Bradley Byrne

Mr. BYRNE

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding, and I rise to extend my support for this rule and the underlying legislation. This legislation funds critical, bipartisan health programs that help keep our communities healthy. Mr. Speaker, I have long been a strong supporter of CHIP because I have seen it in action back in my home State of Alabama. I served on the Alabama State School Board back when Alabama implemented our CHIP program, known as ALL Kids. ALL Kids was the first CHIP program in the country, and it has made a real difference. In fact, the uninsurance rate for children in Alabama has gone from 20 percent pre-CHIP to 2.4 percent today. For 83,000 Alabama children under 19, the program offers low-cost, comprehensive healthcare coverage that includes regular checkups, immunizations, sick child doctor visits, prescriptions, vision care, dental care, and much more. CHIP has always been a bipartisan program, and I hope this reauthorization will earn bipartisan support for the children of America. This legislation also reauthorizes the community health centers fund. I am a huge champion of community health centers because, again, I have seen them work in Alabama from the Mostellar Medical Center in Bayou La Batre to Franklin Primary Health in Mobile to Southwest Alabama Health Services in McIntosh. These centers are vitally important to so many Americans, but especially to low-income families and those in rural areas. One in 13 people nationwide rely on a health center for their healthcare needs, and this reauthorization is necessary to ensure those individuals continue to receive access to medical care. This legislation also includes many other healthcare provisions to meet other priorities. Among these provisions, I am pleased the legislation continues Medicaid disproportionate share hospital payments, or DSH payments, as they are commonly known. DSH provides funding to hospitals that treat a large number of indigent patients. DSH is absolutely critical to the life of Alabama's hospitals, and failure to renew these important payments could result in numerous hospital closures in our State. So, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to get behind this legislation and ensure it gets across the finish line. We should not let petty political arguments keep us from ensuring that children have access to affordable health insurance, keeping the doors open at community health centers, or allowing Alabama's hospitals to continue serving communities in need.

Mr. BYRNE

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Margaret ``Peggi'' Hanrahan for her years of service to the people of Alabama and the United States. On October 27, 2017, Peggi will retire from her current position as Confidential Assistant to Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Prior to this role, Peggi served as Executive Assistant to Mr. Sessions during his twenty-year career in the United States Senate. Peggi oversaw all administrative and front office staff and was essentially involved in every function of the office. Peggi has a very unique background, including a period of time working in the oil and gas industry, time as co-owner of a professional party planning company, and work in a law office. These experiences helped shape her future role in public service. I have had the honor of working with Peggi in a professional capacity, and I also came to know her personally through my family and our work together with a children's home in Mobile, Alabama. Peggi was the Firm Administrator at Miller, Hamilton, Snider & Odom, and I worked closely with her in my role as managing partner of the firm. Throughout our time together, I always found Peggi to be competent, capable, friendly, dedicated, and knowledgeable. After being elected to the United States Senate in 1996, Mr. Jeff Sessions hired Peggi to serve on his staff. There is no way to quantify the numerous tasks Peggi has completed, the various roles she has held, or the number of individuals she assisted during her time on Capitol Hill. Whether it was arranging a tour of the United States Capitol or giving career advice to an intern or drafting personal correspondence to an Alabama family, Peggi's impact has been profoundly felt over the last twenty years. Mr. Speaker, as a sign of Peggi's impressive skillset and track record, Mr. Sessions asked Peggi to continue serving with him once he was confirmed to serve as our nation's 84th Attorney General. Mr. Sessions had this to say about Peggi and her years of service: ``Peggi has been at the center of everything we have accomplished in public service. She loves America and its ideals, is smart, decisive, loyal, and a total professional. She speaks up for the high principles she believes in, and for two decades has been the key point of contact in our office for thousands of Alabamians and Americans all over the country. She has provided invaluable service to me, the nation, and the so many who she trained and mentored. Though we will miss her marvelous contributions, we wish her all the best as she and Kevin embark on this next adventure.'' So, on behalf of Alabama's First Congressional District and a grateful nation, I want to wish Peggi and her husband, Kevin, all the best upon her retirement. Alabama and our nation are better off today thanks to the service, dedication, and leadership of Peggi Hanrahan.

