Bradley Byrne

Mr. BYRNE

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, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 863 and ask for its immediate consideration.

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

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, during consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Let's see, where were we? We were talking about a rule that covers two bills. One bill would stop Federal departments and agencies from using their money to spread falsehoods against innocent Americans. The gentleman from Washington gave a very good, very clear statement of a precise fact situation that happened in the State of Washington where a Federal agency was using its money to spread falsehoods about farmers. That is what we were talking about. And I think that is a very important piece of legislation for us to deal with and deal with right now. And the other piece of legislation, the other piece of legislation would protect the people of the United States from a President who wants to let very dangerous people out of Guantanamo Bay. As I said before, at least 12 individuals who have already been released from Guantanamo Bay have gone on to launch attacks and kill Americans. That is what we were talking about. That is what we are talking about. That is what this rule and the underlying legislation is all about. This House is here to do its work and do its job to defend the people of the United States and also to protect the people of the United States from their own government preying on them. So I think this legislation is completely appropriate. I am glad to bring this rule before the House. I, again, urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 863 and the underlying bills.

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

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from the State of Washington (Mr. Newhouse), my colleague from the Rules Committee.

Mr. BYRNE

Mr. BYRNE. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, earlier this summer, I had the opportunity to visit the new career and technical education classrooms at Saraland High School. From welding to engineering to IT, these programs are going to make a real difference, and I was so impressed to see CTE getting the attention it deserves. You see, for too long, we have devalued the importance of career and technical education here in America. The programs were seen as some sort of second-rate option for students who couldn't make it otherwise. That simply isn't the case. Instead, CTE programs offer real opportunities to students of all ages and from all backgrounds. With this bill, we are making it clear that career and technical education is a critical educational option that leads to good-paying jobs. This bill makes important reforms to our CTE programs, with a special emphasis on ensuring the programs focus on in-demand skill areas in order to close the skills gap and boost economic growth. This is a truly bipartisan, reform-oriented bill that deserves our strongest support, and I urge all my colleagues to join me in voting in favor of this legislation.

Mr. BYRNE

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Mobile native DeMarcus Cousins for winning an Olympic gold medal as a member of the U.S. Men's Basketball Team. Throughout Olympic play, he averaged 9.1 points and 5.8 rebounds. While his play on the court is to be commended, I was more impressed by DeMarcus' work back home in Alabama. DeMarcus recently held a free basketball camp for young children at his alma mater, LeFlore Magnet High School. Following the basketball camp, DeMarcus organized an important conversation about relations between members of the African American community and law enforcement. Like many communities across the Nation, my hometown of Mobile has faced our share of challenges in this area; but thanks to local leaders and leaders like DeMarcus Cousins, Mobile can serve as a prime example of how to defuse racial tension and increase understanding between all members of our community. So on behalf of Alabama's First Congressional District, I want to, again, congratulate DeMarcus on his gold medal and applaud him for his continued leadership in our community.

