Anna Eshoo

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule, and I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so that the House can vote on my bipartisan legislation, the Presidential Tax Transparency Act. This bill codifies the longstanding, bipartisan tradition of Presidents and Presidential nominees disclosing their tax return information to the American people. The Republican majority and the President are currently working in overdrive to pass a distorted tax bill that will raise the taxes on 82 million middle class families. It takes one's breath away. I and many others have spoken at length about the harm this bill will do to the middle class, from targeting the mortgage interest deduction, to raising the cost of higher education and graduate school for student loans, to limiting the deductibility of State and local taxes. And, at a time when our country is recovering from several natural disasters, including major wildfires in California where 14,000 Californians have lost their homes, the House-passed bill eliminates the deduction for personal property losses resulting from natural disasters, which I find to be especially cruel. While it is very clear that the Republican tax bill will harm the middle class, it is less clear how the bill will benefit one taxpayer in particular, if he pays any taxes: the President of the United States of America. Mr. Trump is the wealthiest President in our Nation's history, but he is also the only President, going back to Gerald Ford and all Presidents moving forward who voluntarily put out their tax returns--he is the only one--to refuse to release his tax returns, a lapse in disclosure that is made all the more troubling given his all-out push for tax cuts for the wealthiest at the expense of the middle class and others in our country. How can Americans have any confidence in what is going on? They are not fools. They understand that we are swimming around in conflicts of interest, and nothing is being done about it. Today, Republicans have an opportunity. And while we cannot know exactly how the Republican tax bill will benefit the President, until he releases his tax returns, we can be sure that this tax bill, which is skewed toward the top 1 percent, will benefit the billionaire Commander in Chief and his family. What an example for the American people.

Ms. ESHOO. The Republican tax bill cuts the tax rate for so-called pass-through businesses, which is how many of the Trump family's businesses are structured, including hotels, golf courses, and real estate developments. Specifically, the tax rate for passive business income, which is derived from licensing, royalties, and other arrangements that the Trump organization specializes in, will be cut from 39.6 percent to 25 percent in the Republican tax scam bill. That same bill also repeals the alternative minimum tax, which we know from Mr. Trump's leaked 2005 tax return forced him to pay an additional $26 million in taxes that year. Without the AMT, he is completely off the hook and would, essentially, have a measly 3 percent effective tax rate: another great example for the American people. It is no wonder they don't trust Washington, D.C. Lastly, the Republican tax bill doubles the estate tax exemption to $22 million, and guess who wins again? Mr. Trump. Mr. Speaker, only with full disclosure of the President's tax returns will we know how much he and his family will benefit from this Republican tax scam. That is why I urge my colleagues to stand up for transparency, listen to the will of the American people, and vote on this bipartisan legislation.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, the tax bill being considered, H.R. 1, is a frontal assault on the middle class and it will do lasting damage to our country. The bill is a dishonest bait-and-switch for the 36 million middle and lower class families who will see their taxes increase under this plan to pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans and large multinational corporations. It is paid for by eliminating the few remaining benefits in our Tax Code for the middle class and charging $1.7 trillion to the national credit card, leaving our children and our grandchildren to pay for it. This bill lets the middle class down at every turn, and it should be defeated. It eliminates the deduction for medical expenses, which over 9 million middle class Americans claimed in 2015, including over 1 million taxpayers in my home State of California. This is especially harmful to older Americans struggling with high medical costs and serious illnesses, like cancer and Alzheimer's, and Americans with disabilities. It takes direct aim at college students across the country, raising the future costs of higher education by $65 billion over 10 years by eliminating the deductibility of interest on student loans. It taxes employer tuition assistance benefits for students and tuition waivers for graduate students by treating this as income, making it more expensive for future scientists, medical professionals, educators, and other leaders to get an education. It eliminates the lifetime learning credit and the deductibility of interest of student loans at a time when student loan debt in the United States just reached $1.5 trillion. This is a bitter pill to ask our Nation's student borrowers to swallow. Very importantly for my constituents, this bill bulldozes the State and local tax deduction. Almost 200,000 of my constituents claimed an average State and local tax deduction of $31,193 in 2015. Under this plan, businesses can still claim this deduction. For example, the National Education Association estimates are that 250,000 education jobs will be put at risk because of this lack of deductibility. Just yesterday, the Fraternal Order of Police spoke out in opposition to this bill's dismantling of this deduction, noting that their salaries and the equipment that they use are paid for by State and local taxes on property sales and income. The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy found that California stands to be the biggest overall loser in this plan and faces a $12.1 billion tax increase in 2017 alone. The bill also takes aim at the most valuable asset of the middle class: their home. It limits the mortgage interest