Doug Collins

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, there is something I will agree with the previous speaker on. I agree this is not about the President. It is about the process. It is about what we have all gone through and said, this is how a bill becomes the law. If we need a reminder, then let's talk about that. Mr. Speaker, one of the questions that was just said is why we would bring, why, when we have been here for the last 6 weeks bringing spending bills and sending them over--let's talk about what we did do. January 14, the House approves a full-year funding bill for DHS. February 3, Senate Democrats vote to block consideration. February 4, Senate Democrats vote again to block consideration. Uh oh, February 5, around Groundhog Day, somewhere in that neighborhood, Senate Democrats vote a third time to block consideration. February 23, in case they forgot, Senate Democrats vote for a fourth time to block consideration. Democrats even prevented themselves from offering amendments to strip the language that they found offensive. Mr. Speaker, is there just not a problem being developed here? We find ourselves in a position today because Senate Democrats refuse to be part of the solution. Again, this goes back to basic civics. Let's work this out. Let's do what we need to do. This is about giving us time to let the process work. And as the gentleman had said earlier, what could be different? Maybe this will be different. Maybe the Senate Democrats will learn they are in the minority. The American people spoke in November, and it is time that we work together to find solutions. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, again, I greatly respect my friends across the aisle, but we do have to understand exactly what we are bringing forward is not a bill we are bringing forward to shut down the government. We are bringing something forward to fund it for the next 3 weeks while we continue to work on a process of getting stuff done. Again, I agree with my colleagues. We are trying to fight. We had to work on the 529 plan that, frankly, the administration had some issues with. We fixed that here in the House this week. We are working on the problems that matter to kitchen tables around this country. Republicans are doing that, but they are also standing up for what we learned in civics lessons, is that this is the way the legislative process works. If I just need to repeat it one more time, let's go through it once more. January 14, the House did its job. It approved a full-year spending bill. February 3, Senate Democrats voted to block consideration. February 4, Senate Democrats vote again to block consideration. February 5, Senate Democrats vote a third time to block consideration again--as we will go along, as you know, February 23, same story, three times, fourth time removed. Democrats even prevented themselves from offering amendments to strip language they found offensive. I guess, after so many years of not being able to offer amendments, they forgot how. They are preventing their own selves from doing this in the Senate. It is time we act. This is the issue that we are dealing with today and will continue to do so. With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I think it is sort of interesting--and I appreciate my colleague from Texas--but I think the well-reasoned response of the administration to the issue that is going on, I think there just happens to be a contrary opinion found in a Federal judge in Texas, so maybe so much for the well-reasoned opinion. With that, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot).

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

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. We have no more speakers at this time.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 129 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), 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. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, at this point in time, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa).

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. It has been really an interesting morning discussing what we could do, what we not do, and what we have done, and, actually, the fact and the process of the House doing its job again and the Senate Democrats not doing theirs. It is just very frustrating. You talk about the American people. I tell you, from a Republican standpoint, this is about administration. This is about a time in which we are confronting, in which there is honest debate on both sides, but when it comes down to the bottom line, it has been very true over the course of these first 7, 8 weeks here that one party is putting forward an agenda that says that moms and dads and kids matter, that the rule of law matters, that things are to operate in a certain way, and they are operating in the way that we grew up knowing civics from our Founders that had a Constitution that laid out the path. What is interesting right now is that really, right now, the House Republicans, for the second time, are providing a path to keep the Department of Homeland Security open for business while the judge, Federal judge, has said the administration cannot go forward on their executive amnesty memo, which means it is not happening right now. So the question really becomes--and I don't think this can be stated enough, because when people are out there looking to Washington, they are wanting to know: Are you thinking about me? Are you thinking about what is going on? Are you thinking about what we need to fund in the days that people get up and they know that their country is fighting for them? So I just want to make it very