David Cicilline

Mr. CICILLINE

Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Chair, my amendment would exempt rules that reduce the cost of health care for Americans over the age of 65 from the unnecessary requirements of this legislation. Mr. Chair, our country's seniors face growing healthcare costs, and any delays in rules that could reduce those costs would be a terrible burden to place on America's seniors. According to the latest retiree healthcare cost estimates from Fidelity Benefits Consulting, a 65-year-old couple retiring this year will need an average of $260,000 in today's dollars to cover medical expenses throughout their retirement. That applies only to retirees with traditional Medicare insurance coverage and does not include costs associated with nursing home care. Fidelity estimates that a 65-year-old couple would need an additional $130,000 to ensure against long-term care expenses. That is because the median annual cost for the base rent at an assisted living community is about $41,000 per year. The average annual cost for skilled nursing is about $71,000 per year. Because much long-term care is provided by unpaid family caregivers or is covered by Medicaid, the average senior's lifetime out-of-pocket long-term care expenses are about $50,000. The legislation before us would open up the rulemaking process to lengthy delay tactics, allowing companies or entities opposed to certain rules to take advantage of the court system to stymie final rulemaking for years. Our seniors don't have years to wait on policies that could save them precious dollars in their retirement. There is already a robust process in place for opponents to challenge them in court, with the decision whether to delay a rule rightly placed in the court's hands. This legislation is a gift to special interests who will benefit from the delay of the imposition of rules that reduce costs for seniors. These special interests are willing to spend millions of dollars and waste years fighting regulations that will benefit the American people, particularly our seniors. High-impact rules typically involve either the transfer of Federal funds or rules with billions of dollars in benefits to the public. During fiscal year 2014, for example, executive branch agencies adopted 53 major rules, 35 of which were transfer rules. According to the Office of Management and Budget, transfer rules merely implement Federal budgetary programs as required or authorized by Congress, such as rules associated with the Medicare program and the Federal Pell Grant Program. There are 44.9 million seniors on Medicare in this country. Frivolous lawsuits to delay rules that will increase benefits or those that will produce cost savings would be a grave betrayal of the promise that we have made to keep America's seniors healthy. My amendment simply ensures that any rule that reduces costs of health care for Americans 65 or older will not be subject to unnecessary delays. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CICILLINE

Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I want to begin by thanking Chairman Shuster and Ranking Member DeFazio for their support on this legislation. I would also particularly like to thank Congressman Carson for his strong support in getting this bill to the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and thank Chairman Barletta for his support as well. H.R. 5147, the Bathrooms Accessible in Every Situation Act, or the BABIES Act, would require that both male and female restrooms in public buildings be equipped with baby changing facilities that are physically safe, sanitary, and appropriate. Federal public buildings belong to the people of this country, and they should be welcoming and appropriately accommodating. This legislation will ensure that there are appropriate and sanitary facilities in publicly accessible Federal buildings for parents and caretakers to change the infants and toddlers that are with them. For example, in the office building where my office is located, Rayburn, there are no baby changing tables at all. That means that Rhode Islanders who come to visit my office have to try to find a changing station in another public building, or they will have to decide to change their baby on a bathroom floor, which is a terrible option, unsanitary for both the parents and the children. This same problem exists in Federal buildings all across this country. Access to baby changing stations in restrooms in Federal buildings will help in protecting the health and safety of children and will encourage a family-friendly environment. Various cities and counties in the United States have passed similar laws requiring changing tables in men's and women's bathrooms for all of the same reasons. Current GSA policy requires that the planning of new construction modernization alteration projects include family restrooms equipped with baby changing stations, but current policy does not apply to existing buildings. This legislation would impose the requirement for publicly accessible Federal buildings and facilities. The cost will be modest to install a baby changing station. This will go a very long way to ensuring the safety and comfort of families visiting Federal buildings all across this country. I thank the chairman and ranking member for their support, and I urge my colleagues to support it as well.

Mr. CICILLINE

Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to honor the memory of Kiesha Betton, a victim of gun violence who never received a moment of action on the House floor.