deduction used by homeowners, and this is eminently unfair. Californians just experienced the worst wildfires in our State's history, with over 14,000 homes lost. What does this bill do? It removes the deductibility for property losses due to natural disasters. I find this to be especially cruel. What the bill does do is take special care of the wealthiest 5,500 estates in this country by doubling the estate tax exemption to $22 million and then repealing it, removing the whole thing, by 2024. Finally, the bill has terrible implications for the future of Medicare and the guarantee it has provided for Americans for over 50 years. Without budget changes to offset the $1.5 trillion increase to deficits over 10 years, the bill will trigger automatic spending cuts under the statutory pay-as-you-go. The Republican majority and the administration claim that this tax plan will ``pay for itself.'' It is bad math, because we were promised in the early 2000s that jobs would be created, that the economy would grow, and the outcome was $1.8 trillion of debt. The investments that pay off the most are the investments we make in the American people, in education, in job creation, in infrastructure. These are critical areas that always expand our economy. This House should reject this unfair, unbalanced, fiscally irresponsible plan that dims the future of our country by attacking the middle class.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I was not present during Roll Call vote numbers 564, 565, 566, 567 and 568 on October 12, 2017, because of a death in my family. Had I been present, I would have voted: on Roll Call no. 564, I would have voted YES; on Roll Call vote no. 565, I would have voted YES; on Roll Call vote no. 566, I would have voted YES; on Roll Call vote no. 567, I would have voted YES; and on Roll Call vote no. 568, I would have voted YES.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I thank our distinguished ranking member. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to oppose this bill, the so-called CHAMPIONING HEALTHY KIDS Act. First of all, we are a month late and many dollars short. It was the majority that brought it up late. We didn't have anything to do with being late. Secondly, we are playing political games with the lives of 14 percent of the children in my congressional district who receive their health insurance through the Children's Health Insurance Program and the five federally qualified health centers in my congressional district. They provide medical, dental, and mental health services to almost 55,000 of my constituents every year. Reauthorizing these historically bipartisan programs is critical to the health and safety of not only my constituents but millions of others across our country. Today, the Republican majority is holding them hostage by insisting to fund these programs by means-testing Medicare beneficiaries, kicking individuals who purchase their health coverage on the marketplaces off their insurance, and gutting the Public Health Prevention Fund established in the Affordable Care Act. Remember, the Republicans have set their budget based on eliminating the Affordable Care Act. My State of California will run out of funding for CHIP sometime between now and December. This has never happened before in the history of this program.

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, the community health centers in my district have told me about the difficult decisions they have to make because Congress has not reauthorized their funding, including layoffs of physicians and closing clinics' doors. We are playing with people's lives here. If we can't find the funding for these important bipartisan programs, then we don't deserve to be Members of Congress. I cannot support a bill that hurts people instead of helping them.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, yesterday, Republicans unveiled their vision for tax reform, and it is not pretty. The proposal raises taxes on the middle class and showers the wealthiest 1 percent of our country with 80 percent of the benefits, at a total cost of $1.5 trillion charged to our Nation's credit card. The plan should be called ``Hurt the Middle Class Act.'' It eliminates personal deductions for medical expenses; it eliminates the deductibility of interest paid on student loans; it eliminates the deductibility of State and local income taxes, again, raising taxes on the middle class; and to add insult to injury, the proposal eliminates the deduction for personal property losses from one natural disaster fire. Now, in California, we just experienced the worst fires in California's history. Over 14,000 people lost their homes, at a cost of at least $3 billion. The heck with them. When policies weaken the middle class, the backbone of our country, they weaken our entire country. The President said tax reform will be the best Christmas present of all, but, for the middle class, this bill will be one lump of coal.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Baha'i community as they celebrate the 200th anniversary of the birth of their founder, Baha'u'llah. Born as a nobleman in Persia in 1817, Baha'u'llah spread a message of peace and tolerance, emphasizing the fundamental unity of all people. His teachings of peace among nations, equality between men and women, tolerance among religions, and justice for people of all races and nationalities are as important today as they were in the 19th century. Today, there are over 5 million Baha'is around the world, including a community in my Congressional District. In California and around the world, Baha'is strive to promote the ideals that Baha'u'llah championed to promote peace and unity throughout the world. They are active members of their communities and advocate for human rights, especially those of Baha'is in Iran who are unable to practice their religion openly. I encourage my colleagues to take up and pass H.Res. 274 to condemn Iran for its state-sponsored persecution of its Baha'i minority, and its continuing violation of the International Covenants on Human Rights Mr. Speaker, I ask the entire House of Representatives to join me in sending good wishes to the Baha'i community of California's 18th Congressional District and across the United States on the celebration of the 200th anniversary of the birth of Baha'u'llah

