K. Conaway

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Chairman, the amendment I offer today will clarify amendments made to the Commodity Exchange Act by Dodd-Frank and require the CFTC to actually determine that position limits will, in fact, help reduce excessive speculation before they implement those new rules. This past fall, my colleagues and I all ran for reelection promising to reduce government regulation and eliminate rules that needlessly burden the economy. As we consider the CFTC's ongoing work, we should look no further than the position limits rulemaking to begin that task. Position limits are a tool that have merit and purpose in regulating the commodities market. Today, designated contract markets core principle V requires every U.S. exchange to impose, as is necessary and appropriate, position limits or position accountability levels on the contracts they offer. Further, there are several agricultural contracts that have long- established and well understood federally mandated position limits. My amendment will not change any of those existing position limits regime. Prior to Dodd-Frank, the law was clear: if the Commission wanted to impose position limits, it first had to make a determination that such limits would diminish, eliminate, or prevent the burdens of excessive speculation. Post-Dodd-Frank, the courts have ruled that additions to the statute have rendered it ambiguous. Chairman Massad and I have disagreed for the past 3 years about how to read the statute. So today, my amendment fixes the ambiguity by affirmatively requiring the Commission to determine that position limits will serve to reduce the burdens of excessive speculation before they put them in place. It is important that the Commission affirmatively determines the need for position limits because limits are an unmistakable burden on market participants. The current position limits proposal will cost market participants substantially in time and money to comply with. Most importantly, it fundamentally changes the way hedgers can seek relief from the rules. Agricultural producers and processors, power companies, and other commercial hedgers may have fewer bona fide hedges. What is more, they might get a hedge exemption, only to get a call from Washington telling them their hedge is invalid and they must liquidate their position. The proposal also imposes new recordkeeping and reporting obligations on Futures Commission Merchants, exchanges, and market participants. Less well understood, but no less important, is the impact that position limits in later months might have on market liquidity. Position limits do not have anything to do with the long-term price of commodities. The price of oil, no matter how high it climbs or how low it falls, is driven by supply and demand. Congress itself recognized this when it characterized the burdens of excessive speculation as the sudden or unreasonable fluctuations or unwarranted changes in the price of a commodity. There is nothing sudden about a year's-long run-up or a year's-long decline in commodity prices. That said, I agree there is a role for position limits to play in the management of our commodity markets, especially in managing the convergence of prices at the expiration of a contract. But limits are a regulatory tool to promote orderly markets, not a silver bullet to lower commodity prices for consumers. As a tool, they need to be calibrated to the unique characteristics and historical patterns of each commodity. We cannot impose them in blind faith that more regulation automatically improves markets. My amendment is agnostic about the merits of position limits, but it is clear about the need for the government to justify its rules that restrict economic activity. As this Congress sets about reducing regulatory burdens, it is important that we start by requiring the CFTC to make a determination about the need for further regulations before they act. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Chairman, the CFTC prepared a draft report this past year. Quoting from page 142 of that draft, it says the Masters Hypothesis, which my colleague--who I do have great respect for--said the mere presence of passives distorts the marketplace, that is what Masters Hypothesis said. The CFTC found there are no reputable economic studies which fully endorse this view of how the commodity futures markets work. I would like to close with this comment from another study by the chief economist: ``Comment letters on either side declaring that the matter is settled in their favor among respectable economists is simply incorrect. The best economists on both sides of the debate concede that there is legitimate debate afoot. This analysis paper documents that the academic debate amongst economists about the magnitude, prevalence, and pervasiveness of the risk of outsized market positions has reputable and legitimate standard-bearers for opposing positions.'' I agree with that in full. All we are asking the CFTC to do, Mr. Chairman, is to do the work to prove that the specific position list they want to implement, should they believe one is needed, that they would have to go through regular order, their regular order, to make that happen. I encourage a ``yes'' vote on the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Chairman, I support the gentleman's amendment. I would point out that at the end of his amendment is an antievasion requirement which would allow the CFTC to watch for the kinds of things that the gentlewoman from California was worried about in which foreign markets might be involved and other things. So there are, structured in the Lucas amendment, protections to avoid a crafty, interaffiliate kind of circumstance that she was concerned about.

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition.