Mr. BYRNE

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Colonel David ``Dave'' William Reaney upon his retirement as Executive Director of Feeding the Gulf Coast. Dave was born in Iowa and grew up in California before enlisting in the Army as an intelligence analyst in 1969. After serving in Germany, he commissioned through the Officer Candidate program at Fort Benning in 1974. He spent the next 26 years as a Military Intelligence Officer at 12 different locations throughout the United States, Europe, and Asia. He served as Chief of the Electronic Intelligence Watch, U.S. European Command in Stuttgart, Germany supporting operations following the bombing of the Beirut Marine Barracks, as well as the 1986 U.S. attack on Libya. After being promoted to Colonel in 1996, he was assigned to the National Security Agency as Deputy Chief of the Office of Global Response. After 30 years of active service, Col. Reaney retired in February 2000. Just a few months later, in April, he was appointed Executive Director of Feeding the Gulf Coast. Formerly known as the Bay Area Food Bank, Feeding the Gulf Coast is responsible for serving a 24-county area including south Alabama, south Mississippi, and the Florida panhandle. The organization operates multiple nutrition programs and distributed over 20 million pounds of food in 2015. Under his leadership, Feeding the Gulf Coast reached new heights and achieved major milestones. The organization moved into a new facility, increased distribution from 4 to over 21 million pounds of food annually, acquired nine refrigerated delivery vehicles, developed afterschool snack and summer lunch programs for children at over 215 locations, and constructed a new branch warehouse in Milton, Florida. Col. Reaney also oversaw the organization's disaster response to Hurricane Ivan, Hurricane Katrina, and the Gulf Coast oil spill. Col. Reaney has a long list of personal achievements throughout his years of military and humanitarian service. He is a 1999 inductee into the Officer Candidate School Hall of Fame at Fort Benning, Georgia and a 2001 inductee into the University of South Alabama ROTC Department Hall of Fame. His fifteen military service awards include the Defense Superior Service Medal, the Legion of Merit and the Defense Meritorious Service Medal. He has also served on the board of the Mobile Area Chamber of Commerce, as well as past president of both the Alabama Food Bank Association and the Florida Association of Food Banks. Additionally, he played a critical part in the establishment of Alabama Lieutenant Governor Kay Ivey's ``End Child Hunger'' task force. So on behalf of Alabama's First Congressional District, I wish Colonel Dave Reaney and his wife, Monika, all the best upon his retirement. And, on behalf of a grateful nation, I share our appreciation and gratitude for his years of service and sacrifice.

Mr. BYRNE

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of Representatives Aderholt (AL), Black (TN), Blackburn (TN), Brooks (AL), Chabot (OH), Collins (NY), Fudge (OH), Gibbs (OH), Guinta (NH), Hanna (NY), Higgins (NY), Joyce (OH), Kelly (PA), Palmer (AL), Pingree (ME), Poliquin (ME), Reed (NY), Renacci (OH), Roby (AL), Roe (TN), Rogers (AL), Sewell (AL), Stefanik (NY), Tiberi (OH), Turner (OH), Wenstrup (OH), and Yarmuth (KY), I want to recognize three men who will attempt to pedal their bicycles from Houlton, Maine to Mobile, Alabama between July 29 and August 8, 2016. Ride4Gabe, as it is called, will take the cyclists on a route that is approximately the same distance as the Tour de France in only eleven days. As they pedal 200 miles per day the men will endure substantial physical and mental hardship. The cycling effort alone is worthy of recognition, but these cyclists insist it is their cause that should be known by the American people. Ride4Gabe is really about ending Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. According to Parent Project Muscular Dystrophy, Duchenne is the most common fatal genetic disorder diagnosed in childhood, affecting approximately 1 in every 3,500 live male births (about 20,000 new cases each year worldwide). Because the Duchenne gene is found on the X- chromosome, it primarily affects boys; however, it occurs across all races and cultures. Duchenne results in progressive loss of strength and is caused by a mutation in the gene that encodes for dystrophin. Because dystrophin is absent, the muscle cells are easily damaged. The progressive muscle weakness leads to serious medical problems, particularly issues relating to the heart and lungs. Young men with Duchenne typically live into their late twenties. Michael Staley, 35, of Birmingham, Alabama, and Wes Bates, 21, of Aurora, Colorado, began Ride4Gabe in 2014 when they rode across Oregon, Idaho, Wyoming, Nebraska, South Dakota, Iowa, Illinois, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Alabama. Payne Griffin, 23, of Washington, D.C. will join Michael and Wes this year. The trio will be supported by a crew of volunteers as they pedal across Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Alabama. The Ride4Gabe team will meet with Duchenne patients, rare disease- impacted families, elected officials, and other community leaders throughout their journey. They will educate people about Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. They will highlight the challenges associated with Duchenne through the lens of Gabe Griffin and Duchenne patients all along their route. They will discuss how medical research has the Duchenne community on the verge of solving this problem that nobody has survived to date. They will raise awareness about rare disease drug approval policy and how it relates to Duchenne. On behalf of my colleagues representing the congressional districts along the Ride4Gabe 2016 route, I am pleased to submit this statement to the Congressional Record. The awareness raised through Ride4Gabe will lead to greater public awareness about Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. It is our hope that Gabe Griffin and every other patient who suffers from Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy will soon have access to a treatment, and ultimately a cure.

