Lloyd Doggett

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I would say, instead of taking these hostages and passing this bill, they need to build a great mirror and look in it to see how they have become willing accomplices to this wrongdoing. I bet Mexico would pay for that.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, yes, America does have a wildfire when it comes to the opioid crisis; and what we are getting this week and next, instead of experienced, professional firefighters with a plan to put out that wildfire, we are being offered a collection of garden hoses. It won't get the job done. If words, if speeches, if the President's tweets could resolve this problem, we could be here today celebrating a victory. Instead, we have a piecemeal program around the edges of the crisis. You only have to look at the President's tweets and his near- meaningless declaration of a healthcare emergency, and how he is handling the problem, to know how serious these Republicans are about it. I think the President views this as just another one in the series of political reality television shows that he is producing daily. Because instead of turning to a physician, a firefighter, a scientist, a drug policy expert, he has turned over the leadership of his entire opioid crisis effort to a political consultant and double-talk expert, Kellyanne Conway. We haven't seen much other than talk over there, and with these 30 bills that are being considered today making modest changes around the edges of the problem, we are not going to advance very far. Of course, there is a reason for this in this Congress. We can only consider legislation that a majority of the Republicans say we can consider, and they applied a test to get these 30 bills to exclude other ones. The test was twofold: If it cost much of anything, the bill couldn't be considered here. Second, if Big Pharma opposed it, it certainly couldn't be considered here. So, like Trump, the Republican Congress offers more words, a few bills that may help a few people, but does not address the central issue in the crisis. What we need are substantial additional resources for treatment. Instead of going in that direction, the Republicans turned about- face, and they are trying to drag us backward so we will have even fewer treatment options than today. The President's latest assault on all Americans who have a preexisting condition, to deny them access to healthcare, and his assault to cut billions out of Medicaid, will deny the very places that so many people can now turn to for opioid treatment. So they won't add resources, they won't permit us to add resources, and they want to take away the resources that exist today. Of course, much of the treatment that is out there is necessary because of the wrongs committed by pharmaceutical manufacturers in promoting these opioids in the first place. Here again, the test is not approved for bringing legislation on the floor because Big Pharma opposes it. I believe we should be following the lead of 41 State attorneys general across America who are saying: Let's look at what Big Pharma did to cause this problem. Why make the taxpayer pay for everything when Big Pharma played such a role? We ought to have accountability for those who helped to create the opioid crisis, yet the Federal Government--though, again, Trump talked about it, but he didn't do anything.

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, after talking about it, the Justice Department and the Trump administration have done nothing. In one single year, Medicaid paid out $9.3 billion associated with this opioid crisis, billions and billions of dollars. Yet, when I tried in the Ways and Means Committee to get involved in terms of getting back the money Medicare has paid out, other billions of dollars, it was rejected on a party-line vote. At the very time that we are being told our police and first responders across America and, indeed, individual citizens should be carrying naloxone, a drug that can reverse the effects of overdoses and prevent a death, we have seen an incredible spike from Big Pharma in the cost of that. I see headlines. How does a $575 lifesaving drug jump to $4,500? Because these pharmaceutical manufacturers think they can hijack America and, particularly, our law enforcement sources. We need more than a photo-op version of these measures. If every one of the bills being considered, all 30 of them, are approved, few of those who really need treatment are going to get it as a result of this, and none of those responsible for this crisis will be held accountable. This crisis is a true hurricane. It is being treated like a dust devil. Approve these modest proposals that do no harm, but then let's move forward with a Congress that really wants to solve the problem.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I was present on the floor and used the voting machine to record my vote in favor of H.R. 5515, the National Defense Authorization Act of 2019. But for some unknown reason, my vote was not recorded. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 230.