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. Those of you who paid attention to the debate earlier in the day will find it curious that much of the debate, some of the debate, was about the specificity with which we instructed the CFTC to set up a regime in which to evaluate foreign jurisdictions, and it irritated the group. In fact, many of them are voting against it because that is in the underlying bill that is there, so I oppose the gentleman's amendment. I also don't know that it wouldn't require a referral to the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and while the vaunted Committee on Agriculture would love to claim all the jurisdiction we possibly could, I am not interested in referring it to a different committee. For 4 years now, the end users and folks have been waiting to get this thing done. It is time for us to get it done. I urge my colleagues to vote against this motion to recommit and support the Commodity End- User Relief Act. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule to provide consideration of H.R. 238, the Commodity End-User Relief Act. I want to start by thanking Mr. Newhouse, Chairman Sessions, and the entire Rules Committee for the time and work that they spent preparing this rule. I appreciate the committee's time, attention, and interest in the work of the Agriculture Committee. I am especially gratified by their support of my push to authorize all of the unauthorized agencies and programs under our committee's jurisdiction. Last Congress, we came very close, but we fell one agency short. The Commodities Future Trading Commission ended the year as it began it, unauthorized. The Commission, in fact, has not been reauthorized since October 2013. And since that time, the House of Representatives have voted twice to fix that problem. The most recent effort was in June of 2015. Tomorrow, if we pass H.R. 238, will be the third time this House has done its work on this oversight business. Under this rule, we have the opportunity to pick up where we left off and resume the House's debate on the Commodity End-User Relief Act. The text of H.R. 238 is identical to the legislation passed by this House last Congress, except for four changes: First, we included a specific annual spending authorization level, and it is set at the same level as last year's appropriations. This ensures compliance with the majority leader's floor protocols on both specific authorization levels and discretionary CutGo. Next, two sections were removed because they were already signed into law. Finally, we removed a section that required the Commission to report to Congress on the status of a pending Board of Trade registration application. That application has been approved, so there is no longer a reason for the Commission to comply with that language. Other than those four changes, the text of H.R. 238 includes every word passed by this House last Congress, including amendments offered by Mr. Gallego to encourage diversity in the Office of the Chief Economist, as well as Mr. Takai to identify information security vulnerabilities. This bill does not just reauthorize the CFTC. It also makes important process reforms and targeted changes to help Main Street businesses continue to access the risk management tools that they need to serve their customers. Over the past 4\1/2\ years, the House Committee on Agriculture has held almost two dozen hearings examining the Commission and investigating the impacts that the Dodd-Frank Act has had on derivatives markets. What we have found is that some of the rules have had unintended consequences for farmers, ranchers, manufacturers, and other businesses who use these markets to protect themselves from uncertainty. Our witnesses, many of whom were market participants struggling to comply with burdensome rules and ambiguous portions of underlying statute, were consistent in their call for relief. To address their concerns, H.R. 238 makes reforms that fall into three broad categories: customer protections, commission reforms, and end-user relief. The Commodity End-User Relief Act does not roll back any of the key reforms made under Dodd-Frank. What it does, however, is allow Congress to keep its promise to Main Street America: Main Street did not cause the financial crisis, so Main Street should not have to pay for it. They shouldn't have to pay for it with new fees. They shouldn't have to pay for it in new compliance obligations. They shouldn't have to pay for it in higher transactions costs. And they shouldn't have to pay for it in lost opportunities to manage their business risks. I would like to close by thanking Chairman Austin Scott and Ranking Member David Scott for doing much of the heavy lifting on the committee's issues. The two of them got deep into the weeds of financial reform. I would also like to thank Mr. Lucas, who is a sponsor emeritus of this bill. We have been working on this issue since he was chairman, and much of the bipartisan work he did remains in this bill. I urge adoption of this rule and support for all the amendments that were made in order.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 21st Century Wilberforce Initiative for working towards a world of religious freedom. On October 1, 2014, Dr. Randel Everett founded the 21st Century Wilberforce Initiative. Dr. Everett has a long and distinguished record of service, which includes establishing the John Leland Center for Theological Studies, serving as the Executive Director of the Baptist General Convention of Texas, and over 40 years of pastoring all over the nation including as my own pastor at First Baptist Church in Midland, Texas. Under Dr. Everett's leadership, the 21st Century Wilberforce Initiative has experienced remarkable growth and has left a lasting impact through their work. The organization has now grown to two offices: one in the Washington, D.C. area that focuses on the United States' engagement in protecting religious liberties and a second office in Dallas, Texas, which serves as a headquarters that mobilizes and engages with churches to help raise public awareness of people who are facing religious oppression around the world. Since its conception, the 21st Century Wilberforce Initiative has helped thousands of people worldwide by working alongside policymakers. In 2015, members from the organization traveled to Iraq and met with Christians and Yazidis impacted by the Islamic State. Their report, ``Edge of Extinction,'' helped elevate the awareness regarding the atrocities of religious and