Mr. BYRNE

Mr. BYRNE. Madam Speaker, since taking office in 2009, President Obama and his administration have taken a position in 175 cases before the Supreme Court, but the President has only won 79 of those cases. That comes out to just about 45 percent. Indeed, over the course of his Presidency, the Obama administration argued 44 cases before the Supreme Court where their position failed to get a single vote. Not even the people the President appointed to the Court agree with his position. This number stands in stark contrast to the results from President George W. Bush, who won over 60 percent of his cases before the Court, and Bill Clinton, who won 63 percent of his cases. Most of the cases President Obama has lost have only one thing in common: the President's view that Federal power is virtually unlimited. Under this President, citizens must submit their liberty and freedom to whatever the government experts determine is best. The administration believes they can operate above or around the law. Madam Speaker, the President's record in front of the Court is a disturbing trend and something that should alarm every single American.

Mr. BYRNE

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

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves).

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Chairman, this administration has been reversed by the United States Supreme Court more than any other administration in the history of the United States of America. There is nothing that this administration won't do to further its radical agenda, including going against the clear statement of a statute of the United States Congress. So we have to have language that affirmatively tells them they can't spend this money. Otherwise, they will take the radical step of going against a Federal statute and cynically wait on the United States Supreme Court to tell them they can't do it. So that is why we have to have this. This is very important not just to the Gulf States, but to the rule of law in the United States of America. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to introduce this amendment with two of my colleagues, Representative Bill Flores of Texas and Representative John Fleming of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, I represent coastal Alabama, and I have spent my entire life living on the Gulf Coast. Like many of my friends and neighbors, my family has always enjoyed fishing, swimming, boating, and spending time in the Gulf of Mexico. It is safe to say that living on the Gulf becomes a way of life. For some people, the Gulf also provides for economic well-being, whether through the commercial seafood industry, tourism, or something else. No one is a better steward of the shores and our waters than those of us who live and work in the Gulf. Since the water provides our way of life and our economic well-being, we are going to do everything we can to protect and preserve our resources. We don't need the Federal Government to tell us what to do. That is why I am so concerned by the National Ocean Policy, which was created under President Obama's Executive Order No. 13547 in 2010. The policy requires that various bureaucracies work together to ``zone the ocean'' and the sources thereof, largely affecting the ways in which we utilize our ocean resources. The National Ocean Policy is executive overreach at its very worst. The policy not only restricts ocean and inland activities, but it redirects Federal money away from congressionally directed priorities for over 20 Federal agencies that meet as part of the National Ocean Council, tasked with implementing the National Ocean Policy--a council that has no statutory authority to exist and no congressional appropriation. Numerous and varied industries will suffer as a result of this well- meaning but ill-conceived policy, including but not limited to agriculture, energy, fisheries, mining, and marine retail enterprises, just to name a few. Those who are affected most by the policy don't have a say or any representation in the rulemaking process. There is no current system of oversight in place for the regional planning agencies created as an arm of the National Ocean Council. I urge my colleagues to stand up for our coastal communities, say no to more executive overreach, and support this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Chairman, we have heard the phrase ``land grab.'' This is an ocean grab. There is no cooperation here. This is dictation by the Federal Government to people that live along the coast of the United States of America. It is time to take our oceans and the water of the United States back, not for the bureaucrats in Washington, but for the people of the United States. That is who actually owns this water, not some faceless bureaucrat in Washington who wants to tell us what to do. So I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment and take back control of our oceans for the people of the United States and not allow it to be directed by bureaucrats in Washington who couldn't care less what we feel like on the coast. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to introduce this amendment, along with two of my colleagues, Representatives Charles Boustany and Garret Graves, both of Louisiana. My straightforward amendment would prohibit any effort to redirect funds allocated under the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act, also referred to as GOMESA. GOMESA was passed in 2006 and created a revenue- sharing agreement for offshore oil revenue between the Federal Government and four States in the Gulf of Mexico: Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. Under GOMESA, a certain percentage of the revenues generated from selected oil and gas lease sales in the Outer Continental Shelf of the Gulf of Mexico are returned to the Gulf States. This money must be used in coastal areas for important purposes like coastal restoration and hurricane preparedness. There is a reason the law was structured this way. These Gulf States not only provide a significant share of the infrastructure and workforce for the industry in the Gulf, but they also have inherent environmental and economic risks. Unfortunately, in his budget proposal this year, President Obama recommended the money be taken away from the Gulf States and instead be spread around the country to implement his radical climate agenda. Not only does this proposal directly contradict the current Federal statute, it vastly undermines the purpose of this law: to keep revenues from these lease sales in the States that supply the workforce and have the inherent risk of a potential environmental disaster. This is not the first time the President has made this proposal, and so far Congress has stood strong in opposition. I hope we will do so again today. My simple amendment will support our coastal communities on the Gulf Coast while preserving the rule of law. We should not allow the President to turn our revenue-sharing agreements into a slush fund for politically driven climate projects. I urge my colleagues to support this straightforward amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk related to the National Ocean Policy.