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today alongside my colleagues, Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren and Congressman Jimmy Panetta to honor the Silicon Valley Community Foundation (SVCF) as it celebrates its Tenth Year Anniversary. The Peninsula Community Foundation and Community Foundation Silicon Valley merged in 2007 to increase their impact by creating SVCF. Under the superb leadership of CEO Dr. Emmett D. Carson, SVCF has grown to become the world's largest community foundation with more than $8 billion in assets. SVCF has been able to do this by engaging, empowering, and collaborating with families, individuals, and corporate donors to generate positive impacts and by supporting organizations within and beyond county lines and national borders. SVCF has become a comprehensive center for philanthropy and over the last decade has continued to advocate in pursuit of public policy issues and strategic initiatives in support of those in need. It also serves as a key leader and partner to nonprofit groups and institutions who work to advance ideas and direct resources strategically toward the pressing local needs of the community. SVCF has awarded $4.3 billion in grants since 2007, and the strong support that it has from the community and donors has enabled it to award $2.3 billion to local charities in nine Bay Area counties, with an additional $245 million awarded to other California charities. In their effort to assist students in their higher education and careers SVCF also awarded close to 400 scholarships totaling $1.7 million to students in high school, community college and university programs during the 2014 to 2015 school year. SVCF exemplifies its values of collaboration; diversity; inclusiveness; innovation; integrity; public accountability; respect; and responsiveness. It is fitting and proper that we recognize the tremendous impact of philanthropy, and the spirit of generosity and community service that SVCF has had in the Bay Area. Mr. Speaker, I ask the entire House of Representatives to join my colleagues and me in expressing our collective gratitude to the trailblazing Silicon Valley Community Foundation for its extraordinary contributions to charities and nonprofit organizations throughout our state and nation. We offer our congratulations on the occasion of its decade of philanthropic work and accomplishments in each of our Congressional Districts.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 36, the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. H.R. 36 would prohibit the performance or attempted performance of an abortion after 20 weeks, and harshly punishes physicians who violate the law. This bill has narrow exemptions for the life of a mother (rape and incest) but there are no exemptions in the bill for conditions where the fetus has conditions or diagnoses that are incompatible with life. We have spent the entirety of this Congress defending women's reproductive rights and fighting against plans that would eliminate funding and access to the health care providers of a woman's choosing. This bill is yet another attack on a woman's right to decide what is best for her and her body. A woman, not a politician, must be able to make health decisions that are best for her own circumstances. H.R. 36 ignores that every pregnancy is different and compromises a woman's right to the health care she is legally entitled to. It punishes women who are already in difficult situations. The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that neither a state nor the federal government can ban safe and legal abortion services pre-viability. I support a woman's legal right to opt for or against an abortion. The decision is private. It's a matter of faith and it's a matter of conscience, and our Constitution recognizes this. What I do not support is a bill that takes away a woman's Constitutional right. The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act is a shameful attempt to impose a radical political agenda on women. It strips away their individual liberties and puts their health at serious risk. This bill is wrong, this bill is dangerous, and this House should reject it.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Illinois for yielding and for her leadership and work on the great Energy and Commerce Committee in the House. My congressional district is home to the engineers, innovators, and developers who are pioneering the technologies that are transitioning us to a driverless world. That is why I support H.R. 3388, and it is my hope that the regulatory framework established by this bill is going to ensure that the United States of America is the leader in the world's next great revolution in transportation. I believe that we are, that we will be, and that this bill boosts the effort. Throughout committee consideration of this bill, I stressed the need for bipartisanship on this issue so that the American people would have confidence in the steps that we were taking. And so it is. It is, I think, in the spirit of the original Federal automotive safety standards that passed Congress nearly unanimously in 1966. This bill was improved significantly in the committee, and the final bill, very importantly, preserves the role that States have played to regulate matters such as vehicle registration, licensing, insurance, and liability, while, at the Federal level, ensuring that manufacturers submit safety certifications to NHTSA, placing the agency on the path toward issuing full safety standards for autonomous vehicles. The bill also includes my language to require a study of the environmental impacts of autonomous vehicles, as well as the intersection between autonomous and electric vehicles. The AV revolution is happening on top of the ongoing electrification revolution, and I think the AV advisory council can provide important insight to Congress, States, and localities about how to support growing these fleets. For all these reasons and more, Mr. Speaker, I urge all House Members to support H.R. 3388. I think it deserves unanimous support, as it did in our committee, and that this will be good for America and keep us in a leadership position on the all-important issues that are established by this bill.