ethnic minorities in the Nineveh Plain. Through their efforts, the organization was successful in establishing a Special Advisor for Religious Minorities in the Near East and South/ Central Asia within the State Department and in passing H. Con. Res. 75, which officially declared ISIL's persecution and mass murder of Christians, Yezidis, and other groups in Iraq and Syria as genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. This bill passed the House on March 14, 2016, by a vote of 393-0--a success I was proud to support. The 21st Century Wilberforce Initiative has become a leading advocate for religious minorities in other areas, such as northern and central Nigeria. Throughout 2016, the 21st Century Wilberforce Initiative has traveled throughout areas of Nigeria that the UN describes as the world's worst current humanitarian crisis. During these trips, Wilberforce spoke with thousands of pastors and victims throughout the country and listened to their heartbreaking stories. The group's published report ``Fractured and Forgotten'' has been featured at numerous conferences and has been used to brief Congressional leaders. The group worked extensively with the Nigerian National Assembly to help confirm a new U.S. Ambassador to Nigeria in September of 2016. In addition to raising awareness, the 21st Century Wilberforce Initiative has trained more than 2,700 religious and government leaders from across the world on the importance of religious freedom, worked to expand religious liberties in Nepal's Constitution, and met with leaders within the Taiwanese government to discuss creating a Religious Freedom Caucus in the Legislative Yuan. These are just some of the many accomplishments the 21st Century Wilberforce Initiative has been able to accomplish in their efforts to advance religious freedom around the world. As a nation that was built by those who escaped religious persecution in their homelands, we must not forget that thousands of others across the globe are facing the same persecution as our forefathers. The 21st Century Wilberforce Initiative has given these people a voice and hope that one day they can share the same liberties that we all cherish here in this great nation. I applaud the 21st Century Wilberforce Initiative for their hard work and pray that God blesses them and continues to provide them with the strength and courage to continue their mission to help save their fellow man.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. I thank my friend for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to brag on Randy Neugebauer. He is a friend, and he and I have a unique circumstance that we share in that we ran against each other in Texas. Larry Combest served District 19 at that point in time, and they had a special election. Randy and I ran against each other. It hasn't happened in a long time, but right after that election, people asked me: What do you think about Randy Neugebauer? I said: Well, he is my friend. They said: I know, but that is what you politicians always say--the ``good gentleman,'' the ``friend.'' You never tell the truth in those circumstances. I said: No, no, no. With Randy and I, the key is our wives are friends; so, if wives can survive a campaign against each other and be friends, then it is a testament that we ran the way Republicans should run against each other. He stuck to why folks should vote for Randy Neugebauer, and I stuck with why folks should vote for me. Randy prevailed in that election and joined Congress in June of 2003. He has served wonderfully and ably since then. Randy has a strong moral compass and exhibits that moral compass to the House all of the time. He is one of those guys who is true north and never wavers, a rock solid Conservative and someone, I am sure, who is proud of his service to the folks in District 19. Our districts are contiguous. My northern border is his southern border; so we overlap in certain areas, and I get comments from his constituents about the great work he and his constituent service team do back home. We are going to miss him. We are going to miss him greatly--his voice. He serves on the Agriculture Committee as vice chairman and has served the agricultural communities as well as his having experience on the Armed Services Committee. I am proud to call Randy my friend and I am proud of his service here. He and his wife, Dana, are off to the next chapter--an exciting chapter. I need to warn the rainbow trout and brown trout populations all over America that, on the days we are in office in 2017 and 2018, they need to be on the lookout for an avid fly fisherman who will be on the hunt for all of those trout. Again, I want to add my congratulations to Randy on a job well done in service to his State and our Nation in an admirable way. He leaves office in the right way--on his own terms and very proud. I would ask for God's blessing on him and Dana and for God's blessing on Texas, and may God continue to bless the great United States of America.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate an organization in my district, Centers for Children and Families, on the opening of their new facility. Since 1957, Centers has helped strengthen individuals and families throughout West Texas by providing counseling for those who would otherwise be unable to afford these services. In addition to counseling services, Centers also provides assistance with life management skills, parenting classes, post-adoption support, and programs that help children have safe and positive supervised parental visits. As a prior Chairman of the Board for Centers, I have been fortunate enough to see firsthand the great work that this organization does for the Permian Basin community. With the opening of their new facility, Centers will have quality space to carry on their longstanding legacy of helping people get through the difficult times they may be facing. I wish them best of luck in their future endeavors.