Mr. CICILLINE

Mr. CICILLINE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Progreso Latino, the State of Rhode Island's leading Latino human services organization that is celebrating its 39th anniversary this weekend. For nearly four decades, Progreso Latino has empowered Rhode Island's Latino community, providing direct advocacy, adult education, child care, and youth programs that have helped build strong, sustainable neighborhoods across our State. They have done this work with great professionalism and a deep commitment to the community. Progreso Latino has gone above and beyond to provide essential healthcare services for families, including wellness programs, preventive care, and regular checkups. Headquartered in the city of Central Falls, this organization continues to play a critical role today in meeting the needs of Rhode Island's Latino families and ensuring they have an opportunity to get ahead. I am delighted to congratulate Progreso Latino and the dedicated men and women of this extraordinary organization as they celebrate 39 years of service this Saturday.

Mr. CICILLINE

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

Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would exempt settlement agreements that strengthen the personal privacy of Americans from the blanket prohibition in this legislation. More specifically, it would preserve the ability of civil enforcement agencies to compel large corporations to adopt programs to protect consumer data. Under this bill, these agencies would be prohibited from reaching settlement agreements that provide payments to nongovernmental parties. It would only exempt payments to provide restitution for actual harm directly and proximately caused by the party making the payment. As a result, H.R. 5063 would potentially prohibit payments for required monitoring and other payments for generalized harm due to privacy breaches. As Professor David Uhlmann of the University of Michigan Law School pointed out during the subcommittee hearing for this bill, it could ``preclude all third-party payments in settlement agreements, other than restitution to identifiable victims.'' This is particularly problematic in the consumer privacy context where the harms may be diffuse or systemic. In such instances, the most appropriate remedy may involve prescribing steps that effectively prevent future misconduct rather than ones that focus exclusively on addressing previous faults. For instance, the Federal Trade Commission has used its authority under Section 5(a) of the FTC Act to resolve complaints involving unfair or deceptive practices. As part of settlement agreements for these complaints, the FTC typically requires the offending party to adopt a series of preventative privacy measures. These requirements usually include employee training and monitoring requirements, third-party auditing, regular testing of privacy control and procedures, and other reasonable steps to maintain data security practices consistent with the underlying settlement. These steps are not frivolous, and the payments involved are not opaque contributions to any so-called slush funds. To the contrary, these programs are carefully tailored to protect consumer privacy. Such agreements are an important and substantive component of the toolbox that enforcement agencies have at their disposals. But under the terms of H.R. 5063, these programs would be likely prohibited since they do not provide restitution to an identifiable victim or a party to the litigation. The majority claims that their bill would allow for monitoring, but that is unclear in the language and, at best, would have to be litigated by the courts. Moreover, any monitoring allowed by this language would be done by the very defendant paying restitution in these cases, which defies best practices, especially in privacy cases. In cases of data breaches, in which it is frequently impossible to identify all victims of a leak, it is common to put funds into victim relief funds or consumer privacy funds, which would be prohibited by this legislation as well. My amendment would simply ensure that these agreements, which protect the privacy of American consumers, are not endangered by this bill's vague and broad prohibition on payments in settlement agreements. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Johnson).

Mr. CICILLINE

Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn), the distinguished assistant leader.

Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, this is the last hour that Congress will meet before the 7-week recess that the Republicans scheduled for today. We are going to devote this last hour to focus on an issue incredibly important to the communities of the people we represent and to this country, and that is the issue of gun violence. As you may recall, Mr. Speaker, we had a sit-in where we came to the House floor to protest the congressional inaction in moving forward on sensible gun safety legislation, to bring attention, to break through this logjam and force our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to bring these bills to the floor for an up-or-down vote. We tried motions to recommit and efforts to add these pieces of legislation to bills that were moving as amendments and every mechanism we could to try to force some action because the American people are demanding action--asking--demanding that we do something in the face of the epidemic of gun violence in this country. We talk a lot about gun violence, but I think it is important to recognize this is a uniquely American problem. We kill each other in this country with guns 297 times more than Japan, 49 times more than France, and 33 times more than Israel, just to give you some comparisons. Every day, 297 people in America are shot with a gun, and each day, 89 of these people die. On average, 31 Americans are murdered with guns every day, and 151 are treated for gun assault in an emergency room. Thirty thousand Americans die every year at the hands of a gun, and the United States firearm homicide rate is 20 times higher than the combined rates of 22 countries that are our peers in wealth and population. So it is important, as we make this final plea, to understand that this epidemic of gun violence is a uniquely American problem. We just marked, the day before yesterday, the 1-month anniversary of the assault in Orlando at the Pulse nightclub that took the lives of 49 young people. We just marked the horrific occurrence in Dallas that took the lives of five American heroes, Dallas police officers. It feels like every day there is another mass shooting or a gun tragedy that we hear about and read about in this country. What we ask the Republican House leadership is to bring two bills to the floor. There are, I think, 217 bills in total that will respond to gun violence in a variety of different ways, but we said let's start with the easy pieces of legislation, legislation that is widely supported by the American people that will make a real difference in reducing gun violence in this country and keeping guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them--that is, universal background checks to make sure that someone doesn't get a gun who is not permitted to have a gun under our laws, and keeping them out of the hands of domestic abusers, criminals, and suspected terrorists. The second one is the no fly, no buy. It says, look, if you are on a terrorist watch list and we have determined you are too dangerous to get on an airplane, then you are certainly too dangerous to go into a gun store and buy any gun you want. So those two pieces of legislation, which are really common sense, would be an important first step to demonstrate to the American people that we understand our responsibility to take some action to reduce gun violence in this country and to keep guns out of the hands of people who should not have them. Rather than taking up those bills, regrettably, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle adjourned, and they went flying out that door so they could go home and enjoy a holiday in the summer with their family and friends without ever taking up a single piece of legislation to address gun violence. We tried in every way to say to our colleagues: Bring these bills to the floor for a vote. If you don't support them, make your arguments against them. Let the American people hear you defend that we shouldn't have universal background checks and that it is okay for someone on the terrorist watch list to buy a gun. But come to the floor, make your argument, and vote. That is what we get sent here to do. Give us a vote. Instead, they went out that door, and by doing so, by failing to act, they dishonored the memory of the thousands and thousands of Americans who have lost their lives to gun violence. Mr. and Mrs. Wright, Maria and Fred Wright, were here the day before yesterday on the 1-month anniversary of Orlando. They came to the Capitol rather than spending time at home continuing to grieve about the murder of their son, Jerald, at the Pulse nightclub. They came here to talk to Members of Congress. They wrote an op-ed that was published on the day of their visit to Washington. They said: ``While in D.C., we don't want just thoughts and prayers from Members of Congress. We want them to look us in the eyes and tell us: How will they work to make our Nation safer against gun violence? How will they perform their constitutional duty to `insure domestic tranquility' and `promote the general welfare'--some of the main roles of government according to our Constitution? How will they work to stand up to the extremist gun lobby and urge their fellow Members to do the same?'' That is what they wrote: Look in our eyes. They lost their son, and what Congress did, regrettably, is nothing. They recessed for 7 weeks. Mr. Speaker, we have a moral obligation to protect the lives and well-being of our constituents. That is our most sacred responsibility as Members of Congress. We do that in a variety of different ways. We do that by responding to public health crises, like the Zika virus, which we also failed to do. We do that by making sure people can have safe drinking water in places like Flint and cities all across this country, which we failed to do. We do that by protecting our constituents from the ravages of gun violence in this country, and we did nothing. We have a responsibility as Members of Congress, when faced with these sorts of epidemics, to do something. People who are living in communities all across this country, who are living with the consequences of this gun violence, say: What are you doing to stop it? They know we can't pass one law that is going to stop everything, but, taken together, we can pass legislation--particularly these two bills--that will substantially reduce the likelihood that dangerous people will get guns and harm the communities we represent. I will continue to add my voice to this fight, as I know many members of our caucus will. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson). He really has led our effort as the chair of the Democratic caucus on gun violence prevention and someone who has been a great champion in this effort.

Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his eloquent words. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Beatty).

Mr. CICILLINE. I thank the gentlewoman for her eloquent words. I appreciate the passion she has brought to this not only tonight, but throughout the week and the last many weeks. I am particularly proud, Mr. Speaker, of the leadership of our caucus. From the very first night when we came to the floor to attempt to break through the logjam of inaction by our Republican colleagues, it really galvanized our caucus. It galvanized the country that, likewise, is demanding action, demanding that we enact commonsense gun safety legislation. We heard eloquent words from so many members of our caucus through those 26 hours; but so much leadership was provided by the leaders of our caucus, who, in the past several weeks, have used every occasion, every possible opportunity, to force a vote on two commonsense gun safety provisions--to keep guns out of the hands of suspected terrorists and universal background checks--in amendments, in attempting to attach it to bills, in motions to recommit, in every way that they could. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), our distinguished Democratic whip, who has been a great champion on this issue and who has been a great leader in the fight for responsible gun safety legislation.

Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, it gives me pleasure to yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the distinguished Democratic leader. I thank her again for her extraordinary leadership on this issue.

Mr. CICILLINE

Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that we have an additional hour to continue to speak about the urgency of gun violence prevention action. We have many Democratic colleagues who are here who are seeking time to implore the Speaker to come back.

Mr. CICILLINE. Point of parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, why is the Chair not capable of entertaining a request for unanimous consent to provide for additional time to address this urgent public health crisis?

Mr. CICILLINE

Mr. CICILLINE. Let's call this bill for what it is: a cynical proposal that is designed to score political points in an election year even at the expense of our national security interests. Mr. Speaker, we need serious, thoughtful strategies to confront the Iranian regime, not partisan politics. The stakes are too high. I urge my colleagues to protect this agreement that prevents Iran from having a nuclear weapon, to work with us in a bipartisan way, to impose sanctions that are carefully drawn with the full participation of the Foreign Affairs Committee, and to reject this bill in its current form.

Mr. CICILLINE. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 5631. Nothing is more important to our national security interests in the Middle East than continuing to prevent a nuclear Iran while, at the same time, effectively containing Iran's influence and confronting their destabilizing activities in the region. Iran's ongoing ballistic missile program and its continued support for terrorism constitute an existential threat to our allies in the Middle East, including Israel. In its blatant disregard for human rights, we can hear the echoes of Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, and other failed totalitarian regimes that now reside in the dustbin of history. It is imperative that we do more to exert pressure on the Iranian regime to change its behavior, including meaningful sanctions for human rights and ballistic missile violations and terrorism. But any steps that we take cannot undermine the progress that we have already made over the past year to deny Iran a nuclear weapons program. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action is working. Since its implementation, Iran has dismantled two-thirds of its installed uranium enrichment capacity, ended all uranium enrichment activity at its Fordow facility, and removed the core of the Arak heavy water reactor and rendered its only source of weapons-grade plutonium permanently useless. Iran is now complying with the most comprehensive transparency and monitoring regime ever negotiated in the nuclear age. Israel's Chief of the General Staff, Lieutenant General Gadi Eizenkot, has called this agreement ``a historic turning point. It is a big change in terms of the direction that Iran was headed and in the way we saw things.'' There is no question that the world is safer today and that our allies in the Middle East, especially in Israel, are more secure because the JCPOA has denied Iran the opportunity to develop a nuclear weapon. We can and should continue to build on this work and confront the Iranian regime's behavior without undermining the JCPOA. We should impose sanctions for ballistic missiles, for human rights violations, and for terrorism, but these sanctions must be carefully drawn, must be carefully written to protect the agreement that denies Iran a nuclear weapon. The bill that we are voting on today does not do this. As a result, it won't make us safer. It will, in fact, undermine every single achievement we have made over the past year. It will impose insurmountable limits on the President's ability to work with our allies around the world and to implement effective sanctions on Iranian human rights abusers, their ballistic missile program, and their support for terrorism. If this bill becomes law, it will immediately put Iran back on a path to develop a nuclear weapon. I sit on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. I have attended dozens and dozens of hearings on Iran. I have heard hours and hours of testimony from expert witnesses on how we can effect change in Iran. But no one asked for our input on this bill. It was introduced by the Republican leadership in the dead of night, entirely bypassing the Foreign Affairs Committee, and came straight to the floor.