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I offer this motion to recommit because Republicans have been motionless when it comes to acting on the spiraling drug prices that are harming so many Americans. The willingness of this Congress to sit on its hands, stand idle in the face of the prescription price gouging that so many of our neighbors face, is nothing short of appalling, and there is nothing ``smarter'' in this bill about dealing with that terrible problem. Of course, President Trump has told us it is going to be ``beautiful,'' but every time you turn around, he is cozying up with some pharmaceutical lobbyists that are raising prices and putting some of their people in charge of his drug agenda. All that this motion does is to take the very modest step of reducing the possibility that, through further mergers of drug companies, we will see the sick and dying extorted even more than they are today with skyrocketing prices that are made even worse when these mergers occur. If this motion passes, it won't kill the bill or slow it down a moment. What it will do is to give life to an effort to contain these mergers and see that prescription prices don't soar even further. Yes, it is not the principal issue on drug prices. Unfortunately, there is no wonder drug to stop prescription price gouging, but this is one of the only ways to get the issue to the floor of this House because our Republican colleagues in every committee are determined to remain silent and see no action whatsoever. I continue to hear from my neighbors back in Texas who care about this a lot more than my Republican colleagues. They tell me they cannot afford their prescriptions or they are burdened with immense debt to do it. I think of Elaine in San Antonio, who has suffered with glaucoma for a number of years. She is fighting to save her eyesight, but now her copays on three different necessary drops are costing $400, $227, $178 per month. She says she wants to finish her senior years in dignity but is burdened down by these outrageous prices. The choice should not be blindness or rent for a senior who has worked and saved all their lifetime. Even in the face of the opioid epidemic, where we are about to hear about a whole lot of bills on the floor that don't do a whole lot, but in the face of that crisis, a devastating national public health emergency, the price of naloxone, a lifesaving overdose reversal drug, has been spiked by almost 600 percent. Even an effective drug is 100 percent ineffective when it is unaffordable. Too many drugs are ineffective for too many people because drug prices have soared at a rate of ten times the rate of inflation. But where some see a crisis like that, others see a revenue opportunity. Brand name pharmaceutical manufacturers rely upon government-approved monopolies to charge monopoly prices, whatever they can get out of the sick and dying. They utilize as many maneuvers as possible to perpetuate their monopolies as long as possible while pouring their money, not into research and development of new drugs, but into lobbying this Congress and the administration. Drug manufacturers spent $171 million last year in Federal lobbying, more than insurance, oil and gas, electronics, or any other industries. They had more lobbyists than we had Members of Congress. In fact, they could have a two-on-one defense to assure that this Congress is quiet, it is inactive, it is unresponsive to people. Let's pass this motion and ensure that when the pharmaceutical companies use the $80 billion tax windfall, that they were just rewarded by the Republicans to pay for more mergers, that consumers don't get caught in the middle and see their prices spike even further. We need to commit ourselves to action by approving this motion to recommit, to commit ourselves to putting consumers first over Big Pharma. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Mr. DOGGETT. Strongly.

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his leadership on that and his help. I wish the FAA had listened. And I thank Mr. Shuster and the staffs on both sides of the committee for including this amendment with others that need to be part of this action. It was about 2 years ago that the largest, most deadly crash of a commercial balloon in American history occurred just south of Austin, near Lockhart and Maxwell, Texas. It was, in fact, and remains the largest aviation disaster of any type in this decade. When that morning, that Saturday morning ended, this was all that was left, along with the bodies of the victims of this. The Federal Aviation Administration had been asked, prior to this incident, by the National Transportation Safety Board, to take a closer look and come up with reasonable regulations for the commercial balloon industry. The FAA failed to do that. Since this accident, the Federal Aviation Administration has been asked, once again, by the National Transportation Safety Board to act on this matter, and the FAA has again failed. The families of the victims launched a petition on their own to express their concern about this. I have joined them, others have joined them, in asking for action, and it is clear that only legislative action by us will address this problem. I am hopeful that, with the passage of this amendment, which is narrow, which is bipartisan, and is directed only to assuring that individuals who are flying these--lifting off in these balloons are medically fit to do so. Had that been in place, I believe that this incident would never have happened. So the grief, the horror, that these families experienced, many of them want to channel it into seeing that no other family faces a similar crisis. This is an incident that had a widespread effect. I talked with the owner of the property where the crash occurred. There was a giant prayer circle around the Caldwell County Courthouse of concern of many people in the county for what happened here. I just want to thank my colleagues for incorporating this amendment in because I think it will help save lives in the future.