Mr. BYRNE

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Alabama State Representative James Buskey. Representative Buskey recently announced that he will be retiring from the Alabama House of Representatives after 42 years of representing people in Mobile, Alabama. He was first elected to the House in 1976, making him one of the longest-serving legislators in Alabama history. Outside of the legislature, Representative Buskey spent much of his life working in public education, including as a school administrator at E.S. Chastang Middle School in Mobile. While we have had our share of political differences, I have always appreciated his institutional knowledge and respected his passion for our local community. I am honored to call James a friend and appreciate his decades of service to the people of Mobile and Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I wish James and his wife, Vergie, all the best upon his retirement and the years ahead.

Mr. BYRNE

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this rule and the underlying bill. The Make America Secure Appropriations Act is all about protecting the American people and securing our homeland. Unfortunately, years of underfunding have severely hurt our military. With this bill, we can make real progress towards rebuilding the military and adding more troops, sailors, airmen, and marines to the force. Building on our pledge to boost the Navy to a 355-ship fleet, the bill funds 11 new ships. Included in this are three littoral combat ships, of which the Independence class vessel is built by a fantastic workforce in southwest Alabama. Having state-of-the-art facilities and resources is vital to the success of our military. To help repair dilapidated and aging military infrastructure, the bill provides a 25 percent increase in military construction funding. Supporting our servicemembers and their families is also a high priority of this bill, as it provides for the largest military pay raise in 8 years. That is not all it does. It also provides for our Nation's veterans, the very people who devoted their lives to protecting our country and the values we hold so dear. This bill provides the highest level of funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs in our Nation's history. This will help cut down on the claims backlog and move forward with a new electronic medical health records system. I am also pleased that this bill will allow us to begin increasing our Nation's border security in an effort to keep bad actors out of our country. The American people sent a strong message last November that they wanted a wall securing our southern border. This bill will begin this process by providing over $1.5 billion requested by President Trump for physical barrier construction along the southern border. Mr. Speaker, over this last weekend a lot of people in America went to see a movie called ``Dunkirk'' about the evacuation of over 300,000 British and French troops back over to England. Prime Minister Winston Churchill had only been in office a couple of weeks at that point in time, but he had predicted for years before that in speeches before the House of Commons that that day was coming, and they took his speeches and they put them together in a book called, ``While England Slept.'' With this bill, we are sending a strong message to the world that America is not asleep.

Mr. BYRNE

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Chairman, I rise as the designee of the gentlewoman from Florida, and I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Chairman, this straightforward and bipartisan amendment would provide important clarity for the recreational marine industry as it relates to workers' compensation coverage. For decades, Federal law stated that individuals who build, dismantle, or repair recreational vessels less than 65 feet could be covered under State workers' compensation law instead of the Federal Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act. Under the Democrat-controlled Congress in 2009, the law was simplified by eliminating the size limitation, which allowed more employers to purchase State workers' compensation. Unfortunately, in 2011, the Department of Labor issued a burdensome and confusing rule creating a new definition of recreational vessel. This change contradicted legislation passed by the Congress in 2009, and effectively denied recreational vessel repair workers access to more affordable State workers' compensation insurance. This regulatory confusion and uncertainty is reducing access to affordable workers' compensation policies and also hurting the overall recreational repair industry. Our bipartisan amendment increases strong protections to ensure that no vessel used for commercial or military purposes is inappropriately excepted from the Federal requirements. This amendment would provide regulatory relief for small businesses, including those in coastal Alabama, while also ensuring the maritime workers receive the protections they need. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman. He and I have worked together on shipbuilding issues a lot of times, and I appreciate his leadership in that industry. These are recreational vessel companies. They are small companies doing small things on different types of vessels than the ones that Mr. Courtney and I are typically working together on. So trying to apply the same rules when it is a completely different activity to where, when we are usually talking about very large ships, it just doesn't make any sense. This has traditionally been a Democrat amendment. I have always supported it. I am happy to be here to support it today. I would like for us to continue our tradition of bipartisanship on this issue. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Chairman, we have heard nothing from the Coast Guard this year in opposition to this amendment. In years past, I think the gentleman is correct, we have heard from them, but this year we have heard no opposition. In fact, a recreational vessel being repaired is the same as a recreational vessel being manufactured to use as a public vessel and should be treated the same in law. The Coast Guard already strictly enforces the existing laws and regulations that determine whether a vessel is recreational and enforces the law against those who would unlawfully use recreational vessels for commercial purposes. So I would suggest to the gentleman that this is not something the Coast Guard opposes. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BYRNE