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the following: Whereas, a sustainable agricultural system is crucial to the continued production of food, feed, and fiber to meet both domestic and global demand; and Whereas, in the United States, the agriculture and food production industries employ precision farming equipment, crop protection chemistries, genetic engineering or enhancement, agricultural nutrients, and other modern technologies; such advanced practices protect the safety of the public and reduce environmental impact while expanding yields, improving profitability, and ensuring an abundant and affordable food supply; and Whereas, agricultural pests present significant dangers to the industry and to global supplies of the products they attack; accordingly, the environmental risks of forgoing advances in agricultural technologies that protect crops are severe; excessive regulation may scuttle or discourage the use of agricultural chemicals that could improve human welfare; and Whereas, crop protection is among the most studied and highly regulated of all industries, at both the state and federal levels; the use of sound science should be the bedrock of our nation's regulatory scheme for the agriculture and food production industries, as these industries are critical to the economic vitality of Texas and the United States; now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate of the State of Texas, 84th Legislature, hereby express support for the use of sound science to study and regulate such modern agricultural technologies as crop protection chemistries, genetically engineered or enhanced traits, and nutrients; and, be it further Resolved, That the Senate express opposition to legislative or regulatory action at any level that may result in unnecessary restrictions on the use of modern agricultural technologies; and, be it further Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate forward official copies of this resolution to the president of the United States, to the president of the Senate and the speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States Congress, and to all the members of the Texas delegation to Congress with the request that this resolution be entered in the Congressional Record as a memorial to the Congress of the United States of America.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with concerns about a recently issued memo from the Department of Justice to the Acting Director of the Bureau of Prisons directing the nonrenewal or reduction of contracts with private detention facilities. I strongly disagree with this policy change, as private prisons play a critical role in our current Federal Bureau of Prisons system. One facility in particular, the Eden Detention Center, located in Texas' 11th District, is an excellent example of a private prison operating in an efficient, effective, secure, and safe manner for both the community and those incarcerated. Let me take a moment to brag about these constituents. The American Correctional Association has awarded the Eden Detention facility a 100 percent score on their mandatory requirements, and a 99.08 percent score on nonmandatory requirements. These are undoubtedly phenomenal rankings by any measure, and the Eden facility meets these high standards at considerably lower costs than similar Federal facilities. Eden is more than a detention facility; it is a rehabilitation center. The Bureau of Prisons has long placed significance on rehabilitating those incarcerated, directing facilities to invest in the lives of their inmates. The goal--to turn individuals from a life of crime to contributing members of society--is at the center of the Eden facility's mission. It is this responsibility for one's fellow man that the people of Eden understand and put into practice daily, providing inmates with extensive training, educational services, and recreation, all for the purpose of improving life after incarceration. The Eden facility has partnered with many civic and charitable organizations in the surrounding community to support this goal. As a result, the center is able to provide many vocational, computer, and life skills training opportunities, as well as educational opportunities for basic adult education, English language training, GED, a full library, a law library, and much more. The Bureau of Prisons takes extreme pride--and rightfully so--in a strong value system that includes, but is not limited to, respect, integrity, service, safety for all parties, successful rehabilitation, and exceptional staff and operations. I am proud to report that Eden and the greater community not only meet these core values, but they share them as well.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of a simple yet important piece of border security legislation that I hope to see signed into law shortly. This legislation will help to secure our borders, save taxpayer dollars, and help the men and women who have served our Nation honorably to continue to serve and protect America in much-needed, technologically advanced positions. My legislation makes a simple fix that would allow the Customs and Border Patrol Commissioner to waive the polygraph requirement for soon- to-be veterans who seek employment as UAV pilots within the Department of Homeland Security who come from the Department of Defense with current security clearances. The DOD typically invests a significant amount of training and career development resources in these men and women, and to lose their talent due to a lapse in interdepartmental communication is a detriment to our country. Under the current system, when soon-to-be veterans who are unmanned aerial vehicle, or UAV, pilots wish to apply for a UAV position at the DHS, they are placed on a wait list until more money and time is used to determine if these veterans meet DHS security guidelines despite having already passed similar security background checks performed by the Department of Defense. This creates a near impossible bottleneck where veterans can be stuck for months or years in waiting on redundant procedures, forcing most to drop their applications and go elsewhere to find employment. The result of this bureaucratic inefficiency is that veterans who have valuable skills that can help protect our Nation and in whom we have invested millions of dollars in training are lost to other jobs. This leaves DHS Border Protection positions unfilled and our borders more vulnerable. The country's security, veterans, and taxpayers all lose in this equation. This legislation works to solve three key problems by creating job opportunities for veterans, securing the borders, and saving taxpayer dollars. It is just plain common sense, and I urge the full consideration and adoption of this measure.