Mr. BYRNE

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 819 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman said that the decision made last year was a momentous decision. I agree with him. It was a momentous decision and I fear it is a decision that our children, our grandchildren and great grandchildren will come to regret, a decision that will give us not only a nuclearized Iran, but a nuclearized Middle East. He said there was a choice between war and peace. That was a false choice. There was a choice between keeping the sanctions in place to get a better deal or giving in, and we gave in. So the truth of the matter is that we had a real option out there, and that was to stick to our guns and get a better deal. We didn't do that. We could sit back and watch what is happening, or we can do something. These bills do something that don't undermine the agreement that has already been reached and already been basically approved by a number of people in this House. What we are looking at is a nuclearized Middle East, unless we take some steps now, and these underlying bills do that. We are not safer today because of what we did. The world is far more dangerous. I sit on the Armed Services Committee. I can tell you that that decision last summer has destabilized further the Middle East, not further stabilized it. Finally, the gentleman brought up the Zika virus. We passed a responsible bill through this House that dealt with the Zika virus and sent it to the Senate and Democrats in the Senate are blocking that bill from coming up. So who is being responsible about Zika? The Republicans are being responsible about Zika and the Democrats are being irresponsible. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I was listening to the gentleman's comments. The reason why I know amendments were made in order is that only one amendment was received by the committee. It was received after we had finished having the testimony before the committee and shortly before the committee was going to take up the rule. So there really wasn't any reasonable way to consider that particular amendment. And since no other Member of the House had offered any amendments, there really weren't any amendments to make in order. The second point he said is that we are proceeding on the assurance that Iran is going to comply with the agreement--the assurance of Iran, when we have recent news reports that people in other countries that are working on this, particularly in Germany, have found that there have already been violations of this agreement by Iran. So there is every reason to believe that an assurance from Iran means nothing. Nothing. He says we need to move forward with implementation. Well, there is nothing in the underlying bills that would stop implementation of this agreement that the President agreed to and that, unfortunately, not enough of us were against to stop. So the agreement is going forward, much to my chagrin. These three bills deal with specific threats from Iran that have nothing to do with the agreement. They deal with the production of heavy water. There is no reason for us to buy heavy water. There is no reason for them to produce heavy water unless they are producing weapons-grade plutonium. And there is no reason for them to produce weapons-grade plutonium unless they are producing weapons, which is a violation of the agreement. They should not be able to use American currency to effect their transactions. And we should put very heavy sanctions on them while they continue to support terrorism around the world and while they continue to support ever bigger, ever longer-range ballistic missiles. Let's make no mistake about it. Long-range ballistic missiles are not needed to hit Israel. Long-range ballistic missiles are needed to hit Europe and the United States of America. So these three bills don't get at the agreement that the President has already agreed to and that people on the other side of the aisle and some others said were okay. These get to the remaining threats against the people of the United States. I would suggest to the gentleman that these three bills are very much important to what we need to do to protect the American people. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