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 440 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), 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. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 440 provides for a complete consideration of H.R. 2810, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018. The rule allows for consideration of 122 amendments in addition to the amendments made in order by yesterday's rule. This brings the total number of amendments made in order for full consideration to 210. When you add in the 275 amendments offered during the Armed Services Committee markup, we will, in total, have considered 485 amendments to this year's NDAA. Just as important, there is a clear bipartisan split between the number of majority and the number of minority amendments made in order. Mr. Speaker, this has been an incredibly open process that allowed Members of this body from both sides to have their input on this critical national security legislation. Like other years, the NDAA is a great example of the House working through regular order in the authorizing process and getting the job done. Thanks to this rule and the one we passed yesterday, the House will debate a number of issues where Members of this body have diverse views. From the future of GTMO to the future of the New START, the two NDAA rules provide for a robust debate on many important topics. That is a good thing, and I look forward to the debate. Before I continue, I want to briefly thank the staff in both the Armed Services Committee and the Rules Committee for their hard work on this rule. Dealing with this large number of amendments takes a considerable amount of time, and I know I speak for the entire body, both the majority and minority, in expressing our gratitude for their time and work in helping the members of the Rules Committee come to this product. Yesterday, I outlined my strong support for this year's NDAA, which will help keep the American people safe and secure, so I won't rehash all those points. But I want to share some numbers that highlight the readiness crisis facing our military. This crisis has been caused by cuts to defense spending. This bill authorizes funding for the military at $688.3 billion, which is 16.8 percent of total Federal outlays and 3.4 percent of projected gross domestic product. As a guiding point, 30 years ago, the fiscal year 1988 NDAA represented 27.3 percent of total Federal outlays. This year, 16 percent; back then, 27 percent. And 5.2 percent of projected GDP. This year, 3.4 percent; back then, 5.2 percent. We are spending less proportionately today on our military, despite the fact that we face a wider range of threats across the globe. That should be troubling to every American. Let's think about the threat environment we faced 30 years ago: the Soviet Union. That was about it. There was no ISIS or al-Qaida or other radical Islamic terrorist organizations threatening the United States 30 years ago. Iran was not an existential threat to the American people 30 years ago. North Korea wasn't developing nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles 30 years ago. China was not on the radar as it relates to a military power 30 years ago. We weren't worried about cyber attacks or cyber espionage 30 years ago. It is safe to say the world was a lot different 30 years ago, yet we were devoting a greater portion of our Federal budget to the military. We must make that same or an even greater commitment today. For too long, we, in Congress, have allowed our military to steadily atrophy, bringing us to a readiness crisis. Providing for our national defense is the most important job of this Congress, and this bill helps rebuild, repair, and reform our military. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 440 and the underlying bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BYRNE

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, now that the gentleman's motion to adjourn has been defeated by a wide, bipartisan majority, the House can get back to work and do the people's business. I want to go back over some statistics we talked about earlier. This rule makes in order for floor consideration 210 amendments which are on top of the 275 amendments that were offered in the Armed Services Committee. Now, let's go back to the days when the NDAA was considered on this floor and this floor was under the majority's control on the other side of the aisle. Let's start with 2007. 135 amendments were offered; only 50 were made in order. In 2009, 129 amendments were offered; only 58 were made in order. In 2010, 129 were offered; only 69 were made in order. In 2011, 193 were offered; only 82 were made in order. And we are making in order in this rule, and yesterday's rule, 210. This has been an open process by any measure. The gentleman also referred to the fact that there are other needs in America that are not being met because we are spending money on defending the United States of America. Let me go back and remind what I said earlier. Only 16.8 percent of next year's Federal outlay will go to defending America if we adopt the National Defense Authorization Act as passed by the committee, less than 20 percent. That means almost 85 percent of Federal outlays are going to go to every other thing that we do in government. If there is a problem with something not being paid for, it is not because of the money we are spending on national defense. Then finally, the gentleman's comments about the need for us to make sure that we are properly authorized as we engage in military activities abroad; I do agree with him. We have had some mission creep over the last several years. We have gone from Iraq and Afghanistan, under President Obama, to Syria, to Libya, to Yemen, and many of us on both sides of the aisles decried the fact that we did that. It is, indeed, our responsibility, not the President's responsibility, to declare war, to authorize the use of military force. That is why this rule makes in order an amendment by the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole) that will set in place a process that will lead to the consideration on this floor of the Authorization for Use of Military Force. So I believe this rule does exactly what the people of America expect us to do, and that is to stay in this room, stay on this floor, and act on the National Defense Authorization Act. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelly).

