Michael Burgess

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, as I pointed out in the statement I gave at the beginning of this hour, just reflecting back on the month of May, a month where the House of Representatives passed legislation funding our military bases, funding our veterans, funding energy and water policies, providing new authorities to combat the growing threat of the Zika virus, we updated our Nation's chemical laws for the first time in 40 years, we provided help to people in this country facing opiate addictions, we provided pay and benefits to our military, we provided the tools to our armed services necessary to keep our citizens safe from the growing threat of terrorism, it has been a significant month in the United States House of Representatives. Oftentimes we don't reflect back on what has been accomplished. So this is a good opportunity to do that. Mr. Speaker, today's rule provides for consideration of two important bills to update our Nation's energy policies and address the constitutional deficiencies in recent District of Columbia Council actions. I want to thank the many Members of the House on both sides who contributed to the underlying pieces of legislation, which will be considered today following the passage of today's rule. Finally, I do want to join my colleagues--I am probably the most recent addition to the House Rules Committee, but I certainly have been there long enough to appreciate the wise counsel and guidance of Miles Lackey and certainly wish him well in his future endeavors and pray for his successor.

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

Mr. BURGESS

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

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment that will actually maintain current law. Since its passage in 2007, I have heard from tens of thousands of constituents about how the language of the 2007 Energy Independence Security Act takes away consumer choice when deciding what type of light bulb to use in their homes. Mr. Chairman, they are right. While the government has passed energy efficiency standards in other realms over the years, they never moved so far and lowered standards so drastically. It is to a point where technology is still years away from making bulbs that are compliant with the law at a price point that the average American can afford. Opponents to my amendment will claim that the 2007 language did not ban the incandescent bulb. That is true. It bans the sale of the 100- watt, the 60-watt and then the 45-watt bulb. The replacement bulbs are far from economically efficient even if they may be regarded as energy efficient. A family living paycheck to paycheck simply cannot afford the replacement cost of these bulbs. But the economics of the light bulb mandate are only part of the story. With the extreme expansion of Federal powers undertaken by the Obama administration during the first 2 years of the Obama administration, Americans woke up to just how far the Constitution's Commerce Clause has been manipulated from its original intent. The light bulb mandate is the perfect example of this. The Commerce Clause was intended by our Founding Fathers to be a limitation to Federal authority, not a catch-all nod to allow for any topic to be regulated by Washington. Indeed, it is clear that the Founding Fathers never intended 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. This exact amendment has been accepted for the past 4 years by the House. The first 3 years it was accepted by a voice vote. It has been included in the annual appropriations legislation signed into law by President Obama every year since its first inclusion in 2011. It allows consumers to continue to have a choice and to have a say about what they put in their homes. It is just common sense. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Chairman, I would merely observe that, in calendar year 2007, the political analyst George Will opined at the end of that year that the American Congress essentially had two mandates, to deliver the mail and defend the borders, that it had failed miserably at both jobs. Instead of performing either of those jobs, it banned the incandescent bulb, probably the single greatest invention to have occurred in America in the 1800s. This is a commonsense bill. Our constituents have asked for this. The Congress has supported it. The amendment, in fact, maintains current law. I urge all Members to support it. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a milestone for the Mustang Special Utility District (SUD). On May 13, 2016, this local government entity will celebrate fifty years of utility service to residents and businesses in northeast Denton County. The organization started as a small water supply corporation in 1966 with less than 50 connections. The Mustang SUD now covers 100 square miles and 11,000 connections as a provider of retail water and sewer utilities within its designated boundaries, encompassing cities and communities between Pilot Point to the north and Oak Point to the south. The Mustang SUD is governed by an elected board of directors. The nine directors are elected to three year terms and must be retail customers of the organization and reside within the district's boundaries. Since 2011, the organization has been deemed a ``Superior Public Water System'' by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). To be designated ``Superior,'' the system must meet the TCEQ's stringent criteria for overall excellence in the operation of a public water system. These standards include excelled efforts in protecting public health, ensuring reliable operations and water supply for the system's customers, compliance with regulatory requirements and environmental stewardship. It is my privilege to represent the customers of the Mustang SUD in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor former Lewisville Mayor Gene Carey for his generosity and public service to the citizens and City of Lewisville. Mr. Carey passed away recently at the age of 73 and is survived by his wife of almost 50 years, two children, and five grandchildren. Mr. Carey and his family moved to Lewisville