clear. We said, ``for the second time.'' This is the second time because the first time happened on January 14. The House approved a full-year funding package for DHS, and yes, said this is what we do not like and will not fund, but this is a part of the process. Then, February 3, Senate Democrats vote to block consideration. February 4, Senate Democrats again vote to block consideration. February 5, guess what. Senate Democrats vote for a third time to block consideration. February 23, let's at least make it a home run. We will touch all the bases. Senate Democrats refuse, for the fourth time, to block consideration. But then, the most amazing part, Democrats even prevented themselves from offering amendments to strip language they found offensive. We are here today because the Senate Democrats refused to be part of the solution. So as I go forward and as I look at this, there has to be an understanding of this today--and it was said earlier and I made the point, but I am going to make it one more time today--a solution is being put forward. There is no one putting forward a bill to shut anything down. The bill that is being put forward is to fund for 3 more weeks. So I will encourage my friends on the other side of the aisle, any Democrat who wants to vote ``no'' on this funding bill, you are voting to shut down the Department of Homeland Security. Is that what you want to tell the American people? With that, I urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying bill.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Nicholas Bennett for making his 1,000th half-court basketball shot on Saturday, January 24. Let me say it is not the shot that is impressive, it is Nicholas. You see, Nicholas, a senior at North Hall High School who also has autism, has been manager of his school's varsity basketball team for 4 years. As a freshman, he made it his goal to sink 1,000 half-court shots by graduation. He has amazed his teammates by consistently making those on the way to fulfilling his promise. Nicholas got his first-ever starting opportunity at the North Hall- Gainesville basketball game last month. He scored on the opening play and sunk his 1,000th half-court shot during halftime. One of those people who impresses you the minute you meet him, Nicholas' kindness, determination, and dedication to his team are an inspiration. His motto is ``have faith,'' and it speaks to northeast Georgia's core values. Today, I join with the Ninth District in recognizing Nicholas' outstanding character and wish him the best in his future endeavors. Sometimes it is not about the shots; it is about the person making the shots. And Nicholas, you remind us to have faith.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate this opportunity to advocate for my amendment to H.R. 5, the Student Success Act. My amendment is based on the principle that strong oversight of taxpayer dollars should be the utmost priority for any Federal agency, including the Department of Education. I know my colleagues have strong and varied opinions--as has been exhibited on this floor over the past few hours--on the merits of this bill or not, but as this amendment comes forward, I would ask that we look at the accountability factor that is in this amendment. As the husband of an educator, education has long been a priority in my family. My wife's experiences have also given me a firsthand look at the challenges teachers face when school resources are tight. Some school districts in northeast Georgia and all over the country often struggle to make ends meet. They have to hold each other and every member of their staffs accountable for the money they spend. I think it is time we apply this same commonsense principle to the Department of Education. When fiscal responsibility and oversight are not taken seriously, we lose opportunities to help educators and students. When the Federal Government is a good steward of public funds, we have more resources to direct to good initiatives that will actually make a difference in classrooms across the country. My amendment seeks to protect the Department of Education's limited resources by ensuring that recipients of taxpayer-funded grants are aware of their responsibilities. Now, understanding I personally believe that the Department of Education's role should continue to be reduced and that States and locals are the best place to do this, but as long as there is money going to the Department of Education, it should be an utmost responsibility of responsibility and accountability. My amendment requires that the Secretary of Education ensure that each grantee and subgrantee is aware of three things: first, their responsibility to comply with all the monitoring requirements under their applicable program; second, the grantee's obligation to properly supervise any subgrantee; and third, the Secretary's schedule for monitoring and compliance reviews to ensure proper use of Federal funds. Making sure all grantees have this information will discourage abuse and remove the grantee's excuse that they just did not know what would be required of them when they accepted taxpayer dollars. My amendment also requires the Secretary to review and analyze the results of monitoring and compliance reviews to understand trends, identify common issues, and issue guidance before the loss or misuse of taxpayer funding. The Secretary would also make public their agency's effort to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse, including specific cases in which the Secretary found and prevented the misuse of taxpayer funds. Finally, my amendment requires the Secretary to work with the agency's Office of Inspector General to ensure that the