Doug Collins

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Chair, before I yield to the gentlelady, it has been quoted here, especially, 90 to 95 percent of the people want universal background checks. And everything has statistics, a poll, but when actually put to the voters of Maine, the voters of Maine actually rejected it, and I understand where they are coming from on that. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Smith).

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Byrne).

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the words of the majority leader. However, I will say that in the previous Congress, this Congress did pass Fix NICS. It also passed the STOP School Violence Act. I am sure, among other reasons, it is probably why the majority leader voted against those bills in which they were included. I do agree with him. The moments of silence may not have stopped, but it did call upon a higher power to realize that we are fragile human beings involved in tragedies. I will also remind the folks, and Mr. Chairman, yourself, that this bill will also not do what it has many times been promoted for it to do, because any of these mass violence episodes would not have been affected by this bill. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise).

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman from Louisiana an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, again, I understand the need or want to do this is to make many things that actually came in discussions in our committee about some of the problems that we found here, and the mere submission is another tacit admission that the Democrats understand the flaws in this bill. Mr. Chairman, it is not something that I am going to relitigate here, but also, when debate is cut short, this is what happens when you get to the floor. When debate is cut short in committee, this is what happens. They realize that good products were brought up, but yet they chose to push through a bill because they had a timeline. We went through this in the Rules Committee. I get it. This is what is coming up. But, again, to put this in, ``great bodily harm,'' it is minimally helpful at this point. It goes back to the problem we had with ``imminent'' in the last one. These are all things, frankly, that could have been--even in a bill that I would disagree with at the end of the day on this--this is, again, not something that is going to fix it. A victim of domestic abuse can live in constant fear of her abuser and feel threatened at all times. Again, Mr. Chairman, I understand at least the attempt to fix something, because they understand that there were problems and they don't want to make it worse, but I have advocated all along that what this does help, it also hurts. And this is, again, just another attempt to do that. I appreciate that they are figuring out the problems now; I just would oppose this amendment, because, again, it does not completely fix the problems that we have seen, and would not in the bigger picture. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

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

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I am prepared to close as well. Mr. Chair, before I close, I would like to say that I agree with the statement from the gentleman just now that there are maybe the ones turned away every day. The problem is there are only 60 a year prosecuted for what is a crime. This doesn't address that. Mr. Chair, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Budd), a licensed firearms dealer.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I won't take even the 30 seconds. I just support the amendment. I think it is good. Many of the flaws that we have seen in this bill so far, this is an amendment that actually works.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, is this now the final speaker?

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I request of the chairman: Does he have any more speakers at this time?

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time. Announcement by the Chair