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. Recently, our attention was rightly focused on one passenger who was killed after jet engine failure. Two years ago, July 30, 2016, 16 people were killed near Lockhart, Texas, in the deadliest commercial balloon crash in our Nation's history and the worst aviation disaster of any type in the last decade. After that crash, this photo shows all that was left. Rightly, the head of the National Transportation Safety Board expressed his disappointment that the Federal Aviation Administration appears to be shirking its responsibility for the many people who go out to enjoy a commercial balloon flight. Since 2016, I have repeatedly urged the FAA to adopt a safety measure, long recommended by the NTSB, to help avert tragedies like this. The NTSB found that the FAA's refusal to require commercial balloon operators to obtain a medical certificate that they are suitable for flying contributed to this crash where so many were harmed. My bipartisan amendment, that has been approved by the Rules Committee, would end this exemption for commercial balloon operations to ensure that there is not another family in America that is at risk of injury or death from an impaired pilot. Continued inaction is inexcusable and risks condemning more to death. Uniting in Caldwell County around the courthouse in morning prayer to remember the victims, a bell rang 16 times for each person who was lost; families, coming together in their hurt, lovingly embraced by that community. You cannot un-ring a bell, and we cannot bring the precious lives back that were lost in this crash. But from their loss, we can pass an amendment that will help ensure that no other family needlessly suffers. Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of the amendment in the course of the debate.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, my hometown of Austin, Texas, is modestly known as the ``Live Music Capital of the World.'' The title is well justified, from the South by Southwest music festival in the spring, to Austin City Limits on a couple of weekends in October. It is a wonderful place for live music. It is the musicians and those who support them in technical ways-- weekday, weekend, and in between--that make this industry so vital and who contribute so much to our local economy. This piece of legislation is a step in the right direction. There is much more that needs to be done to ensure that our musicians and all who are involved in the creative economy get their fair compensation. I am pleased this step is taken because these are really not only talented and creative people, but small-business people, and they deserve to have the property that they generate--their talent, their music, that adds so much joy to our lives--fairly compensated. This is a good step forward, and I certainly support the legislation.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Madam Speaker, the Social Security number really is a key to identity theft, and thieves have had a field day with these Social Security numbers and the identity theft and the invasion of privacy that occurs. A full 10 years ago, I authored a measure here in the House to remove this information from the Medicare card. The next session, finally in 2010, we were able to pass that through the House with the help of Representative Johnson. It was a bipartisan initiative. Then the Senate didn't pass it. When Republicans took over control of the House, Mr. Johnson appropriately took the lead on that legislation, and he worked at it for a while, and, finally, in 2015, he got it passed to remove the Social Security number from the Medicare card. As Representative Johnson knows, finally, now, 10 years from when we started in June of this year, it looks like seniors will begin getting their Medicare cards without the Social Security number on it, to protect their privacy and to avoid the exploitation that has occurred. To his credit, Mr. Marchant has identified another group of very vulnerable individuals: children. Carnegie Mellon did a study that reported that nearly 10 percent of America's children have had their identity already stolen, and the Social Security number is a factor in that. That is significantly higher than it is for adults, some 51 times higher, according to the Carnegie Mellon study. Children are particularly vulnerable in this regard because they don't have a driver's license. They are really kind of a blank canvas. They don't work, and they don't establish credit. This allows theft and fraud to go undetected for many years in some cases. By the time that they are young adults, they could unknowingly be buried in debt and face delays in very important steps in their education, in their work, in getting their first job, in getting that driver's license or applying for a student loan. I salute Mr. Marchant for seeing that this is a problem. I am pleased to join him and my colleague, Mr. Davis, from Chicago in supporting this measure. Children and their parents or their guardians acting on their behalf deserve a streamlined process that will allow for a child to be issued a new Social Security number long before any misuse occurs. No child should have to wait for the inevitable harm to come along and have their identity stolen before action occurs. Building on the success that we have had with seniors, and I hope in a much more prompt fashion than we were able to do it for seniors, we now, through Mr. Marchant's efforts, are working to ensure, once again on a bipartisan basis, that we provide the same kind of protection for infants and children from baseless identity thieves. Madam Speaker, I urge adoption of the legislation.