Mr. CICILLINE

Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, Maria and Fred Wright traveled to Washington to mark the 1-month anniversary of the murder of their son in Orlando. They wrote a beautiful op-ed: While in D.C., we don't want just thoughts or prayers from Members of Congress. We want them to look us in the eyes and tell us: How will they work to make our Nation safer against gun violence? How will they perform their constitutional duty to ``insure domestic tranquility'' and ``promote the general welfare''--some of the main roles of government according to our Constitution? How will they work to stand up to the extremist gun lobby and urge their fellow Members to do the same? Unfortunately, for Maria and Fred Wright, and for all of us, they would have to run really fast to look into the eyes of Congress as our colleagues fled down the stairs to run out for a 7-week vacation and to do nothing. Their son, Jerry, is one of 33,000 Americans who will lose their life to gun violence every year in this country. We urged our colleagues to bring to the floor something, do something in the face of this carnage. And we stay here as Democrats. The cameras can't stay in the room. The Republican side of the room is empty. They are gone. They are home with their family and friends. Maria and Fred will never get to be with their son Jerry. They didn't do anything to protect us from gun violence, to protect us from the dangers of Zika, to protect us from lead poisoning. Our most sacred responsibility is the health and well-being of those we serve. Shame on our colleagues on the other side of the aisle. Have they no decency to bring these bills to the floor and do their job?

Mr. CICILLINE

Mr. CICILLINE. Madam Speaker, last evening, we, the members of the Democratic Caucus, came together in an evening of remembrance to mark the 1-month anniversary and honor the lives of the 49 individuals who were massacred in Orlando at the Pulse Nightclub. We are about now to leave Congress, adjourn for 7 weeks, failing in our sacred responsibility to keep the American people safe. During that time, during our recess, about 5,000 Americans will die at the hands of guns. Too many communities have been stained by the blood of gun violence, and Congress has done nothing. We have begged and pleaded and implored and argued to bring to the floor responsible gun safety legislation, to do something to honor the lives that have been lost. Yet, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have refused--have refused to show the courage to stand up and do what is right for the American people. I pray that they find the courage to do that, and that we finally do something to reduce gun violence in this country and to honor the lives that have been lost, and to finally leave this Chamber knowing that we have responded and done something to respond to the epidemic of gun violence in America.

Mr. CICILLINE

Mr. CICILLINE. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today to offer an amendment which would provide a modest increase to the operation of the National Park Service account. This August 25 will mark the 100th anniversary of our National Park Service. Each year, more than 275 million people visit our national parks. Our national parks, heritage areas, monuments, and historical sights occupy more than 84 million acres of land in all 50 States and are home to more than 1,000 endangered and threatened animal species. My home State of Rhode Island is home to one of the newest units in the National Park Service, the Blackstone River Valley National Historic Park. The Blackstone Valley marks the birthplace of the American industrial revolution and serves as a monument to the growth of our Nation. Sites like Old Slater Mill in Pawtucket and the Museum of Work and Culture in Woonsocket help tell the story of how America became an economic superpower. It is essential that our national park system receives the funding that is necessary to help tell America's story and preserve it for generations to come. Being one of the newest units of the park system, Blackstone relies on long-term partnerships built over several decades in cities and towns as well as other public and private partnerships to help define its boundaries and strengthen its economic and cultural impact. However, it relies on Federal dollars, as well, from the National Park Service for its operations, including seasonal and year-round staff, maintenance of its facilities, and ongoing planning for the park's development. Unfortunately, this bill has underfunded the account for our national parks significantly below the budget request for fiscal year 2017. As a result, the more than 400 units of the National Park Service, including Blackstone, will be forced to do more with less. This will also be a step backward for the Blackstone River Valley National Historic Park. While the budget increase for Blackstone was modest for this year, it was an essential step forward to continue the momentum needed to allow the park to continue meeting its potential as a vital part of the New England landscape and a driver of economic growth in Rhode Island and Massachusetts. My amendment makes a modest reduction of $2.5 million from the departmental operations account for the Department of the Interior, which receives a funding level in this bill that is more than $470 million above the budget request, and moves it to the operation of the National Park Service account, which was underfunded by more than $89 million. This small increase to the Office of National Park Service account will not be enough to make up for the constraints that the bill places on our national parks, nor will it, of course, guarantee that Blackstone will be able to receive all the resources it truly needs. What it will do is ensure that some additional funds are available that may help Blackstone continue to increase the momentum it has built since its establishment in 2014. The extra funds this amendment provides will help provide some relief to our national parks, which provide a critical boost to our economy. According to the National Parks Conservation Association, every dollar the Federal Government invests in our national parks generates $10 in economic activity. Let's continue to support these critical investments in our national parks, which are the envy of the world. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment.

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