in 1972. He previously served in the U.S. Army and became an inventory analyst for Halliburton, where he worked for more than 38 years. His love for Lewisville inspired him to commit his time and efforts to ensure the community's prosperous growth and the well-being of its residents. He was a faithful member of Lakeland Baptist Church and an active volunteer with Christian Community Action. His numerous community activities included membership in the Denton County Republican Men's Club and Lewisville Economic Development Foundation. Mr. Carey was a graduate of Lewisville's Citizens Police Academy, served as Chairman of the Arts Advisory Board and the Charter Review Committee, and as a board member on the Lewisville Parks Board. In 1993, he was elected to the Lewisville City Council. He would then go on to win his first race for Mayor in 2000 and was subsequently re-elected three more times. Mr. Carey was the 21st person to serve as Mayor of Lewisville and was the longest-serving mayor in the city's history. I was privileged to count Mayor Gene Carey as an insightful and trusted colleague in serving the citizens of Lewisville and Denton County. He dedicated his life to his family, friends, and the Lewisville community. He will be greatly missed by the people whose lives he touched and his legacy will continue to benefit the community for years to come.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the University of North Texas (UNT) on their 125th anniversary. On September 16, 1890, Joshua C. Chilton established what was then known as the Texas Normal College and Teacher Training Institute in Denton, TX. Starting with only 70 students, UNT has risen in the ranks of academia to become the largest university in the Dallas-Fort Worth area with a student population of over 37,000. Starting out as a small, private teacher's college, an important milestone was reached in 1901 when the school became a publicly-funded educational institution. 1913 was a banner year with the opening of the first library and genesis of the sports program as well as student enrollment reaching 1,000 students. In the 1920's, the music program became well-known with the introduction of the Aces of Collegeland band. This iconic moment still resonates today as the School of Music has gained renown as the first in the world to offer a jazz studies degree and is one of the largest music institutions at the collegiate level in North America. During World War II, the campus became a training site and enrollment declined by half as the student body was called to service. In the decades to come, the institution grew in size and stature as it attained university status; became home to the Texas Academy of Math and Science; added the College of Engineering at the Discovery Park campus; built the premier Murchison Performing Arts Center, Apogee Stadium and Union venues; launched the nation's first comprehensive emergency management degree and just recently achieved recognition as a tier one research university. The University of North Texas has become a cornerstone educational institution and powerful economic generator for not only Denton, but also the entire north Texas region. As a proud UNT alumnus, I am pleased to join the students, faculty, staff, administration and community in celebrating the university's quasquicentennial. In the years to come, UNT will continue to serve as a leader in higher education. It is an honor to serve the University of North Texas in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Mrs. Lori Wright, who is retiring after 20 years of dedicated public service to the City of Highland Village, Texas. The community has benefited immeasurably from her unflagging encouragement, unfailing commitment to excellence, and from her attentive care to the city's council, staff, residents and businesses. On January 3, 1995, Lori Wright began her career as a part time receptionist for the City of Highland Village. Her infectious personality and hard work boosted her through the ranks to administrative clerk by November of 1995. One year later, she advanced, yet again, to deputy city secretary. On March 1, 1999, she attained the position of executive assistant. She has capably provided support and continuity to three city managers during her career. Mrs. Wright has fostered effective and consistent communication amongst the staff and beneficial dialogue between the city's administration and residents. Under her conscientious charge and in concert with her colleague Laurie Mullens, the Highland Village Business Association has grown into a vibrant organization to promote the city's business community. She has been instrumental in making the city's annual ``Salute Our Veterans'' luncheon a treasured event to honor local veterans. Each year, Mrs. Wright visits assisted living communities in the area to reach as many veterans as possible and encourage their attendance. She ensures that the luncheon operates smoothly and that every veteran present is greeted personally and treated with distinction. Mrs. Wright has worked closely with my district office to facilitate the public announcement and recognition of the 26th Congressional Veteran Commendation recipients. In addition to her many administrative duties, Mrs. Wright has also played an important role in the development of the Honor Our Veterans Monument, working with city staff and council in the development and construction of the monument, serving as the city's liaison to the Veterans Committee to determine the policies for review and placement of veterans names and developed the presentation ceremony. My best wishes to Mrs. Wright upon her well-earned retirement; her positive influence, her excellent work and tireless devotion to the community will be greatly missed. During her two decades as a public servant, Lori Wright was an able ambassador for the city and effectively helped the city government operate seamlessly for its residents. It is my privilege to honor such an outstanding citizen in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 672 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire of the gentleman from Colorado how many additional speakers he has?