appropriate Department of Education employees understand how to properly monitor grantees and guide grantees in the overseeing of subgrantees. This is a straightforward amendment designed to improve transparency, increase communication between the Department of Education and grant recipients, and ultimately ensure the Federal Government ensures good stewardship of taxpayer dollars. The extra layer of accountability provides this amendment will ensure that grants of all sizes are used well and that students and taxpayers will get the most benefit for their buck. Educators in Georgia and across the Nation understand the importance of protecting the limited resources we have to help kids in and out of the classroom. The least the Department of Education can do is put the policies in place to prevent the abuse of taxpayer dollars by grantees and make sure that the grant recipients know all of the reporting requirements and guidelines concerning their taxpayer funds. With that, I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will support this simple, commonsense transparency amendment. I would like to express my thanks to the chairman and the committee for their work on this bill and others. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate northeast Georgia's Engelheim Vineyards for its success in the San Francisco Chronicle Wine Competition. Thanks to the great Peach State winemakers, including Jan and Gary Engel, the owners of Engelheim Vineyards in Ellijay, Georgia wines are rightfully gaining national recognition. Last month, the Engels entered their northeast Georgia-grown and bottled wine in the prestigious San Francisco Chronicle Wine Competition. With more than 6,400 entries from 28 States, the San Francisco Chronicle Wine Competition is recognized as the largest competition of American wines in the world. Despite the crowded field and the fact that it was their first showing at the competition, Engelheim Vineyards did Georgia proud by earning four medals. Engelheim brought home a double gold medal for Sweet Molly, silvers for its Traminette and its Merlot, and a bronze medal for Trilogy, a blend of three estate-grown grapes. This magnificent achievement is just the latest example of northeast Georgia's emergence as a prominent wine region. Wine critics and a growing number of tourists agree the unique geography of our mountains and the passion of our winemakers make Georgia wines truly special. I commend the Engels and the hardworking Georgia winemakers, who are making a great name for our State in the world of wine, and I look forward to their continued success.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I would like to start off with a positive note. Just recently, President Obama submitted the Federal budget on time for the first time since 2010. While I appreciate his timeliness, I, and the constituents in my district, don't appreciate, however, his disregard for fiscal responsibility. The President sent a budget to Congress which starts the fiscal year with our country in the red. What organization starts off the fiscal year by saying they are going to purposefully spend more money than they take in? How many folks around a dinner table actually have their conversation at the start of the year saying, ``You know what? I want to start the year broke and I want to end broke.'' That is what the President's budget does. The President presented to Congress a $4 trillion budget, and yes, you heard me right, that is trillion with a T. The proposed budget requests $4 trillion in spending but only provides--catch this--$3.5 trillion in revenue. I was not the best math student but I can see a problem here. That leaves the government with a half-trillion-dollar deficit. Wait. Hold on a second. Let me go back and correct myself. I misspoke. That leaves the U.S. taxpayers with a half-trillion-dollar deficit because, let me remind you, the government makes nothing. Everything we spend comes from right here in my pocket, your pocket, and the pocket of everyone else in this country. Now, I just checked, and the population of the United States is slightly over 320 million. So every man, woman, and child would have to add an additional $1,500 onto what they already owe in taxes--to include newborns--in order for this budget to even break even. And that is just for 2016. The President's budget is a political document that reflects a very different view of fiscal responsibility than most people have. Let's go through it and discuss the good, the bad, and the ugly of this budget. First, the good. Now it is true that our national deficit is shrinking. Is it because of the President's policies? No. It is because of the ingenuity and determination of the American people. The private sector is now growing--and has been for a while--even as the administration has attempted to stifle businesses with antigrowth policies like ObamaCare and other regulations that continue to put sand in the gears of American business. Even in the President's own budget document he cites economic growth as helping accelerate the pace of deficit reduction. He likes to go around the Nation and do speeches on how the deficit has decreased to its lowest level in decades during his Presidency. The inconvenient truth is that he decides to leave out that the biggest drops occur after 2010, when the Republicans took control of the House of Representatives. The Republicans were able to garner concessions on reductions in spending. Plus, sequestration entered the fray, which aided in the decrease of federal expenditures. While sequestration is not the budget tool Congress would have hoped for, the President is now trying to capitalize off of this budget