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. I thank Mr. Tonko so much for organizing this Special Order. I do know how special that Louise was to you and to so many of us. She was a dear friend for many years, an outspoken advocate for social and economic justice, and she put together a great team, a series of teams through her years here, some of whom are on the floor today. We salute them, also. Louise was funny, she was sometimes a bit conspiratorial, and she was a person who just refused to act her age in the best ways possible. I was amazed myself, knowing that Louise had been here a few years more than I had, to learn what her age was at the time of her passing, because she was out powerfully speaking truth to power right up until the week before she passed. She had the enthusiastic support of her late husband and tremendous partner, Bob. Both of them understood the challenges of public service, and they withstood repeated Republican assaults with wit and grit. Her fierce passion was matched with sincere compassion and kindness. Over the years, time and time again, she reached out and helped me and helped other Members. I admired her unwavering commitment to speak truth and to honor values of acceptance, equality, and justice. She put the health and well-being of people first, and she fought tirelessly to improve the lives of the people in her community and across this country. Louise showed just how much one determined woman can do for our country. As chair of the Rules Committee, she was involved in every major piece of legislation and many minor ones that came before this House. And in her service on Rules, it can certainly be said that she worked day and night, sometimes all night, on behalf of the people of this country. She overcame significant resistance to secure passage of the Violence Against Women Act, achieving some historic increases in funding for women's health. She was a real trailblazer when it came to so many issues and inspired so many women to get involved and make a difference for our country. She authored the STOCK Act to ensure more complete and timely disclosure of financial dealings by the Members of this House so that no one was trading off the public trust for private gain. I think of Louise and look over to this microphone each time a rule is brought up in the House setting forth the terms of debate for legislation. There is a vacancy in the House, and there is a vacancy in our hearts for a tough but generous woman. We salute her daughters, Megan, Amy, and Emily; her grandchildren; her great-grandchild, all of whom she often referred to and showed such great affection for. May it be a source of comfort for each of them that their mother was a loyal and loving friend, a fierce and genuine public servant, a force to be reckoned with, a champion for so many vital causes; and may her very fiery spirit live on with all of us.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, like some stormy sermon from Trump on the virtues of chastity, I believe these House Republicans today really do deserve a gold medal for hypocrisy. After approving their budget-busting, trickle-down, trillion-dollar tax break and refusing to pay a dime for their huge increase in military spending, they have the audacity to advance a balanced budget amendment. Choosing words over deeds, they shamelessly preach the gospel of ``do what I say, not what I do.'' I have already voted for a balanced budget when I voted for not going into an unnecessary war without paying anything for it. I voted for a balanced budget when I voted to reject the distorted Republican theology that, when it comes to taxes, less always means more. The more tax cut theology has proven wrong over and over and over again. Republicans keep demanding just one more tax cut to drive us ever deeper into debt. Dripping in red ink, this newest Trump tax bill that he is promoting right now at the White House certainly validates his boast that he is the ``King of Debt,'' and these House Republicans are his supplicants. Our children and our grandchildren are being saddled with over $2 trillion in debt just because of this one bill, all so that Trump, his wealthy buddies, and a few multinational corporations, can receive a tax windfall. For Trump and his congressional enablers, fiscal responsibility is just a hollow political slogan that they use to undermine the vital education, healthcare, and retirement security initiatives, like Medicare, that they have always not truly supported. They would surely let Medicare ``wither on the vine,'' to use the words of one the King of Debt's loudest troubadours. Reject this proposal.