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman is right. Workforce training is very important, and that is why we passed on this floor a few weeks ago the reauthorization of the Perkins Act--not by a bipartisan majority, by a 100 percent vote. We have other bills that we are considering in the Education and the Workforce Committee that will deal with that because it is important that we build the workforce in America. But you don't do that in the National Defense Authorization Act. That is what we are here today about. I am afraid my colleagues on the other side have forgotten what this bill is about. It is about making the people of America safe and secure. We will deal with those other issues, as important as they are, in other legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Marshall).

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Messer).

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's comments. I think that his issue comes within the broader question about the authorization of military force in various parts of the Middle East. I think he raises an important point. There is an amendment made in order under this rule that will put in place a process to get us to that debate. I appreciate what he just said. I hope that he will hold that idea, and when we have that debate on the floor, will bring it back so we can consider it among those other items we will consider at that time. I appreciate what he just said. This is not the place or the time to take that up. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I really believe very strongly we need to do more in workforce training in America. I am a former chancellor of postsecondary education, former chair of workforce development for the State of Alabama. It is something that is very near and dear to me. I know that we are working very hard on these issues and have already produced this one bill, the Perkins bill that we passed in the absolutely 100 percent vote here on the floor. There will be more coming. But the National Defense Authorization Act authorizes what our military does and doesn't do and how it does it around the globe. This is a separate, different vehicle designed to provide for the defense of the American people. I appreciate the gentleman's comments. We need to take those comments up at another time as we take into consideration other bills that work on our workforce development. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I remind all of us that the war in Afghanistan was authorized by an AUMF that was passed by Congress in 2001. So while we can have a debate about the other conflicts in other places, that conflict is, indeed, authorized, and has been authorized from the very beginning. So I would take exception to the gentleman's comments with regard to Afghanistan. There are provisions in the underlying bill that this rule makes in order and in those provisions that do things to help with that war effort, help the men and women over there fighting that war effort for us. So I think that this rule and the bill that underlies it are doing exactly what they should do with regard to Afghanistan, because Afghanistan is authorized. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I appreciate the gentlewoman's comments. Most of those issues, if not all of them, were brought up in committee when this bill was considered as amendments, and they were defeated in virtually all cases by a bipartisan vote. I appreciate the fact that she voted for the overall bill, as did everybody but one Member after you take it all into consideration, because that is what this bill is about. We are authorizing a broad swath of the defense of this country. There are a lot of moving parts to it. Not everything in a bill this big is going to be satisfactory to everybody on the committee. I can pick out one or two things I don't like about it. But as a whole, it does the job that needs to be done for the people that we depend upon to defend America. So I appreciate the gentlewoman's comments, but most of all, I appreciated her vote at the end of the day when we approved that bill after markup in committee. Now, I do want to respond to one thing that the gentleman from Massachusetts said. He talked about, we are still there fighting the Taliban. The 2001 AUMF specifically references the Taliban. So we can talk about how things in Syria that President Obama did, things in Libya that President Obama did, things in Yemen that President Obama did are outside the AUMF that was adopted in 2001 with regard to Afghanistan, and I think that is a legitimate debate. But there is no legitimate debate about whether or not the ongoing conflict in Afghanistan and our involvement with it has been authorized, because it has been authorized for 16 years. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The gentleman said we can't debate anything. The rule we passed yesterday makes in order 210 different amendments to be debated on top of the general debate of the bill itself. And that is on top of 275 amendments in the committee of jurisdiction, the Armed Services Committee. This is the most debated piece of legislation we have every year, and it should be for the very reasons the gentleman from Massachusetts itemized, because what we are doing here is of profound importance. Now, I know that there are other issues that people try to stick into this bill every year that, frankly, distract us from the underlying importance of the bill; and that is, we are trying to do everything we possibly can to protect the American people. The threats the American people face today are more diverse, more profound than we have seen since the end of World War II. So, yes, this bill authorizes a lot of very important and expensive things. I acknowledge they are expensive. But it is even more expensive if we don't do them, or don't do them right, and we leave the American people exposed. Just take into account one of our threats, Kim Jong-un in North Korea. That missile test he did recently was an ICBM, an intercontinental ballistic missile. He does not need such a missile to hit South Korea or Japan. He needs that missile to hit us, to hit Alaska, to hit the West Coast of the United States, and ultimately to hit the entirety of the United States. It is a direct threat to the safety of the people of the United States. This bill authorizes an increase in missile defense, just one of the things that it does. So I hope that all of us will take the many things that we are going to debate here over the next several days very seriously and that we will come to the bipartisan conclusion, as we did in the committee, that when you take the totality of this bill together after you have gone through all of these amendments, it does the most important thing we are here to do, which is to defend the American people. Mr. Speaker, I again urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 440 and the underlying bill.