Mr. BURGESS. In which case, I reserve the balance of my time.

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 672 provides for consideration of H.R. 2666, the No Rate Regulation of Broadband Internet Access Act. The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided between the majority and the minority of the Energy and Commerce Committee. The Committee on Rules made in order three amendments that were submitted to the committee, all three of which were submitted by the minority. Finally, the rule affords the minority the customary motion to recommit, a final opportunity to amend the legislation should the minority choose to exercise that option. H.R. 2666, the No Rate Regulation of Broadband Internet Access Act, was introduced by Mr. Kinzinger, a member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, to address the issue of an out-of-control independent agency, the Federal Communications Commission, or the FCC. The bill is targeted and does one thing only. It prohibits the Federal Communications Commission from regulating the rates charged for broadband Internet access. In February of 2015, the Federal Communications Commission voted on a party-line vote to adopt rules that reclassify broadband Internet access as a title II telecommunications service, reversing their previously stated position that they would not reclassify the Internet under title II, and, in fact, afterwards, the President himself interjected into the debate and demanded that the Commission reconsider and that they do so. The rules prevent blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization of the Internet. This reclassification poses a serious risk for the regulation of rates charged by providers for the delivery of Internet service, a move that has never before been taken by the government. Under the Federal Communications Commission's unprecedented use of a 100-year-old statute to regulate the Internet under its net neutrality rule, the Commission gave itself the authority to regulate the rates that Internet service providers charge to consumers for service. In response to this power grab by the Commission, the Energy and Commerce Committee held oversight hearings. That resulted in the drafting and passage of the legislation before the House this week, which is intended to prevent the Federal Communications Commission from using reclassification of broadband Internet service to engage in rate regulation, whether that be directly through tariffing or indirectly through enforcement actions. Rate regulation--or even the threat of rate regulation--out of the Federal Communications Commission creates massive uncertainty for Internet service providers. Because of this, Internet service providers could slow or stop altogether the investment and will be less likely to offer specialized or unique pricing offers to their consumers. As the Federal Communications Commission consolidates more and more power to regulate the Internet--and make no mistake, the Federal Communications Commission is very eager to regulate the Internet-- providers will have fewer and fewer avenues for providing consumer service plans and packages. The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, Tom Wheeler, and President Obama have both stated that net neutrality rules would not result in the FCC regulating rates. Yet, less than a year after the rules were adopted in March of 2016 during an Energy and Commerce hearing, Chairman Wheeler admitted that the FCC should and will have the authority to regulate broadband rates under these new rules. Like all government agencies, the Federal Communications Commission can't help itself. It sees an unregulated space--the Internet--and it just can't allow it to go on without government control. Under net neutrality, the Federal Government will have the ability to control the Internet. Let me say that again. Under net neutrality, the Federal Government will have the ability to control the Internet. Even if this current Federal Communications Commission chooses not to regulate the rates charged, the Commission's net neutrality rules permit future FCC commissioners to do exactly that. These rules from the Federal Communications Commission have the potential to cost well north of 43,000 jobs, according to a recent study commissioned by the United States Telecom Association. The bill before us this week will take a step toward protecting the Internet industry from those job losses. I urge my colleagues to support today's rule and support the underlying legislation to protect consumers from an out-of-control Federal bureaucracy. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, back in the late 1990s, in the middle of what was called the dot-com boom, my predecessor, the then-majority leader of the House of Representatives, Richard Armey, came and spoke to the Dallas Chamber of Commerce. The purpose of his discussion that day was to talk about the dot-com boom that the economy was experiencing. He confessed that the Internet was the gosh darnedest thing, no one had ever seen anything like it, but he cautioned us. As business leaders that day, he cautioned us. He said: Look, when the government doesn't understand something, the first thing it will want to do is regulate it, the next thing it will want to do is tax it, and you have then effectively killed it. Mr. Speaker, it wasn't an accident that I used in the opening statement the language that under the proposed rules from the FCC, the Federal Government will have the ability to control the Internet. That is a significant and important fact. If you allow the Federal Government to control the Internet, you have effectively damaged the promise of the Internet to the point where it will no longer function for its citizens the way it was intended to function: as a free and open process. Mr. Speaker, it is pretty simple. Today's rule provides for consideration of a bill to rein in the Federal Government that is all too eager to regulate every aspect of our lives. H.R. 2666 will protect the Internet from government regulation and allow it to continue to thrive without interference. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Mr. Kinzinger for his work on this legislation, and I want to thank the committee for the work that they did in getting this legislation to the floor. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the rule and ``yes'' on the underlying bill.