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a recent Medal of Honor recipient, LTC Charles S. Kettles. LTC Kettles will be honored at the Fort Wolters Historical Park's Medal of Honor Day in Mineral Wells, Texas on September 17, 2016. This ceremony recognizes the lives of individuals who were stationed at Fort Wolters at some point in their career and received our nation's highest military commendation. On May 15, 1967, Charles was serving as the Flight Commander of the 176th Aviation Company in the 14th Combat Aviation Battalion, American Division near Duc Pho, Republic of Vietnam. On that day, an airborne infantry unit came under heavy enemy fire and suffered casualties. Charles immediately volunteered to lead a flight of six UH-1D helicopters to carry reinforcements to the embattled force and evacuate his wounded brothers. Upon arriving at the landing zone, Charles and his crew faced a savage barrage of enemy fire that inflicted heavy damage to their fleet. Despite all of this, Charles refused to depart until all helicopters were loaded to capacity. With his aircraft severely damaged and leaking fuel, Charles skillfully guided his helicopter back to base. Later that day, the Infantry Battalion Commander requested immediate, emergency extraction of the remaining 40 soldiers that were stranded after their helicopter was downed by enemy fire. Again, Charles volunteered to lead a flight of six evacuation helicopters to return back to the deadly landing zone, making this his third trip that day. During the extraction, Charles was told that all personnel were accounted for and he, along with his team and Army gunships, left the battlefield. Shortly after departing, Charles was informed that eight troops had been unable to reach the evacuation helicopters due to being pinned down by intense heavy fire. With complete disregard for his safety, Charles passed the lead to another helicopter and reversed course back to the landing zone. Without any artillery and tactical support, enemy forces concentrated all firepower on Charles' helicopter. His aircraft was immediately damaged by a mortar round that shattered his front windshields and the body of the helicopter was riddled with small arms and machine gun bullets. Despite these circumstances, Charles was able to buy enough time to allow the remaining eight soldiers to board the helicopter. Once in the air, Charles was able to safely guide his severely mangled aircraft back to the base. Without LTC Kettles' heroic deeds that day, the dozens of soldiers he had saved would not have come home to their loved ones. His selfless acts of valor exemplified the values of honor and service that makes our nation's military the finest in the world. It is with great pleasure and honor that I am able to share his story with all of my colleagues in the House.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Odessa College for being named a Finalist in Excelencia in Education. This honor was bestowed on Odessa College for their work in raising retention rates through their Design for Completion program. Starting in 2011, Odessa College created a framework to provide meaningful connections and engagements between their students and faculty. Design for Completion is focused on the student and their success in the classroom and beyond. This initiative places students on a distinct and coherent pathway that provides the necessary support and resources vital to their collegiate careers. Since implementing Design for Completion, retention and student success rates have dramatically increased across campus, especially among Hispanic students. Through this program, Odessa College has instilled confidence in their students by showing them that they can accomplish any goal that they set out to conquer. Odessa College hopes that this program serves as a model that other higher education institutions can use to help other students succeed in their academic studies. A strong education system contributes greatly to the success and growth of our country, and is the key to not only our individual achievement, but also to our competitiveness as a nation. Programs like Design for Completion helps our nation achieve these goals and reach our fullest potential. I am honored to have the opportunity to represent Odessa College and wish them continued success.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, today the House of Representatives is losing a treasure. After more than 41 years of service, Joanne White, or Miss Joanne as she is affectionately known, is taking her well- earned retirement. She has never been elected, she has never introduced a bill and she has never cast a vote on the House floor but she has meant more to this institution than many of us lucky enough to be called members. It is no secret that so much of what successful Members are able to accomplish is because of dedicated staff. Staff keeps the trains moving, they sweat the details, and they are the experts on so many of the issues of the day. In her 41 years here, Miss Joanne has done more, seen more, and forgotten more than I ever will. Her experience and institutional knowledge is irreplaceable. I am fortunate enough to have known Miss Joanne during my time as chairman of the House Ethics Committee, where she has served the past twenty five years. As a new chairman, I was the beneficiary of her accumulated wisdom and the recipient of her sage counsel. Miss Joanne is unique because of her dedication to this institution and her bipartisan service to 13 different Committee chairmen. While she is retiring today, she is leaving indelible marks behind. The Ethics Committee reflects her warm and gracious demeanor. And, there are two generations of staffers who she taught not how to work for Congress, but how to serve in Congress. Finally, like my predecessors, I am grateful to have had Miss Joanne by my side as I navigated the challenges of chairing the Ethics Committee. She taught me lessons that I will not forget either. I am indebted to her. Her colleagues are indebted to her. The House of Representatives is indebted to her. As she retires, I wish her happiness and joy as she spends time with her family and friends. Thank you, Joanne, for your service.