this government should be taking. For these reasons, I encourage my colleagues to support today's rule and the underlying bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute. Mr. Speaker, it is ironic that the gentleman would reference the cost of asthma inhalers. It was, after all, two Congresses ago where the Environmental Protection Agency actually outlawed the manufacture and sale of over-the-counter asthma inhalers and took them away from those of us who suffer from that disease. And, indeed, losing that over-the- counter option for an over-the-counter epinephrine inhaler for the treatment of asthma as a rescue inhaler, we have, indeed, seen the cost of prescription inhalers quadruple over that time frame. So, in many ways, as an asthma patient, I hold the EPA directly responsible for my inability to get an inexpensive over-the-counter rescue inhaler. And for many asthma patients, who may find themselves caught short, that means a trip to the emergency room and, probably, a $1,200 or $1,500 event that otherwise could have been solved by a Primatene inhaler that sold two for $16. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute. Mr. Speaker, I want to reference a letter that I sent on May 23, 2014, to Dr. Christopher Frey, who was then the chairman of the EPA Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee. The letter reads: ``I understand that, due in part to recommendations by the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, EPA's new draft Health Risk and Exposure Assessment for Ozone concludes that''--I am quoting from the EPA here-- `` `mortality from short- and long-term ozone exposures and respiratory hospitalization risk is not greatly affected by meeting lower standards.' '' Again, that is from the EPA draft of the Health Risk and Exposure Assessment for Ozone, from May of 2014. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the letter. Congress of the United States, House of Representatives, May 23, 2014. Dr. H. Christopher Frey, Chair, EPA Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, Distinguished University Professor, Department of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC. Dear Dr. Frey: In January 2015, pursuant to a court imposed deadline, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is expected to propose revisions to the current National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone set in 2008. The agency's proposed revisions may well represent the most costly standards the agency has ever sought to impose on the U.S. economy. The Administrator's judgments about the adequacy of the standard and any such proposed revisions accordingly will be subject to close Congressional oversight and scrutiny. A critical question will concern whether the Administrator has fully and clearly evaluated the risk reduction estimates associated with the standard and proposed alternatives. The Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee's (CASAC) by statute serves to review the information supporting EPA's assessment of the existing NAAQS for ozone and to help assure that EPA conducts a full and objective evaluation of risks and risk tradeoffs in its proposals. In the context of this review, given the potential costs and impacts of any revision to the current standard, I believe it is critically important that such risks and risk tradeoffs are fully evaluated. Presently, EPA appears to be moving forward without fully addressing important risk tradeoff questions regarding the impact of emissions reductions of nitrogen oxides (NOX), which CASAC has also been reviewing, on ozone concentrations. I write today to draw your attention to concerns that have been raised that EPA has not fully evaluated the risk reduction outcomes identified in the agency's risk assessments used for the upcoming proposed rule. I understand that, due in part to recommendations by CASAC, EPA's new draft Health Risk and Exposure Assessment for Ozone (HREA) concludes that ``mortality from short- and long-term [ozone] exposures and respiratory hospitalization risk is not greatly affected by meeting lower standards.'' According to the HREA, this is due in part to the fact that further reductions in nitrogen oxides (NOX) emissions will actually increase ozone levels on low concentration days in urban areas where at-risk populations live. For instance, in modeling a 50 percent reduction in NOX emissions from existing levels, the HREA found that April-to-October ozone exposures actually increased for large percentages of exposed populations in several major urban areas where at-risk populations are likely to live, including New York, Detroit, Los Angeles, and Chicago. In other words, even though reducing NOX emissions may yield direct benefits by reducing NOX related health effects, they may also lead to increased ozone levels--the issue under review by the CASAC Ozone Review Panel. If EPA is correct to assume that all ozone exposures should be of concern, any increases in ozone exposure throughout the year are important to assess. However, testimony submitted to CASAC this past March notes that EPA's analysis likely underestimates the potential for increases in ozone exposures because the agency does not evaluate the effect of NOX emission reductions on ozone levels throughout the full year. Specifically, EPA's analysis of epidemiologically-based short-term mortality and morbidity risks fails to consider the likely increases in ozone levels during the cooler months of the year when NOX emissions are reduced. This March testimony reported that such a full year-round analysis of the impact of NOX emission reductions in urban Philadelphia resulted in increases in total ozone exposures. The EPA's analysis itself notes that wintertime increases in ozone ``were significant in 11 out of the 15 areas'' evaluated when nationwide NOX emissions were cut ``almost in half,'' but fails to address how increases in wintertime ozone levels from further NOX reductions will affect the proposed health benefits of meeting a lower ozone standard. Potential changes in wintertime ozone levels also pose a problem for EPA's assessment of mortality risks from long-term exposure to ozone. In light of these shortcomings in analysis, we ask that you recommend that EPA conduct a full year-round analysis of the effect of further NOX emission reductions on the epidemiologically-based, short-term mortality and morbidity health benefits front meeting a lower ozone standard. This should be done in a manner that clearly distinguishes between exposure changes projected for urban, suburban, and rural portions of each of the Urban Study Areas. In addition, EPA should provide a discussion of the limitations of projecting future mortality risks from long-term exposure given that the epidemiological study used did not account for potential differences in wintertime ozone levels. Finally, I understand that transcripts of your public proceedings may not always be preserved for future public access and review. If this is the case, I ask that you ensure that CASAC preserve a full transcript or recording of the telephone conference and related public deliberations for future public access and review. Thank you for your attention to this request. Sincerely, Michael C. Burgess, M.D.

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