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

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 632 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 Florida (Mr. Hastings), 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 632 provides for a rule to consider a commonsense, bipartisan piece of legislation that will address waste, fraud, and abuse within the Medicaid program. The rule provides for 1 hour of debate, equally divided between the majority and the minority of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. The Committee on Rules made in order four amendments that were submitted to the committee, three Democratic amendments and one bipartisan offering. Finally, the rule affords the minority the customary motion to recommit, a final opportunity to amend the legislation should the minority choose to exercise that option. H.R. 3716, the Ensuring Access to Quality Medicaid Providers Act, combines two bipartisan bills that were unanimously reported out of the Energy and Commerce Committee: H.R. 3716, the Ensuring Terminated Providers Are Removed from Medicaid and CHIP Act that was introduced by Dr. Larry Bucshon, a member of the committee; and H.R. 3821, the Medicaid DOC Act authored by Representative Chris Collins, also on the committee. Not only is this bill bipartisan, it has received support of the administration, and it is an important illustration of the work we are doing in the House right now to improve health care for all Americans. The Medicaid program continues to suffer from fraud, waste, and abuse. These issues cause direct harm to the beneficiaries and waste billions of taxpayer dollars. Medicaid beneficiaries frequently end up in the emergency room, not because they need emergency care, but because they cannot find a physician participating in their Medicaid program. This is an inefficient and ineffective way to access health care. H.R. 3716 is commonsense legislation that resolves both of these problems and improves beneficiary access to quality providers. Not only is this bill good for patients, it is fiscally responsible. According to the Congressional Budget Office, this package would reduce Federal outlays by $15 million over the budget window because the Medicaid program would no longer be paying providers who had been terminated for reasons of fraud, integrity, or quality. Although the Congressional Budget Office does not estimate State- specific savings, this bill would also save State Medicaid programs from several million dollars over the same timeframe. The Office of Inspector General at the Department of Health and Human Services has previously found that 12 percent of terminated providers were participating in a State Medicaid program as of January 1, 2012, after the same provider was terminated for reasons of integrity or quality from another State Medicaid program. The base bill, H.R. 3716, will ensure that we put an end to this problem. State Medicaid and State CHIP programs will be required to report terminated providers to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services within 21 business days. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services will then be required to include that data and Medicare provider terminations in its Termination Notification database within 21 business days. In addition, State Medicaid and State CHIP managed care contracts will be required to include a provision that providers terminated for reasons of integrity or quality from Medicare, Medicaid, or SCHIP be terminated from participation in their provider networks. Where Medicaid or CHIP payments are made to providers for services performed more than 60 days after the provider's termination, those States will be required to pay back the Federal portion of the Medicaid match of those payments. The bill will also ensure that State Medicaid agencies have a current and complete list of providers serving Medicaid patients by requiring providers to enroll with the State agency. To streamline reporting requirements and eliminate duplication, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services will be required to develop uniform terminology for terminations related to fraud, integrity, or