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, farmers, ranchers, and foresters take great pride in the stewardship of the land. They are the original conservationists. While it may be popular among some to blame farmers and ranchers for any and every environmental concern that crops up, I know that nobody cares more for the environment than those who work the land every day. When a farm family's livelihood depends on caring for natural resources, there is an undeniable economic incentive to adopt practices to enhance the land's long-term viability. Unfortunately, the Obama administration has pursued an agenda seemingly absent of any recognition of the consequences for rural America and production agriculture. Obama's EPA is creating regulations that are burdensome, overreaching, and negatively affecting jobs and the rural economy. Perhaps the most poignant example is the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers' recent power grab with the waters of the U.S. rule or, as the EPA calls it, the clean water rule. I will be frank, this rule is not about clean water. Everybody wants and deserves clean water. This rule simply embodies EPA's insatiable appetite for power. When EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy testified before the House Committee on Agriculture in February, members of the committee brought forth many concerns with the WOTUS rule. Numerous times Administrator McCarthy simply brushed off their concerns with statements that were intended to assure us that farmers would have the same longstanding farming exemptions that were originally included in the Clean Water Act. These verbal assurances give little comfort to farmers and ranchers who will face steep civil fines for any violation. While the Administrator was telling the farming community that they have nothing to fear with the new WOTUS rule, a California farmer was being prosecuted by the Justice Department for simply plowing his field. The lawsuit brought against this producer claims that by plowing a field, which every farmer I know considers a normal farming practice, this farmer has created, get this, ``mini mountain ranges'' in his field. These mountain ranges are furrows from normal farming. The suit also claims that this producer discharged a pollutant into the waters of the U.S. This so-called pollutant was the soil he was plowing. These perceived violations only came to light when an overzealous court bureaucrat just happened to be driving by the property and discovered perceived WOTUS violations on the land. Regardless of the degree to which some deem government regulation justifiable, all regulations must be developed in a manner that is based on science and mindful of the economic consequences. This rule clearly was not. Farmers, ranchers, and foresters believe the EPA is attacking them, and it is easy to understand why. Instead of using the EPA and Corps' preferred strategy of fear and intimidation, coupled with punitive enforcement and overreaching regulatory authority, we should be building on the successful approach taken in the 2014 farm bill and previous farm bills to protect our natural resources through voluntary incentive-based conservation programs.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I am not sure Texas ever had an income tax, and I am pretty sure we are not ever going to have one. As part of my professional background, I am a CPA and my license is still current. Before I joined Congress, I spent 30-plus years helping clients cope, deal, understand, and pay their taxes. Speaking of the IRS and the intimidation factor, as a CPA, if I get a letter from the IRS addressed to me, my heart rate goes up before I open it. Now, it shouldn't be that way. It shouldn't have that kind of impact on any of us because I work really hard, as you might expect, to make sure that I get my taxes done. My colleagues have both hit many of the high points on the FairTax. The choices we have out there now: there is the current Code, and there are advocates for that; there is a flat tax, and there are advocates for that; then there is a national sales tax, and I have cosponsored it after six terms and am proud to do that. There are several reasons I have settled on the sales tax. One, it eliminates the IRS. Every government needs taxes in order to run. That tax collection scheme should have no other purpose, other than collecting the minimum amount of money needed to fund that government. The current Code from `86 forward--and back, actually, to 1916--has been used over and over and over to manipulate this behavior, to incentivize that, disincentivize this, reward this half, punish, all these kinds of things. That is manipulative and it is inefficient, and it is just the wrong use of a Tax Code. We shouldn't be using it that way. So that is why I have settled on a national sales tax. The reason I do that versus a flat tax is because, quite frankly, the flat tax, as most people understand it, leaves in place the IRS, leaves in place the opportunity for the mischief that goes on with the current Code. We could go to a flat tax, as we did sort of in 1986. The 1986 act was more in that direction. It reduced rates, flattened the rates out, eliminated some, those kinds of things. Thirty years later, we are more complicated today than we were in 1986. The flat tax leaves all of that opportunity for mischief in place going forward. So the ink wouldn't be dry on the flat tax until somebody would say, hey, you know, if you give us a little relief on that flat tax thing for this area, look how it would prosper, grow the economy, create jobs, all those kinds of good things, and every one of those provisions are in there, so the flat tax and the current Code share much of that same risk. Sales tax, on the other hand, is collected by the States. You would eliminate the IRS, so it is collected at the point of sale. The compliance, the studies show that the compliance with that sales tax would be greater than the current compliance we have with the income tax that we currently have, and so compliance would be better. It would be left up to the States to collect it. They would get a little slice for doing that on our behalf. The rest of the money would come into the Federal Government. You would eliminate the entire bureaucracy that is the IRS and the good and the bad that they have done in the past, more bad lately than good because of the punishing taxpayers, going after taxpayers because their political beliefs are different from the current boss of the IRS, who is Barack Obama. That goes away, and it is just better. I would caution, though, there are those who would argue, well, let's just do both. Let's have a little bitty income tax and a little bitty sales tax. Don't do that. The jurisdictions who have both wind up raising both. Let's pick one and stick with it, as hard as it might be to transition and all this kind of good stuff. Let's do that because of the impact it has on the opportunity for manufacturing in the United States to compete, as you just said. In addition to the tax, there is that overregulation thing that hurts them as well, but the Tax Code creates a huge competitive disadvantage