negotiation side effect. President Clinton likes to take credit for the budget surpluses in the nineties, which were a result of the Republicans' Contract with America. Now, President Obama wants to take sole credit for a decrease in the deficit, a reduction in spending that he has had to make do with. The bad. The President wants to raise taxes on Americans at the worst possible time--as we are emerging from the financial crisis. President Obama's tax proposals target job creators and the middle class. One such proposal was so egregious that even the Democrats said, We can't go along with this. The President had a tax proposal to cut tax benefits on college savings plans. The 529 college plans are a means by which close to 12 million families save for college, many of them middle class Americans. That comes at a time when student loan debt is approaching a trillion dollars. Hidden deep in Obama's budget is a student loan program that recently has been discovered to have a $21.8 billion shortfall. His plan to subsidize student loans has now created a loss equal to the annual budgets of the Department of the Interior, EPA, and NASA. The ugly. In President Obama's budget he discusses that by 2025 the Federal debt will have reached 73.3 percent of GDP. That is almost three-fourths of our Nation's collective wealth. The President defines the country's $18 trillion debt as being fiscally sustainable. For him, 73 percent of our GDP is acceptable: The key test of fiscal sustainability is whether debt is stable . . . as a share of the economy, resulting in interest payments that consume a stable . . . share of the Nation's resources. Figure that one out. The most disheartening part is the President's numbers are incorrect. The Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan analytical wing of Congress, has stated that by 2025, the Federal debt will actually rise to nearly 79 percent of GDP, when the Federal debt would be $26.3 trillion. CBO states that our debt is currently 74 percent of GDP. The question you are asking now is: What is causing this increase in government spending? I bet you know the answer but I am going to tell you anyway. The CBO lists many factors, all of which are contributing to a bust in our Federal spending. With that, this budget is another example of what does not need to be.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on Roll Call #69, on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 719, I am not recorded because I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted Aye. On Roll Call #70, on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 720, I am not recorded because I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted Aye.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on Roll Call #65 on the Schrader amendment to H.R. 527, I am not recorded because I was absent due to a death in the family. Had I been present, I would have voted Nay. On Roll Call #66 on the Jackson Lee amendment to H.R. 527, I am not recorded because I was absent due to a death in the family. Had I been present, I would have voted Nay. On Roll Call #67 on the Motion to recommit with instructions to H.R. 527, I am not recorded because I was absent due to a death in the family. Had I been present, I would have voted Nay. On Roll Call #68 on the Passage of H.R. 527, I am not recorded because I was absent due to a death in the family. Had I been present, I would have voted Aye.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that, and I thank my good friend from North Carolina, who, as has already been stated on the floor, is powering through today, standing strong for the values that I think really would not be expressed any differently except to say, Mr. Speaker, that there is critical national interest here. There is probably today, on the floor, as we talk about these bills-- and yes, it is sort of a Groundhog Day, and I will get to that in a moment, because it seems like every time we, from the Republican side of the aisle, want to talk about jobs and kitchen tables and making better improvements for life and getting rid of regulatory burdens that would help or putting controls on government, we are accused of wanting to spoil the environment, kill trees, make flowers not bloom, I mean, whatever it may be, but the issue, that is Groundhog Day. So if people want a true Groundhog Day analogy, here is the Groundhog Day analogy. The analogy is, when we want to put constraints on government from interfering and getting in the way of its proper role of helping business and helping our country do what it is supposed to do, or we are wanting to control, through government, this process and do so in a way that is detrimental to those moms and dads who get up every day and families and single moms and grandparents and aunts and uncles, all these folks who just simply say, we are not really as overly concerned about what you are doing in Washington, D.C., as I am concerned about what you are doing in Hometown, USA, where I get up every morning. It has been said many times, Mr. Speaker, already this afternoon, and the issue is, we are putting more burden and red tape on America. No. What this bill does--and these two bills that I speak in favor of in this rule, these two bills that we are doing, H.R. 50 and H.R. 527-- is actually controlling government. Instead of letting it get in the way and put unnecessary or quicker burdens on those again, we are simply saying, Whoa. There is a proper place. There is a proper place for regulation. There is a proper place for a limited government role that our Founders made. However, when that role steps over and begins to not only burden business but instead the man or woman