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, it was all only a dream, a dream that Speaker Ryan would permit this House to work its will and have a vote to secure the future of our DREAMers, America DREAMers, who Trump one day condemns as ``illegal,'' then says he ``loves,'' and then goes off on some racist rant. Congress, in fact, has been hijacked by 28 percent of the Members who sit here. Applying the rule that the only thing this House can vote on is whatever a majority of the majority want us to vote on and blocking everything else is what creates the problem that we face today. A minority of this House can say we will not ever get to vote on the DREAMers or any other number of other issues under the procedures that are being applied here. And even if 72 percent of this body want to seek a bipartisan resolution to a matter, we cannot do it under the rules that are being applied. So what has happened since the Trump shutdown three weeks ago? What has been done to secure the future of our DREAMers? What has been done to fulfill the promise that was made of action on our DREAMers? Absolutely nothing, zero, zilch--nothing to resolve this problem, and not even the prospect of action here in the House. Last week I met again with DREAMers in Texas: a county prosecutor who enforces our local and state laws, a teacher, a nurse, students-- powerful, emotional stories that they tell--and their employers who are uncertain about their ability to continue providing the services that they provide. Just as Congress has been hijacked by a few Republican extremists, these DREAMers have been hijacked, and the only question is: What is the price to solve their problem, our problem? That price grows by the day. The ransom that is being demanded day- by-day goes up a little bit higher amidst all of the anti-immigrant hysteria. It is not difficult to resolve this issue. It could have been resolved before President Trump ever issued his ill-begotten proclamation in September. And since I represent a city that is proud to call itself ``Military City,'' San Antonio, Texas, I find particularly obnoxious the attempt to pit the security of our DREAMers against the security of our country. It ignores, for example, the fact that a number of DREAMers are putting their lives on the line for us in the United States military. And what could be more harmful to taxpayers and the future of our country than to continue to budget week-by-week, month-by-month? Of course, I am impressed by the number of Republicans who get up here and tell us: Oh, we just hate these continuing resolutions. Well, if they hate them, why do they keep doing them? We are on number five.

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, what we have is an incredible amount of bungling, no fiscal responsibility in doing this week by week, month by month. And the discussion of there being a government shutdown, turning the lights out, well, the only person who has called for a government shutdown was Donald Trump back in May, and then he reiterated his call this afternoon for a government shutdown. I think he and the Republican intransigents, the ability to block votes here in the House by a minority--28 percent, almost one-fourth of the people who are here to block a vote--is what led to the last Trump shutdown. And by casting our vote ``no'' today, it is not only about the DREAMers, but it is the only way that we who do not have a majority can speak out and say that this fiscal mismanagement has to stop once and for all. We are tired of taxpayers being charged more money for all kinds of services and products the government procures just because this problem is not solved. Fulfill the dream. Fulfill responsibility for the taxpayers. Vote against this resolution.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, more and more Americans are recognizing that Donald Trump is unfit to be President--his divisive tactics, his racism, and his mendacity--but this Trump shutdown has shown further that he is truly incapable of being President. His fabled dealmaking ability appears to be just a television act. When he reaches an agreement, his extremist cohorts will not let him close the deal. He mistakes tweeting for government. He just cannot lead. Since this Trump shutdown began, this self-described ``stable genius'' has failed to hold a single bipartisan meeting, nor even make a public appearance, though he did dispatch his son, Eric, to declare-- amazingly--that the government shutdown is a ``good thing for us.'' It is not a good thing for America. This Congress must lead in supporting the needs of our people and recognizing that we must put America first in this situation.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, the cause of any government shutdown now will be the same as in the past: Republican intransigence. If they continue to insist upon an entirely partisan bill that excludes DREAMers, they should not expect Democratic votes. I want the government to remain open for everyone, including our DREAMers. While Republicans firmly control all levers of government, they can't keep it operating. They will make history, celebrating the first anniversary of Donald Trump's incompetence by shutting down the government that they totally control themselves. Instead of staying here to work toward a bipartisan solution, they are moving to shut down the House first. It is the height of irresponsibility. It shows the depths of mismanagement that has failed to produce a simple one-year resolution to continue the operation of our government. We must speak out about the wrong that is being committed here. Defend our DREAMers. Defend the continuation of our government and a more responsible approach in this new year.