quality. These simple reforms will ensure that we stop paying millions of Federal taxpayer dollars for fraudulent and wasteful care and that beneficiaries are not receiving care from providers who have failed to adhere to basic standards of quality or integrity. The second key issue this bill tackles is one of access to care. Beneficiaries in the Medicaid program have historically struggled to find a physician who will accept Medicaid and can provide treatment. H.R. 3716 includes H.R. 3812, introduced by Representative Chris Collins of New York, to empower beneficiaries with better information that will arm them with the information that they need to access care without first going to an emergency room. While Medicaid beneficiaries enrolled in managed care plans have a defined network of providers, about half of States use delivery systems other than risk-based managed care, and those served under a fee-for- service or primary care case management program include some of the most vulnerable Medicaid enrollees, such as the elderly and disabled children. Unfortunately, these enrollees may have limited assistance in identifying physicians who participate in the Medicaid program. Specifically, the policy would require State Medicaid programs to publish an electronic directory of physicians who have billed Medicaid in the prior year--an indication that the physician has or likely still accepts Medicaid patients. That directory would include the physician's name, specialty, address, telephone number, and, where relevant, information on whether the physician is accepting new patients and linguistic capabilities. Medicaid is estimated to cover 83 million people this year, and it is growing. H.R. 3716 makes two targeted but important reforms to strengthen the integrity of the Medicaid program and to improve access to quality care. This legislation is another example of the Energy and Commerce Committee's record of success on bipartisan reform to improve the state of health care in America. I encourage my colleagues to vote for this package. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, so pending Mr. Hastings' conclusion, I will reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I do want to point out today is March 2, significant for many of us in Texas because that is Texas Independence Day, a date that is recognized across the Nation as one that brought independence to the State of Texas. I would point out it seems like oftentimes, in my role here presenting the Republican case for the rule from the Rules Committee, it also becomes my duty to provide some historical perspective for the House of Representatives, and today is no exception. March 2, today, the first year that the Democrats had the majority in recent memory was calendar year 2007. When was a budget passed in calendar year 2007? It was passed on March 29. I would point out that the only thing bipartisan about that budget resolution was the opposition. Calendar 2008, a bit better, the budget passed on March 13, the middle of the month, about 2 weeks from where we are today. Once again, on that budget, 212 yeas and 207 nays. But the nays were bipartisan. The yeas, of course, were of a single party. Calendar year 2009, the budget didn't pass until the month of April, and, once again, the only thing bipartisan about the budget that year was its opposition. Then, finally, I would point out that the following calendar year, 2010, there was no budget submitted. So, Mr. Speaker, my understanding from the chairman of the Budget Committee is they are actively working on the budget. I wish them Godspeed. I am thankful that I don't have to be in the room while it is being done, but I have every confidence that they will produce a budget document that the House will then consider. But today--today--Mr. Speaker, today's rule provides for consideration of an important fix to the Nation's Medicaid program. I certainly want to thank Dr. Larry Bucshon and Mr. Collins of New York--both, of the Energy and Commerce Committee, two important members of the Committee on Energy and Commerce--for their work on this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the rule and ``yes'' on the underlying bill.