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

Mr. BYRNE

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 431 provides for full consideration, including making six amendments in order to H.R. 23, the Gaining Responsibility on Water Act, and allows us to begin consideration of H.R. 2810, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018. H.R. 23 is legislation necessary to deal with the severe water supply crisis facing California and other Western States. The region has experienced the worst drought in over 1,000 years, and many Western communities have been very negatively impacted. This commonsense legislation fixes the broken regulatory system that is only exacerbating the impact of the drought conditions. The current regulatory system is overly complex and inconsistent. Making matters worse, various court decisions have only further complicated efforts to resolve these issues. For example, this bill will help bring California's water infrastructure into the 21st century. The current water storage and delivery system is designed to serve approximately 22 million people, but the State currently has 37 million residents. The bill is not only important to people in California. In fact, around half of our Nation's fruits and vegetables come from California. Every American could be hit in the pocketbook at the grocery store or checkout line if the California drought is allowed to continue. Through this legislation, we can help expand water infrastructure and allow for greater water conveyance while ensuring environmental and water rights protections. Passing H.R. 23 will directly help address the drought crisis and benefit families, farms, the environment, and the American economy. The rule also allows us to begin consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act. The bill provides for general debate and makes in order 88 amendments, including 41 minority amendments and 20 bipartisan amendments. Another rule is expected tomorrow to provide for consideration of additional amendments. This open process actually started in the Armed Services Committee on which I serve. At the committee level, 275 amendments were offered, and 231 amendments were adopted during our committee markup last month. I have said this many times on this floor, but it is worth saying again: there is no greater responsibility of the Federal Government than to provide for the safety and security of the American people. This year's NDAA does just that by reforming, repairing, and rebuilding the United States military. The bill addresses the realities of the dangerous threat environment facing our Nation and ensures our troops and their families have the necessary resources and benefits. Over the last decade, we have cut our military at an alarming rate. As the threats rack up, we have planes that can't fly, ships that can't sail, and soldiers who can't deploy. We must reverse this readiness crisis. Thankfully, there is bipartisan support for boosting our Nation's military. In fact, this bill passed out of the Armed Services Committee by a vote of 60-1, continuing a strong bipartisan tradition of passing NDAAs. I want to briefly highlight just a few of the positive provisions of this legislation. The bill increases total military spending by 10 percent to rebuild the military from the current readiness crisis. This includes increasing the size of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Army Guard and Reserve, Naval and Air Reserve, and Air Guard. Given the serious threat posed by North Korea, the bill boosts missile defense programs, including adding an additional $2.5 billion above the President's budget request. The bill also authorizes the construction of 13 new Navy ships, including three more littoral combat ships, as we work to grow toward a 355-ship fleet. It funds a 2.4 percent pay raise for our troops and extends special pay and bonuses for servicemembers. Importantly, the bill continues to advance Chairman Thornberry's priority of reforming and strengthening the military's acquisition process to make it more effective and efficient. Given the evolving threats related to cyber, the bill improves the oversight of cyber operations. The bill also helps set policy for the U.S. military relating to Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, Ukraine, Russia, Africa, and the Asian Pacific region. All told, this bill achieves important priorities of reforming, repairing, and rebuilding our military. Each and every day, more than 2 million men and women put on the uniform of the United States and serve our country. As we have seen by two recent tragedies, the Marine plane crash in Mississippi and the USS Fitzgerald collision off the coast of Japan, these individuals put their lives on the line in order to protect the freedoms we all hold dear. They deserve the resources necessary to fulfill their mission and the benefits worthy of those who sacrifice so much. So I am hopeful we can continue to move forward in a bipartisan manner to pass this NDAA, to support our troops, and to fulfill our constitutional obligation to provide for the common defense. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 431 and the underlying bills, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 431 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. BYRNE. 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