who wants to get up in the morning and chase a dream of starting a new business, as I once did, when we started a scrapbook store, you know, just to get a little bit of money, we were able to do so. But others who want to go get a loan, they have to go through the bureaucratic red tape that is now keeping them from starting the small business jobs that employ people on a day-to-day level. We are simply saying, Government, it is time to take a breath. It is time to step back and see the impact that you are having. Granted, some regulation is good. I will give that to my Democratic colleagues. But overregulation and burdensome regulation tears down our economy. So if that is the Groundhog Day argument for this week we want to have, I will have it every day of the week. The Members and people who watch this floor can see you have a party that wants to restrict business and jobs and government in such a way that it throttles the economy or a party which is putting forth solutions and will put forward as many times as we have to to remind the American people that it is people and small business and jobs, the everyday Americans who create the jobs in this country, not government. A business owner that I just recently spoke to had 10 employees, and he said he was getting ready to hire another employee. I said, Well, great. That is great. 10 percent growth. One more employee. He said, But you have got to understand. I am having to hire somebody, and all they are going to be doing is filling out government paperwork. In other words, Mr. Speaker, this is not someone who can go out and sell their widget or perform their service. This is someone who will sit in an office and simply make sure that they are complying with the Big Brother overreach of government. That is not job creation. That is burdensome on business. Let's get them where they can create jobs and go out and sell their product, do their services. We have a bank in my area. You are talking about unfunded mandates, regulatory rulemaking. A bank in my area, on their regular regulatory inspection, they were waiting for the bank examiners to come, the folks to come in and do their audit. The problem they had was this: when the government showed up, they had more people coming to inspect their books than they had employed in their main office. And the government agency complained that they did not have enough room for them to do their job. I am sorry, Mr. Speaker. It is not up to small business to make sure government can do its job. It is up to government to provide the atmosphere so small business can do its job, and that is what we are here about today. So when we look at this, I urge my colleagues, don't get sidetracked on other issues. Look at it for what it is. It is government getting the constraint, not the American people. It is protecting the American people from not good legislation, good litigation. It is the stuff that we need to work on. So, Mr. Speaker, I state these are good bills. Let's state it clearly. Groundhog Day is exactly what it is: for government, or let's let the people live.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, today, I rise with great sadness to express the loss of a true public servant. Longtime Lula councilwoman and Mayor Pro Tem Vicky Chambers sustained serious injuries when a drunk driver hit her car head-on on January 18. Tragically, Vicky succumbed to her injuries several days later. She served Hall County and Banks County in many capacities for well over a decade, including years on the Lula City Council. Vicky was well known for her volunteer activity. She generously gave her time to the Lula Area Betterment Association, the Lula Downtown Development Authority, Hall County and Banks County cemetery restoration, area animal rescue, and the Lula Historical Society. Lula will miss Vicky's compassion, her optimism, and smiling face, but her legacy will live on in the northeast Georgia town she clearly loved. My wife, Lisa--whose home town is Lula--and I express our extended heartfelt prayers and condolences to Vicky's family, friends, and colleagues during this very difficult time. It is in tragedies like this that we remember public servants serve first those around us, and when they are gone, they are missed. Vicky, we will miss you.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize three patriots from Georgia's Ninth District. Arthur Mohor from Hartwell is a 91-year old World War II veteran, who received France's highest honor on January 27, 2015. As a Staff Sergeant in the U.S. Army's 302nd Infantry Regiment, he stormed the beaches of Normandy in 1944. In a special ceremony in Atlanta, France's Consul General bestowed on Mr. Mohor and two more Northeast Georgians--Harry T. Catchpole (Technical Sergeant, 9th Traffic regulation Group, 3rd Army) of Bogart and Henry R. Petree (Private First Class, 1306th Engineer General Service Regiment) of Bethlehem--The National Legion of Honor medal. The medal symbolizes France's eternal gratitude to these three brave Georgians, who risked their lives to knock the Nazis on their heels and help liberate France and the rest of Europe. We owe them--and the many others who gave their lives to preserve this country's freedom--our own eternal gratitude. The actions of Arthur Mohor, Harry Catchpole and Henry Petree provide amazing examples of service and sacrifice. The honor France bestowed upon them is a wonderful tribute to their bravery and a fitting tribute to America's Greatest Generation.