that we can do something about now. Overregulation, you know, that is in the eye of the beholder, but the income tax, the impact the income tax has on the cost of goods sold outside of the country, that is clear, and there is definitely something we could do about that. I appreciate my colleague bringing this up. The one thing that people ask back home who are supportive of the FairTax is: What do we do? How do we get this done? Quite frankly, it is educating taxpayers, because the uninitiated would listen to that 30-second commercial that says, you know, this politician is in favor of a percentage increase in taxes. They leave out the little nugget that we would do away with the IRS, do away with income tax, estate tax. That kind of gets left out of that 30-second commercial. We have got to have an educated taxpayer base out there that looks at that commercial and says, no, wait a minute, as Paul Harvey said, that is not--there is more to it, there is ``the rest of the story'' associated with that tax increase that they would like to champion this to go against it--so, educating taxpayers. I ask folks, when I bring this up at a townhall, to look at it themselves. What does it do to your business? What does it do to you personally? How does it impact you? Educate, because there is no interest like self-interest. So look what it does for you, and it is a better way to get at it. It has got all these advantages. All this investment would stay here in the United States. I have cosponsored it for 6 years. One quick anecdote and I will shut up. I have not had a CPA come to me and complain about sponsoring the FairTax, that you are going to put us out of business. I did have the mother of a CPA come to me, and she was a diminutive little lady who thumped me on the chest really hard and said: Don't you put my daughter out of business. I said: Ma'am, I have got that. I have got that. Well, it just so happens I am real good friends with the CPA daughter. I ran into her a couple weeks later. She said: Hey, I understand you saw my mom. I said: Yeah, she was worried about me putting you out of business. She said: Don't worry about my mom. If the Code went away, all that tax compliance work went away, we would find really good stuff that we could do for our clients to promote their business, help them be more efficient, help them grow and do all those kinds of things that we would really rather do than comply with an ever-changing Tax Code. I appreciate my colleague sponsoring this hour tonight and those who are about to speak and have spoken, because it is important to educate the American taxpayer so that that groundswell of support--you know, the folks who support a national sales tax, the folks who support a flat tax, basically, are telling Congress, we want something other than the current Code. The problem is we have got to have enough oomph, enough political muscle from the electorate--I am not sure how she is going to spell that--to back it so they would represent that two-thirds to overcome a policy that is this invasive, this expansive, and make that happen. So it is about educating taxpayers, getting them on board to create that political will that then gets communicated to the 435 of us who actually have the voting cards that can make it happen. So I appreciate my colleague for sponsoring this tonight and allowing me to prattle on for a whole lot longer than you probably wanted, but thank you for letting me be with you tonight.

Mr. CONAWAY. Well, a couple things. Obviously, there is an industry created to help comply with a really complex Code. There is a smaller but, nevertheless, powerful industry that is in place to promote new changes and additional issues to add to the Code to make it more complicated. Every one of those special programs in the Code-- deductions or credits--has an advocacy group. Somebody somewhere is using that piece in their tax return. Here is an example. I was talking back home about the advantages of eliminating--A Better Way has got another tax program. But I said, making a comment, we are going to eliminate all those deductions and credits for individuals. I said, now, that is going to take political will because every one of them has an advocate, a taxpayer, not a lobbyist or all those kinds of bad words, but a taxpayer; and in order to overcome it, we are all going to have to give up our little special niches to make that happen. No sooner was that out of my mouth and I finished it than a guy came up to me and said, hey, I agree with doing away with all those tax credits and all those deductions, but leave in place section 1031. Well, 1031 is that like-kind exchange section where I can take income- producing property, sell it, defer the gain, invest it in another income-producing property, and just kind of daisy-chain that down the road. Well, he is a broker. He sells ranches and farms, so it was in his best interest personally to make that happen. It is hard to make broad statements that it does good stuff, but every one of those provisions has somebody somewhere in America who is taking advantage of it. Here is another thing that just happened, and this has really nothing much to do with this. I got two calls today, one while I was sitting here waiting for this to start from a voice that said, ``Hello,'' very stern, this is so-and-so from the IRS, Internal Revenue Service, and you have an audit problem that you have not addressed. There is a big deal going on, and if you don't call this number back right away, we will interpret that as you trying to run from us, and it will enhance the charges against you. A clear scam because the IRS doesn't call you. But nevertheless, there is a scheme out there available that someone could use as a scam artist to frighten taxpayers because, to an uninitiated person, they would call that number back. I have no idea what it would do to your phone if you called it back. There is something going on there that hasn't happened, but here is what would never happen. You will never get a call that says you have not paid your sales taxes, and because you have not paid your sales taxes, we are coming to get you. No, sales taxes are collected at the point of sale, and there will be no collection agency. There will be no opportunity for a scam in that regard. But back on who benefits. Obviously, there are a group of folks who do tax compliance, and much of that is offshored, quite frankly, and then the people who use those individual pieces. So part of this is to overcome that inertia to change.