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I am all in favor of keeping our government open. The difference that I have with my Republican colleagues is that I want to keep it open for everyone. Here, at Christmas, we think of the children first, but the children are not put first in this underlying bill. The Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) is barely left on life support. There are children out there right now, some with dreaded diseases or disabilities, and their access to a family physician is not assured because this Congress has not acted on the Children's Health Insurance Program. Instead of Christmas cards, they are about to get cancellation notices. And there are children who were brought here to America, through no fault of their own, without a visa. They grew up here. They only know this country. They have since passed a criminal background check. They had paid a fee, but their future is uncertain. They are called DREAMers because they have a dream of giving back to America and being full Americans, which they are, in everything but those legal papers. And we, in Congress, have our own responsibility. It is a responsibility to respond to their passionate pleas. We should not support another partisan Republican continuing resolution or appropriations process that does not assure the future of our 800,000 DREAMers. I can tell you, from meeting with them personally, I think of a cardiac nurse, I think of a county prosecutor, I think of a number of teachers whom I have met and many students, all of whom are DREAMers, who want to be full Americans. And I think of the groups in Texas like RAICES and TOPS and JOLT and the University Leadership Initiative and a number of others that are working with these DREAMers to secure their future. Even President Trump, in one of his few reasonable tweets, in September, said: ``Does anybody really want to throw out good, educated, accomplished young people who have jobs, some serving in the military?'' I think the answer here, if given a free vote, Republicans and Democrats, the majority would say absolutely not; we need these young people. This holiday season is one that you would hope would open closed hearts to see the humanity in these young people. But amidst all the self-congratulatory high-fives and patting on the back yesterday down at the White House, nothing was said about the DREAMers. The Republican leadership has apparently decided to leave town without doing anything for them. I believe that the Dream Act, the DACA authorization they have now, was terminated by the President just to use them as a bargaining chip. That was way back in September. And since that time, the majority has had ample opportunity to act.

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I would just say that all of us as Members of Congress are eager to return to our families as soon as possible across America, but our DREAMers are left with fear and uncertainty about returning to their families and about their future. These deserving young people should not be used as bargaining chips for a wish list of anti-immigrant policies. Let's reject this rule, enact the Dream Act, reauthorize CHIP, and offer a truly Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all of America's children.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, let's make no mistake about it. We are here this morning solely because of a mistake. This is the blunder rule. This is not the first big blunder in this bill, and indeed it certainly won't be the last. We will be cleaning up this mess and the blunders in this bill all of next year. The only questions are: How many people will get hurt in the process? How much money is lost to the United States Treasury because of the many loopholes in this Swiss cheese-kind of a bill that they have created? How many loopholes will deny revenue that eventually will come out of the pockets of the middle class and will come out of the small businesses of this country to make up for all these special interest provisions that the lobbyists got added? This is what happens when you run roughshod over the process, when every member of the Trump administration lacks the intestinal fortitude, the courage, to come and answer any questions about this bill. That is what happened here. Americans need to understand that. Trump is over there tweeting away. He is bragging about all the wonderful things. But is he willing to send one official--even one--to come before any committee of this Congress and respond to questions about the many wrongs that are contained in this bill? Of course the answer is absolutely no. What about the businesses across America that are impacted by this bill? What about the academic experts of all political points of view who could come and respond and help perfect and avoid errors just like this? They were all left out. There was not one minute of examination from any objective source coming in and talking in a hearing to the committee about this bill. I am one of the conferees to adjust the differences between the House and the Senate. My, was that a great honor, a great experience in the new democracy that these Republicans are providing for America. In that conference committee, the chairman of the committee refused to entertain a single motion or a single amendment. But he told us not to worry. After we adopt this conference report behind closed doors and agree to it, you can look at it and can read it over the weekend before you vote on it at the beginning of the next week. You just can't change it in any way. You cannot study it in any way. You cannot share it with anybody in any way because we are only interested in sharing it with those lobbyists with whom we have special connections and operate in secrecy behind closed doors. Of course, one of the many sad things about this particular bill is that it lost its name in the Senate in what we are considering this morning.