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I am honored today to rise in recognition of three police officers from the Lavonia, Georgia, Police Department. Officers Harold McCroskey, Brandon Brown, and Blake Andrews are selfless public servants who have committed their lives to protect ours. The Lavonia Police Department named Officers McCroskey, Andrews, and Brown their 2014 Officers of the Year. Our corner of northeast Georgia is safe and peaceful thanks in part to the service of these three brave officers. On behalf of my family, Franklin County, and the Ninth Congressional District of Georgia, I offer my gratitude and respect. The entire department deserves recognition in Congress because Chief Bruce Carlisle and his squad are proud, patriotic Americans. Not only do they keep their local community safe, but they give to charity. This month, they started a scholarship fund in honor of their friend Deputy Steven LaCruz, who died in pursuit of a traffic violator. As the son of a Georgia State trooper, I am honored by their sacrifice, inspired by their courage, and remain committed to working on their behalf here in Congress.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. I thank the chairman for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in very strong support of this rule and the underlying bills, many of which have not been discussed because we have been discussing the one that is, frankly, the most effective and have been discussing what the President has done and the funding issues. But the one thing that I want to emphasize is what is not being discussed here, and what is not being discussed is the simple opportunity to restore constitutional checks and balances. My friends across the aisle have talked about what question would you want to talk about. Well, let's talk about immigration. When they had the opportunity, they punted on that issue, so I wouldn't want to talk about it if I were them either. They want to talk about how we are going to leave the country in jeopardy. No, we are not. The President can sign this bill, get back to proper constitutional order, and then everything is funded; and there, order is restored. What I find amazing is the blame on running other things. And even when we bring up this, some of my friends from across the aisle will bring up, well, other Presidents have done it. Well, that reminds me of what my mother used to say: If everybody jumped off the roof, would you? Just because it was wrong then does not make it right now. It is time. And what people in America tell us all the time is it is time for Congress to reassert its congressional authority. That is what this is about. Throw the blame anywhere you want to, try to direct us, but you are not deceiving the American people, as the speaker just said. The American people do know the difference when you are trying to misdirect them. So this package of rules, these bills underneath, they get at the heart of restoring constitutional order, of taking back regulations that need to be rolled back so that our businesses can function, our markets can function, and we can get back to doing exactly what we are supposed to be in here doing. So as long as we hear the distractions, I know the American people aren't fooled because I am not fooled. I did what I have said I would do--I came here to fight--back at the first of the year: to fight what was being done around Congress and around this executive order. I will continue that fight. That is the promise that we made to the American people. That is the promise the Republicans are bringing forth. Jobs, people, and kitchen table. That is what we are about. It is about what the Founding Fathers said we would do.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Speaker, it is amazing again to come down to this House floor to discuss issues and to be a part of this debate. I think one of the issues that really has to come to light here is when it is being said that what we are doing is trivial, what we are doing doesn't matter, then, frankly, what does matter? Does the Constitution matter? Does the rule of law matter? What is amazing to me, and I sat through a whole 5\1/2\-hour hearing the other day in dealing with this, we used letters that were not probably used for the right context, we used other examinations, and it always came back to, well, in the end, if it just helps somebody, it is okay. The problem I am having here with this is this problem: the ones who are coming into our country, many of them whom I have spoken with in my time as a pastor and other times dealing with missionary work, they are coming from places where rule of law is not followed and where rule of law is broken. So now what do we do? They come to a country in which rule of law is being put aside and is being expanded just to help just a little bit. Mr. Speaker, I applaud the gentleman from Florida. I applaud everyone from here who is saying it doesn't matter if it is a Democrat or a Republican, what is right is what is right, and that is what matters on the floor of this House. When we understand that, then we can get back to what really matters, and that is saying that it is a time for debate. It is not a time for exercising further outside the lines. It is a time in which we, as a group, come together and say, let's solve problems, let's not poison the well so we cannot have conversations, and we don't have the dignity which we have for those who truly want to come to our country, who have done it legally and have done it right. Why would we do that? That is what is wrong with this debate. The problem that we are having right now is we are just simply saying, Mr. President, there are three branches of government, and you can do whatever you want to within your side, but the Congress has to do it on its side, and it listens to the people as well. I think they spoke pretty loud and clear 3 weeks ago.