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of Amendment No. 18, and I'm proud to be a cosponsor of it. The amendment authorizes $15 million for an innovative program known as Hacking for Defense. I'm proud this was originally piloted at Stanford University in my Congressional District and has since expanded to six other colleges and universities around the country. Hacking for Defense offers our country's best and brightest students the opportunity to work directly with our nation's military to identify our most urgent national security threats. Students design innovative solutions using a lean-startup model that can quickly lead to the procurement of new technologies that solve real-world problems facing our military and the warfighter. Hacking for Defense integrates entrepreneurism with public service and helps the federal government become more flexible and less bureaucratic in its approach to problem solving, something Congress has long sought to foster. I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan amendment.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2430, the FDA Reauthorization Act of 2017 to reauthorize four important user fee programs: the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, the Medical Device User Fee Act, the Generic Drug User Fee Act, and the Biosimilar User Fee Act. These critically important laws have improved patient access to important therapies and expedited the FDA's approval times while upholding the most rigorous standards for patient safety. The Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) was enacted in 1992 when drug review times were lagging and FDA simply couldn't keep up with the flood of new drug applications. Through user fees paid by applicants, PDUFA gave FDA the resources it needed to hire and support more staff. The program has been successful in reducing review-time backlogs and expediting safe and effective therapies to patients. My legislation created the Medical Device User Fee Act (MDUFA), which was enacted in 2002 and has resulted in significant changes to the medical device industry and within the medical device center at the FDA. Through this user fee program, the device center has improved its efficiency and reduced the time it takes to bring effective medical devices to market. This legislation builds on the progress made in previous user fee agreements and will produce important developments for the medical device industry. The Generic Drug User Fee Agreement (GDUFA) was enacted in 2012 and takes important steps to bring lower-priced drugs to the market more quickly for the American people. Finally, the Biosimilar User Fee Agreement (BsUFA), which was first enacted in 2012 through legislation I authored, is critical to supporting the nascent biosimilar industry and will lead to meaningful progress, breakthroughs and cures for the American people. Previous user fee reauthorizations have included significant gains for pediatric populations. Before the Better Pharmaceuticals for Children Act (BPCA) and the Pediatric Research Equity Act (PREA), which I authored, the vast majority of drugs (more than 80 percent) used in children were used off-label, without data for their safety and efficacy. Today, that number has been reduced to 50 percent because of my legislation. Both programs were permanently reauthorized in 2012, and while this agreement includes important changes to BPCA and PREA, there remains a need for more meaningful improvements. This legislation lays important groundwork and provides the foundation for future progress. Finally, I urge my colleagues in the Senate to take up this legislation swiftly. It's imperative that both houses of Congress pass this legislation and send it to the President in a timely manner for him to sign into law in order to provide essential resources to the FDA so they can continue to do their critical work.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 23 because it upends decades of State and federal water law and needlessly pits water users against one another. On the heels of the worst drought in California's history, this bill mandates that certain interests come out ahead of others. California has just recently emerged from six years of a punishing drought that forced every resident to conserve water, caused millions of acres of agricultural land to be fallowed, and dramatically increased our State's risk of major wildfires. The drought was a massive disaster and Congress should respond by investing in long-term resilience against future droughts such as water conservation, recycling, groundwater recharge, and desalination. What Congress should not be doing is using the drought as an excuse to permanently upend a century of water law and countless protections for threatened and endangered wildlife. H.R. 23 weakens or overrides decades of State and federal law, including the State and federal Endangered Species Acts; the National Environmental Policy Act; the Central Valley Project Improvement Act; and the San Joaquin River Settlement Act. This list should set off alarm bells for any proponent of States' rights or cooperative federalism. For over a century, the Federal Government has deferred to State water law whenever possible. The GROW Act unwinds that history entirely. By discarding a century of water law and species protections, this bill will decimate the San Francisco Bay-Delta ecosystem, drive the Delta smelt to extinction, and accelerate the decline of the wild salmon and steelhead runs which have been an important part of the Northern California economy since the mid-19th century. This irresponsible bill also overrides science-based management of the delicate Delta infrastructure and would gut several of our most bedrock environmental laws. For these reasons I strongly oppose this legislation and I urge my colleagues to join me in voting no.