Mr. CONAWAY. I thank the gentleman. Again, I appreciate him sponsoring this hour. I know you have a couple other Members who want to speak. Thank you for your generosity tonight.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and dedicated service of George Koehl III. On August 28 of this year, the Midland community celebrated his life and service with Sunday services and a memorial service on Saturday afternoon, August 27. George was born and reared in Midland, Texas, to Maggie and George Koehl, Jr., on August 19, 1954, and he went to meet his Lord on his birthday, August 19, 2016. He graduated from Midland High School in 1972, and later received a bachelor's degree in church music and a master's degree in music theory and composition from Hardin-Simmons University in Abilene, Texas. While studying at Hardin-Simmons, George met the love of his life, DiAnn Schmidt. The two married and had four children and five grandsons. After completing his degrees from Hardin-Simmons University, George answered God's call to service and began his career in ministry. Over the course of the next 16 years, George served as a youth and music minister for multiple congregations throughout Texas. In August of 1993, God called George back to his hometown to serve at the First Baptist Church of Midland, where he labored and worked for 23 years. I was privileged to attend First Baptist Church throughout George's entire tenure. Under his leadership, the music ministry excelled and touched many lives. The Passion Plays at Easter and the Christmas programs he directed were first-class productions that were enjoyed by capacity audiences whose lives were blessed. I watched George and DiAnn walk a path that I am not unfamiliar with in the battle of cancer. George battled his illness with grace and dignity and courage and a palpable faith in Jesus Christ. All who knew him were inspired by his dogged and iron-willed determination to not let cancer rob him of the service to Christ's kingdom. DiAnn set the bar for how spouses should support each other in good times and hard times, all the while battling cancer herself. During George's memorial service on August 27, 2016, his children blessed us all in reaffirming their faith in a loving and sovereign God. While their prayers for their dad's healing on Earth were not answered, they acknowledged that God had healed their dad for all eternity. Throughout his career, he consistently placed the needs of others ahead of his own, and he did so with the utmost integrity and devotion. The many qualities George exhibited serve as a shining example of how each of us should serve the Lord. George lived a life that blessed everyone that he met and made every community he lived in a much better place. The City of Midland declared August 28 as George Koehl III Day. He is greatly missed, but his legacy will be carried on by the many people whose lives he has touched by his living example.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, for thousands of years, mankind has used biotechnology in its various forms to improve crops and livestock. In fact, these technologies have led to the evolution of nearly every food product we consume and have enabled us to enjoy the safest, highest quality, and most abundant and affordable supply food and fiber in the history of the world. The majority of the scientific community, including the American Medical Association, the World Health Organization, and the National Academy of Sciences, contends that food products grown with the use of biotechnology are just as safe as, if not safer than, any other food. Just last month, a group of 107 Nobel laureates joined the effort to fight back against the anti-science, activist group Greenpeace for its attempts to stifle these lifesaving advances. With almost 800 million malnourished people worldwide and the global population expected to rise to 9 billion by 2050, we are more reliant on biotechnology than ever to meet the ever-increasing demand for a safe and stable food supply. In recent years, campaigns against agricultural biotechnology have raised concerns among consumers, and some States have begun to implement arbitrary and inconsistent labeling laws that threaten to increase consumer confusion and food costs while ultimately interfering with interstate commerce. The bill before us today addresses these issues by providing a blueprint for a nationwide uniform standard for labeling products derived from biotechnology. Though I believe the government should only require labels when it is a matter of health or safety, or to provide valuable nutritional information, it is important that this State-by- State patchwork not disrupt the nationwide marketing of food. With the Vermont mandate kicking in earlier this month, time is now of the essence. I reached out to USDA last week, asking for clarification on the limits of authority that the Senate bill vests with the Secretary. USDA'S response has helped to provide much-needed clarity. I include in the Record those letters. House of Representatives, Committee on Agriculture, Subcommittee on Nutrition, Washington, DC, July 7, 2016. Mr. Jeffrey Prieto, General Counsel, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington,

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 822, I call up the bill (S. 764) to reauthorize and amend the National Sea Grant College Program Act, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendment to the House amendment thereto, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion at the desk.