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the willingness of the amendment, I think, but I rise in that, again, this is something discussed at committee. It was an attempt to--it is basically a failed attempt to fix one of the shortcomings of this legislation. I understand why they would bring it. I understand why they would want to fix it, because its existence indicates what we have been saying about the flaws in the bill, which we discussed at committee. Like other floor amendments that are going to be offered, this is nothing more than trying to basically change the appearance of what is a flawed perception. The problem here is it addresses the undefined term of ``imminent'' used in the bill. Mr. Chairman, it is well known, and I have spoken about it many times, that I am still currently serving as a United States Air Force chaplain. I have pastored for many years, and I have been on the other end of phone calls from those who were struggling and thinking of taking their life. Suicide is not something that we can define very easily. It is not something that we can simply limit to: Yes, guns are effective. But any method that someone uses to choose to end their life is sad and a struggle for those of us who have dealt with this. The term ``imminent'' here is problematic for those of us who have dealt with those who are struggling with suicide because imminent to them and imminent to a judge and imminent to someone who wants to take his life, and to law enforcement, indicates something precipitous that will happen in a very short amount of time, a very imminent act, something that is maybe going to happen, Mr. Chairman, even before I finish my speech. That is an imminent kind of act. Imminent does not extend to 12 hours or 24 hours or even 46 hours. That would not fall under the definition of ``imminent.'' And I am not willing to let a prosecutor or a judge who may not like guns, who would actually say that was an imminent threat, and by transferring it for more than a short amount of time, you have then fallen under and fall under this. Now, I would hope that would never happen, Mr. Chairman. But we have to be serious about this issue of imminence. For those of us who have dealt with this, there may be, and I have had times when people would come to me and they were thinking about harming themselves, but the imminence factor was not there. They were just trying to see if they could clear their head. It may be a week that would pass, and they came back and would say it was fine. But in this issue, I understand the intent and the heart here, but it is a very weak attempt to fix problems that we had already pointed out in this bill. And it will still not fix the problem, because the problem is the imminent standard. That is the part that we are struggling with. We can disagree about this, and I will respect the gentlewoman if she disagrees, and would expect her to. But let's remember, this is carried out, if, say--which I would hope would not happen--this bill actually becomes law. It then will present a problem for those who have to enforce it and those judges who would have to interpret it. We have to remember that our actions here, we vote on words on paper, not aspirational ideas. Those are happy thoughts, not words on paper. The only thing that the courts can do is vote on words on paper. I appreciate the gentlewoman bringing this. I support the intent, especially dealing with suicide, which many of us have worked on, and the tragedy that it leaves in the wake of so many. But please understand my opposition to this is it is still a flawed product because we have not dealt with the very issue of imminence in this legislation and this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Mr. Dallas Gay, a fellow Northeast Georgian who was recently named Man of the Year by the Gainesville Rotary Club in recognition of his work to combat the opioid epidemic in Georgia. Each year, thousands of Americans lose their lives to opioids. Mr. Gay understands the severity of this issue better than most, as he lost his grandson to a drug overdose in 2012. This tragic loss inspired him to join the fight and ultimately save countless lives throughout the state of Georgia. Mr. Gay has spearheaded several drug- related campaigns, some of which have led to new legislation. In May 2017, the Jeffrey Dallas Gay Jr. Act was signed into law, making naloxone--a life-saving antidote for drug overdoses--available over the counter. He also co-founded the ``Think About It'' campaign, which raised awareness of addiction to opioids and prescription drugs, and ultimately raised over $400,000. Mr. Gay was previously recognized by the Medical Association of Georgia and St. Jude's Children's Hospital for his work on the opioid epidemic. In his Man of the Year acceptance speech, he encouraged others to continue to ``be a soldier'' in combating this crisis and to question and safeguard the drugs which are prescribed to them. I thank Mr. Gay for his steadfast commitment to fighting this epidemic, and I look forward to witnessing his continued impact on countless lives across the state of Georgia.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on February 15, the President exercised his clear authority under a clear Federal statute, duly- enacted by Congress, to use funds already appropriated by Congress for the purpose of securing our southern border. Mr. Speaker, I am glad about one thing today coming here. I am glad that, for many of the years I have been here, I came through the Rules Committee, and others, and talked about Article I authority. I am glad now to see that we have others who have now figured that Article I probably needs to be enforced. What is interesting is it is selective enforcement against a President they don't like, for a purpose they don't want, for a wall that they don't want to have because securing a border is not the top agenda for them. I get it if you don't like it. But argue with the law. The statute itself and the President's actions, in accordance with it, rest solidly within the separation of powers, and are certainly constitutional. If you are citing the Supreme Court case of Youngstown against the President's action today during this debate, then I suggest you haven't read the case. That reasoning of the Youngstown case only applies when the President is acting unilaterally and not pursuant to a duly-elected statute by Congress. Maybe the selective memory here is because the previous President actually did that when he instituted the DACA program under no things that he could have found to actually work on. Then we discuss the issue of, is there an actual emergency on the border? You know, a President once noted, he said: ``We have seen a significant rise in apprehensions and processing of children and individuals from Central America who are crossing into the United States in the Rio Grande Valley areas of the Southwest border. The individuals who embark upon this perilous journey are subject to violent crime, abuse, extortion, as they rely on dangerous human smuggling networks to transport them through Central America and Mexico.'' Most may think that was from the current President. It was not. It was from President Obama when he was requesting more money for the emergency on the border. The problem is the factual basis is there. We sat in a hearing today in the Judiciary Committee, and I had to look at the faces of our Border Patrol agents and ICE agents, and others dealing with this on a day-to-day basis while all they get, many times from this body, is hate and derision when they are doing their job that we sent them to do. My problem comes back here--if we can argue about different things-- this was under the law and done by Republicans and Democrats for the last almost 40 years. If you want to fix this, then you have done what you should do under law. You have brought your resolution of disapproval. But if you really wanted to take Article I authority, then actually look at the law itself. If you actually want to change it that is what this body ought to be doing. If you don't like the fact that the President can do something and especially my friends across the aisle who don't want this President to do anything, then fix the law. Go into this emergency declaration and say, we will define what a national emergency is. We will do that. They don't want to do that because they don't want to bind the hands because they know that the law was written for a purpose that has been upheld for over 40 years. This is simply a show. It is a farce. Let's just get to the political aspect of this and say, Mr. Speaker, we don't like the President. We don't like what he is doing. Oops, we forgot about this law, and the President said, I will act under the authority given to me by Congress. You can have all the arguments you want, but at the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, when you cast this vote, don't hide behind Article I. Don't hide between separation of powers. Go to the law and look at what the law says and vote ``no.''