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, Raymond Lawrence Sullivan, Jr., was born in San Francisco on October 4, 1942. He was the second of six children and grew up in San Francisco and Hillsborough. He has three living siblings, Phillip Sullivan, Mary Sullivan Ward, and Mother Agnes of the Cross, CJM, and his late sister, Sheila Sullivan Peterson. Larry was educated at St. Catherine's Grammar School in Burlingame, Bellarmine College Prep in San Jose, the University of San Francisco and the UCSF Medical School. He did his residency in Anesthesiology at Stanford, and served our country in the U.S. Navy Medical Corps from 1968 to 1970. Larry married Victoria Growney on August 13, 1966. Together they have five children: Larry Sullivan III; Kasey Sullivan Bradstreet, JD; Loretta Sullivan Chang, MD; Brian Sullivan; and Jason Lally, their foster child, who is part of their extended family. Their grandchildren, Liam, Andrew and Thomas Chang, Oscar Bradstreet and Harley, Riona and Raymond Lally bring them untold joy. Dr. Sullivan joined the medical staff of O'Connor Hospital as an anesthesiologist in 1975 and has served there until his retirement. From 1982 to 1988 he served as Clinical Assistant Professor of Anesthesia at Stanford University School of Medicine. At O'Connor Hospital he was Anesthesia Department Chair, a member of the Critical Care Committee, President of the Medical Staff, Member of the Hospital's Board of Directors, and Chair of the Medical Staff Advisory Committee. He was honored in 2011 with the Vincentian Spirit Award given by O'Connor Hospital. Dr. Sullivan has given generously of his time and talents to his professional community as a member of the Santa Clara County Medical Association, (CMA) the American Medical Association, the California Society of Anesthesiologists (CSA), the American Society of Anesthesiologists and the California Medical Association. He served as President of the CSA from 1999 to 2000, and from 1997 to 2006 he served on a Specialty Delegation to the CMA House of Delegates. He received the Distinguished Service Award from the CSA in 2009. Larry also served as a referee and coach of the American Youth Soccer Association in Palo Alto, and was Scoutmaster of Troop 57, Stanford Area Council, where he guided 35 Scouts to the rank of Eagle Scout. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring an extraordinary physician, a devoted son, husband, father, grandfather, a vital member of our community, and a treasured personal friend. Larry Sullivan is a man of integrity and he lives a life instructed by his faith. I have never met a finer human being and a finer family. How proud I am to call the Sullivan Family my friends and to have the privilege of representing them. I ask the entire House of Representatives to join me in wishing my dear friend Larry, a great and good man, and his devoted wife Vicki, every blessing that retirement has to offer, and we thank him for all he has done to strengthen our community and our country.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Silicon Valley Leadership Group (SVLG) as it celebrates its fortieth anniversary. Founded by David Packard in 1978, SVLG advocates on behalf of Silicon Valley businesses in the interest of expanding the economy and maintaining a high quality of life in Silicon Valley. Under the superb leadership of CEO Carl Guardino, the approximately 400 member companies constitute one in every three private sector jobs in Silicon Valley. The Leadership Group has built mightily upon David Packard's legacy by playing a key role in many critical undertakings, including: the establishment of a permanent U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in Silicon Valley; establishing the Housing Trust Fund to create affordable housing; creating new employment opportunities for women; and advocating for comprehensive immigration reform. SVLG has been the unquestioned leader in the development of transportation improvements, including securing funding for the electrification of Caltrain to replace diesel trains with high-performance electric-powered trains; several successful efforts to expand BART to San Jose; and the enhancement of expressways, local roads, transit and highways to provide safer and more efficient commutes for Silicon Valley employees. Mr. Speaker, I ask the entire House of Representatives to join me in expressing our collective gratitude to the premier organization of Silicon Valley for its extraordinary contributions to the economic health and quality of life in Silicon Valley. We offer our congratulations on the occasion of its four decades of accomplishments which have made our region the economic engine of our nation's economy and have strengthened our country in countless ways.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the Rule and the underlying bill, and I urge my colleagues to defeat the Previous Question so that the House can vote on my bipartisan legislation, the Presidential Tax Transparency Act. I first introduced the Presidential Tax Transparency Act exactly one year ago today, along with my Senate counterpart Ron Wyden. This bill would codify the longstanding tradition of presidents disclosing their tax returns. The bill is simple, it is bipartisan, and it has the support of the American people. A recent poll found that 80 percent of Americans believe the President should disclose his tax returns. Earlier today, a petition was delivered to Congress with over 4 million signatures calling on the House to take up this bill. Since I introduced the Presidential Tax Transparency Act a year ago, candidate Trump and now President Trump has amassed serious ethical lapses, troubling connections to Russian officials, and countless potential conflicts of interest, all while hiding his full financial information from the public. Mr. Trump is the first president in decades to refuse to disclose his tax returns as a candidate and as President. We know from his candidate financial disclosure filed last year that the President has 564 financial positions in companies around the world, and owes at least $300 million in debts to various banks. But there's no way for us to verify these claims without his tax return information. Disclosure of the President's tax returns would provide answers to many of the troubling questions surrounding this Administration's connections to Russia. In recent weeks, the President pressured the FBI Director to stop investigating Michael Flynn's Russia connections and then fired him. There are near-daily revelations of undisclosed meetings with Russian officials, disclosures of classified information, and more evidence that the Russians sought to directly interfere in our election. Only with full disclosure of his tax returns will we know the true sources of the President's income, the holders of his debt, and the extent of any business ties to Russia and other foreign countries. I urge my colleagues to listen to the will of the American people and join our bipartisan effort to exercise Congress's constitutional duty to serve as a check on the Executive Branch. By defeating the Previous Question and voting to approve the Presidential Tax Transparency Act today, this body can start the process of obtaining the truth that the American people want and are entitled to.