Mr. DOGGETT. In fact, if you turn to the bill, which is a big old thick stack, you see it says ``short title, et cetera,'' and it stops. It is nameless at this point. It is a bill that has no name. And, of course, it has no heart. But what is the solution to that? Well, every time Donald Trump touches a tower, he puts his name in bold letters across it: Trump Tower. This is the only accomplishment that President Trump can point to this year. Why don't we put his name on this bill? We could call it the ``Donald J. Trump Inequality Act,'' because it will do more than any legislation we have considered here in recent years to widen the gap between those at the very top and the rest of us. Or we could call it the ``Donald J. Trump Family Windfall'' bill, because he and his family are going to pocket an immense amount of money. There is no surprise they are over there at the White House celebrating all afternoon. He and his family personally will walk away with a huge amount of resources out of this. Or we could just call it ``Fat Cats Get Fatter,'' because one of our colleagues on the Republican side who is closest, perhaps, to President Trump admitted and said quite candidly: I can't go back to my donors if we don't pass this legislation. What a study in wise investment. The Senate Budget Committee, last night, pointed out that Goldman Sachs contributed over $26 million to Republicans since 1990. They get about a $6 billion tax cut. Where can you get a return like that? Or Pfizer, who contributed $15 million, they get a nearly $39 billion tax cut. Yes, this bill is a job creator. It creates more jobs for accountants and tax lawyers than anyone can imagine because they will be going in there trying to undo some of the things that were done and shape the loopholes a little more favorably for their folks. What we have here is a bill that is compared also with the other issues that we have here.

Mr. DOGGETT. I know how much the gentlewoman cares about the future of our children and the Children's Health Insurance Program. I think of the Family Visiting program to help young parents. That is in our committee. I think about our crumbling roads and bridges and the fact that we need dollars to invest in them to keep our transportation system competitive. They agree on all these measures. They make speeches about them. The only thing is they don't want to put any money into them. They say we can't afford to do that. If we don't steal Medicare premium money to fund the Children's Health Insurance Program and use general revenue dollars, that will drive up the debt. At the same time, they are willing to drive the debt up trillions of dollars, they refuse to invest in people, or invest in our children and provide them the healthcare that they deserve. In short, this is a Christmas gift to those at the very top--and especially to the Trump family and his billionaire buddies and other real estate moguls who gain in the conference report. They get the Christmas gift. The American people, the middle class, get the gift wrapping, and that is it.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, we are here solely because of Republican blunders. Hardly the first blunder. Many more blunders will need correcting from this trumped-up partisan bill. If President Trump blunders into signing it today, it will trigger $25 billion in Medicare cuts. This sad bill is left without any name. Like other towers, this towering monstrosity should be called ``Trump''-the ``Trump Inequality Act,'' the ``Trump Family Enrichment Act,'' or perhaps just call it the ``Whopper'' because it is a lie wrapped in lies. The truth will eventually catch up with these lies.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, for those with silk stockings, it is a very Merry Christmas indeed. The billionaires get stuffed, but we get coal. It is like a White Elephant gift exchange. The billionaires grab the good gifts, and the leftovers go to working families, though they get the bill for everything. How many millions of dollars the Trump family will personally stuff in their pockets cannot be precisely determined, only because of continuing Republican collusion to cover up Trump's personal tax returns. Excluding the public, refusing to even permit Democrats to offer an amendment, Republicans dumped this proposal out this weekend and now demand an immediate vote. The dangers lurking in this bill for economic opportunity, for tax fairness, are very real, but they are overshadowed by the dangers to our democracy from these Trump tactics to impose his rule on America. Republicans decided the only way to pass their program was to hide it. Let's reject it today.