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Mr. Randall Moon, who is retiring this week after serving as Oakwood City Police Chief for the past 25 years. Mr. Moon started with the Oakwood Police Department in 1990 and was quickly promoted to Chief in June of 1994. Over the past 29 years, Mr. Moon has witnessed the police force grow from seven officers to sixteen officers and has been key in assisting the department as they have worked to grow the department with an ever-changing city. Through it all, he is most proud of ``maintaining an excellent workplace, with excellent pay and benefits.'' Mr. Moon credits a presentation on bike safety, given to his second- grade class by two Georgia State Patrol troopers, as the catalyst for his desire to work in law enforcement. Ever since, Mr. Moon knew law enforcement was his calling, and he has since served in law enforcement for over 34 years, including 29 years in Oakwood. He leaves his successor with a few words of wisdom: be a friend, be a family, as that's what sets Oakwood apart from other police departments. The citizens of Northeast Georgia are fortunate to have men like Mr. Moon serving our communities. I thank Mr. Moon for his exemplary service, and I wish him all the best in his retirement.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the admirable work of a fellow Northeast Georgian, Ms. Martha Coley. Ms. Coley began caring for foster children thirty-three years ago, and has since cared for over 100 children in her home in Hall County, Georgia. In June of 2016, Ms. Coley's house tragically caught fire and burned to the ground, forcing her to start from scratch and completely rebuild. But that did not stop her from welcoming children back into her home just six months later, as soon as she moved in. Ms. Coley's willingness to foster teenagers makes her an especially valuable foster parent. She says that the most rewarding part of being a foster parent is when she has the opportunity to witness her foster children succeeding after they have left her home, and often times giving back to their community, just as she has done for many years. The hardest part of fostering, she says, is when they eventually leave her home. The State of Georgia has approximately 14,400 children living in foster homes, which is why we are especially fortunate to have citizens like Ms. Coley serving our communities. All children deserve the opportunity to lead a happy and healthy life, free from any type of abuse or mistreatment, and I want to thank Ms. Martha Coley for the many lives she has touched.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Lieutenant Bob McMahan. Born in 1933, Lieutenant McMahan was a decorated veteran of the United States Army. He served as an Army Ranger and received many awards for his outstanding service, including the Purple Heart, the Vietnam Service Medal with a Silver Star, the Army Commendation Medal, Parachutist Badge, Ranger Tab, Combat Infantry Badge, Permanent Aircraft Crewman Badge, and Bronze Star Medal, among others. Following his military service, Lieutenant McMahan returned to Georgia where he continued his career in public service. Joining the Hall County Sheriff's Department in 1973, he worked his way through the ranks from patrolman to lieutenant. In 1980, McMahan played an instrumental role in creating the first Hall County SWAT team. His colleagues described him as a true leader and teacher, someone you could always count on. The Department would frequently approach McMahan with difficult tasks because they knew he would ``tackle them with success.'' He will forever be remembered as a brother, mentor, motivator and father figure to countless individuals in the Sheriff's Office. Lieutenant McMahan was a remarkable man who was beloved by many. He leaves behind a legacy of distinguished service to our country and to our community. May he rest in peace.