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 390, the Iraq and Syria Genocide Emergency Relief and Accountability Act of 2017. In March of 2016, Congress declared in unequivocal terms that the persecution of Christians, Yezidis, and other ethnic and religious minorities in Iraq and Syria by ISIS constituted genocide. This was a seminal moment in the U.S. Congress because it's only the third time in history that Congress has declared a genocide. Unfortunately, the conditions for the tens of thousands of survivors of these crimes against humanity grow worse each day. Mr. Speaker, we are witnessing the systematic extermination of Christians and other religious and ethnic minorities at the hands of ISIS. And despite the fact that Congress has appropriated over $1 billion in humanitarian aid to help these communities in Fiscal Year 2017, the money has not reached survivors because the only organizations focused solely on aiding survivors are religious groups, which the State Department will not provide assistance to. For example, the Archdiocese of Erbil is currently providing food, housing, and medical care to more than 70,000 Christians who escaped death at the hands of ISIS. Even though the Archdiocese of Erbil is providing assistance to survivors at the center of this crisis, the State Department will not distribute U.S. assistance through religious organizations. H.R. 390 would resolve this ongoing problem. The bill directs the Secretary of State and USAID to provide assistance directly to entities, including faith-based entities that are effectively providing assistance to genocide survivors or other persecuted religious and ethnic communities on the ground in Iraq and Syria. Importantly, the aid can only be used for humanitarian relief on the ground, not to support the general operations of the church or faith-based entity. H.R. 390 also includes important provisions that will help the international community document the crimes against humanity that have been committed by ISIS, hold the perpetrators accountable, and ensure we learn from the horrors we have witnessed over the last six years so that we can one day prevent the next large-scale genocide from occurring. I want to thank the bill's sponsor and my partner in this ongoing effort to help the tens of thousands of survivors of genocide in Iraq and Syria, Congressman Chris Smith. He has been a tireless advocate on behalf of these persecuted communities and I commend him for the work he has done to get this bill through the House. Thirteen months after the House and Senate took the important step to label these crimes against humanity as genocide, my colleagues now have the opportunity to help bring an end to the suffering. I urge my colleague to vote ``YES'' on H.R. 390.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a highly distinguished former colleague and dear friend, Senator Chris Dodd, who recently announced his plans to retire as Chairman and CEO of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) at the end of this year. As the longest serving Senator in Connecticut's history, Senator Dodd brought accountability and historic reforms to Wall Street following the 2008 financial crisis. His extraordinary leadership resulted in the landmark Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the largest overhaul of our financial system since the Great Depression. His bipartisan, landmark legislative accomplishments covered a broad range of issues from civil rights, to families and children, and to foreign policy. After retiring from the Senate in 2011, Senator Dodd followed in the footsteps of the legendary Jack Valenti, taking the reins of the MPAA. The challenges of representing the six major film and television studios during a time of tumultuous changes in technology were met head on by Senator Dodd, and his leadership brought about an unprecedented expansion of American films to the international market. He improved diversity and secured valuable state tax credits for filmmaking here at home. The motion picture industry has benefited greatly from Senator Dodd's steady hand and his years of experience developing consensus between stakeholders. He advanced one of America's great industries that shape the meaning of America around the world with a record of exceptional leadership brought to bear on behalf of the studios, filmmakers and the thousands of men and women who bring the magic of film and television to screens large and small. He leaves an indelible mark on the MPAA, just as he did in service to our nation in the United States Senate. Mr. Speaker, I ask all of my House colleagues to join me in congratulating Senator Dodd for his brilliant leadership and countless achievements as Chairman and CEO of the MPAA, and wish he and his family every blessing in the next exciting chapter of their lives.