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 819 allows for consideration of three very important bills relating to the national security of the United States of America. Each of these bills deals with Iran, the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism. The conduct of the Iranian Government continues to be very concerning. Iran has a clear record of human rights violations and mistreatment of its citizens. Iran also has continued aggressive behavior, including testing intercontinental ballistic missiles, which can be used to attack our allies in the Middle East, like Israel, as well as the potential to strike us here at home. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper wrote in testimony to the Senate Committee on Armed Services earlier this year: ``The Islamic Republic of Iran presents an enduring threat to U.S. national interests because of its support to regional terrorist and militant groups and the Asad regime, as well as its development of advanced military capabilities.'' Iran is not becoming a better partner or neighbor. Just look no further than the capture at gunpoint and detention of 10 U.S. sailors earlier this year. A Navy investigation released a few weeks ago found that Iran violated international law and violated sovereign immunity during that episode. Clearly, they are no friend of the United States. So these bills address three different areas where the United States can stand up to Iran and encourage them to stop with their rogue actions and putting lives at risk. First, the resolution allows for consideration of H.R. 4992, the United States Financial System Protection Act. This legislation will codify existing requirements that prohibit the Obama administration from allowing the U.S. dollar to be used to facilitate trade transactions with Iran. These requirements will remain in place until the President certifies that Iran is no longer supporting terrorism, developing ballistic missiles, abusing human rights, or laundering money in support of dishonest activity. Iran's financial sector poses a clear risk to financial markets around the world, given their track record of corruption and support for terrorism. In fact, the Financial Action Task Force, an organization created by the G7 to set standards regarding money laundering, has labeled Iran as a Non-Cooperative Country or Territory. If Iran doesn't want to be subject to these restrictions, then it is simple: they just need to stop supporting terrorism and conducting other illicit activities. I don't think that is too much to ask. The bill also allows for consideration of H.R. 5119, the No 2H2O from Iran Act. This straightforward bill prohibits the United States from purchasing heavy water from Iran. For those who do not know--and until I learned about this, I would have been one of those--heavy water is essential to the production of weapons-grade plutonium. News reports from just yesterday indicate the Obama administration has officially purchased 32 metric tons of heavy water from Iran for $8.6 million. That is $8.6 million in U.S. taxpayer money that will be going to the largest state sponsor of terrorism. That is simply absurd. If Iran isn't producing nuclear weapons, then why do they need such large amounts of heavy water to begin with? Iran needs to stop with their production of heavy water altogether. The last thing the United States should do is continue to support and condone their illicit activities. Finally, the bill also provides for consideration of H.R. 5631, the Iran Accountability Act. This bill will ensure strong sanctions remain in place against Iran for their support of terrorism as well as their human rights violations and continued ballistic missile program. Holding Iran accountable is critically important, and it is clear that our sanctions against Iran work. Robust economic sanctions will force Iran to back down from their rogue activities and stop supporting terrorism. Just consider the serious threats posed by Iran's ballistic missile program. Mr. Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence, has also written in testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee that ``Iran's ballistic missiles are inherently capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction, and Tehran already has the largest inventory of ballistic missiles in the Middle East.'' The United States cannot stand by and become complicit with these actions by Iran. We must stand up for freedom, justice, and good around the globe. Mr. Speaker, I want to quickly make one other point. I know Members of this House have different opinions about the Iran nuclear agreement. Personally, I was and am strongly opposed, because I think it makes the world less safe. But regardless of your views on the Iran deal, can we not all agree that Iran should stop supporting terrorism? Can we not all agree that Iran should face consequences for the continued violation of human rights? Can we not all agree that Iran should stop producing ballistic missiles that can be used to attack U.S. servicemembers and our allies and us here at home? Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to stand up to Iran. Support House Resolution 819 and the underlying legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.