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule and the underlying bill, and I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so that the House can vote on my bipartisan legislation, the Presidential Tax Transparency Act. Mr. Speaker, in the last week, the President fired the FBI Director who was investigating him. We then learned that the President also pressured the Director to end his investigation of Michael Flynn's Russia entanglements. These revelations, added to so many others, make it abundantly clear that we must have disclosure of the President's tax returns in order to fully understand his connections to Russia. The Presidential Tax Transparency Act would require this disclosure for the current President, all future Presidents, and Presidential nominees. This practice has never been required by law. But if there were ever a time for Congress to codify this bipartisan disclosure tradition, now is the time. The President's behavior has raised questions since before the election about what connections or exposure he may have to Russian officials. After the FBI, the CIA, and the NSA concluded that Russia did, in fact, interfere in our national elections; after several of the President's associates and staff lied about meetings with Russian officials during the campaign and transition; and after the FBI opened an investigation into these Russia contacts, the President still welcomed top Russian diplomats into the Oval Office for a closed-door meeting last week. Holding the meeting itself raised many questions. But in the meeting, the President revealed highly classified, code-word information to the Russians. I believe that this is unprecedented. No President in the history of our country has ever done such a thing. And on May 16, The New York Times reported that the President pressed the former FBI Director Jim Comey to end his investigation of Michael Flynn's ties to Russia before he fired him. This all begs the question: Why is the President so eager to please the Russians? The appointment of former FBI Director Mueller, a highly distinguished public servant, as special counsel is most welcome. But I believe that Congress can act today to provide public disclosure of the President's tax returns, which would provide an immediate and important window into the President's potential Russian entanglements, and answer the critical questions of: To whom does he owe money? And who is the President doing business with? What are those entities? We know there are 564 of them. The American people deserve to know. Only with full disclosure will we know the true sources of the President's income, the holders of his debt, and the extent of any business ties to Russia and other foreign countries. Mr. Speaker, this bill is a highly serious, bipartisan--I want to stress that--bipartisan effort to exercise Congress' constitutional duty to serve as a check and balance on the executive branch as a coequal branch of government. As the former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said on May 14: Our institutions are under attack, both externally . . . and internally. I want to thank all of the cosponsors of this bill and, most especially, the Republicans who have had the courage to do so. It takes courage to have courage. Now is the time to stand up and demonstrate courage so that the American people will have confidence--confidence in what takes place here and to answer the questions that are left unanswered. So by defeating the previous question today and voting to approve the Presidential Tax Transparency Act, Congress can create a pathway to the facts, and then the truth, that the American people have a right to know.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, include in for the Record a letter from common sense kids action: Common sense kids action, April 25, 2017. Re H.R. 1628--OPPOSE Hon. Diane Black, Chairwoman, House Budget Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Representative Black: On behalf of the millions of American kids and families who rely on comprehensive, dependable health insurance to stay healthy and to get medical treatment when they need it, we are writing to respectfully express our strong opposition to your bill, H.R. 1628, the American Health Care Act (AHCA). We have added this bill to our Common Sense Legislative Ratings Tool as an ``Against Kids'' bill and will communicate our position to our parent and teacher members. Common Sense is the nation's leading independent nonprofit organization dedicated to helping kids thrive in a rapidly changing world. We empower parents, teachers, and policymakers by providing unbiased information, trusted advice, and innovative tools to help them harness the power of media and technology as a positive force in all kids' lives. The policy arm, Common Sense Kids Action, is building a movement of parents, teachers, business leaders, and others dedicated to making kids our nation's top priority by supporting policies at the state and federal level that contribute to the building blocks of opportunity for kids. Access to affordable and quality medical care for kids is certainly one of those key building blocks. Thanks to current law, including the Affordable Care Act, Medicaid, and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), 95% of young children in the U.S. today have health insurance. That's a remarkable achievement. With health insurance, parents are more likely to seek medical care for themselves and for their children, helping to prevent illnesses from developing and shortening their duration when they occur. However, the AHCA will result in 24 million fewer Americans having coverage, including millions of children. This jeopardizes the health and well-being of America's kids and will alarm any parent who understands the importance of health insurance for their children and family. The Affordable Care Act certainly needs to be fixed, but if Congress has the goal of making sure that all families and businesses have access to affordable and comprehensive health insurance, it could improve the law for everyone without forcing millions of kids and their parents to lose access to critical medical care. As Congress continues to grapple with this issue, health insurance programs, we think these facts about children's health insurance from the Congressional Budget Office and the Georgetown University Center for Children and Families are important to keep in mind: Ninety-five percent of children age 0-5 are insured today. Forty-five million of those children access health care through two programs: about 37 million through Medicaid (a federal-state program) and 8 million through CHIP, the Children's Health Insurance Program. Children are the single-largest group of persons covered under Medicaid. Under the Affordable Care Act, as you know, many states expanded Medicaid with help from the federal government, increasing coverage for kids and families, including coverage for mental health care. Changes being considered, including under the AHCA, would cut funding to Medicaid by as much as $880 billion over the next 10 years. The AHCA, when compared with current law, would result in 24 million fewer Americans with health insurance by the year 2026. Even with changes recently suggested to your bill, America's kids will be best served by strengthening the Affordable Care Act and preserving Medicaid and CHIP, not by repealing the Affordable Care Act and block granting or establishing a per capita cap on Medicaid. We urge you to keep our children's future foremost in your thinking, withdraw your bill, and work on a bipartisan basis to support measures that protect and strengthen children's health care. Thank you for your consideration of our views and we would be happy to talk with you at any time about this and other issues that matter to America's children and families. Sincerely, Danny Weiss, Vice President, Federal Policy.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I think that today is yet another sad day here in the House of Representatives for the people of our country, because what is being brought forward is the same bill that we debated and that went down because of the weight of the problems and the cruelty of that bill. It is the same thing with a few more poison pills in it. People are going to have to pay higher premiums and deductibles, and it is going to increase what comes out of their pocket; there is going to be less coverage; 24 million people will lose their coverage--that remains in this bill--and key protections are gutted, American people: emergency rooms, maternity care, opioid, mental health care, a string of things that you want in your insurance coverage, a crushing age tax for seniors. Now, there is a real hypocrisy here. Every single Member of Congress has been enrolled in the Affordable Care Act. I want to know which one of you dropped out of it. It was good enough for you--one person, great. Two people, big deal. It was good enough for you, but it is not good enough for your constituents. And you know what? Who is standing with you? Not the doctors in our country, not the AARP to seniors, not nurses, not the cancer association, not anyone. This bill violates the American people.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 1180, the Working Families Flexibility Act of 2017. This misguided legislation would undermine nearly 80 years of federal employment law guaranteeing overtime pay to employees who work more than 40 hours in a week at a given job. Income inequality in America has increased dramatically over the last four decades while the middle class continues to shrink. The average income for the top 0.01 percent of households grew 322 percent between 1980 and 2015, compared to a 0.03 percent increase for the remaining 90 percent of households over the same period of time. Rising household expenses like childcare, healthcare, housing, and education have made it even more difficult for families to climb the rungs of the economic ladder, while approximately 47 million Americans continue to live below the federal poverty line, including over 15 million children. Congress should focus on policies and legislation that help middle- and low-income households achieve economic mobility. Instead, H.R. 1180 would short-change hourly workers by allowing private sector employers to offer compensatory time off in place of overtime pay. By weakening existing requirements for overtime pay, employers can choose to offer overtime hours to employees who agree to receive compensatory time, while nothing in the bill guarantees that employees will be able to use their compensatory time when they wish to. Although employers are required to pay employees for any unused compensatory time, they have up to thirteen months to do so, and there are no protections for workers if the employer declares bankruptcy or permanently closes its doors. At a time when the American Dream has become more difficult to attain, it is more critical than ever for Congress to take action that will make it easier for working parents to meet their responsibilities both at home and at work. These policies include increasing the federal minimum wage; providing households with paid sick and family leave; and ensuring workers are guaranteed stable and predictable work schedules. I urge my colleagues to vote `No' on H.R. 1180, the Working Families Flexibility Act of 2017.

Ms. ESHOO

Ms. ESHOO. For all of these reasons, Mr. Speaker, and all of these conflicts of interest, it is why the President needs to reveal his tax returns, it is why we have bipartisan legislation. We should defeat the previous question and sign on to the discharge petition so that this bipartisan legislation can come before the full House to ensure that the President provides transparency to the American people now and in the future.

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Colorado for his leadership and for yielding me time. Here I am again. I rise in opposition to the rule and the underlying bill, and I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so that my bipartisan--this is both Republicans and Democrats--this bipartisan legislation, the Presidential Tax Transparency Act, can be made in order for debate and a vote. The Presidential Tax Transparency Act is very simple. It would require this President, all future Presidents, and Presidential nominees from both major parties to publicly disclose their tax returns. Until recently, most Americans thought this disclosure was required by law, but it actually has been a tradition. It has been a voluntary disclosure by every President of both parties since Watergate. This long disclosure tradition exists because, A, the American people demand a baseline level of transparency from the highest officeholder in the land, and each one of the Presidents wanted the American people to know that their first and top priority was the American people's interest and not their own financial interests. This last Saturday, April 15, thousands of Americans in 125 cities across the country participated in tax marches calling for the President to release his tax returns. Now, why did they do this on holy Saturday? Because they care and they are deeply concerned about the President's conflicts of interests and his foreign business entanglements. The President's refusal to release his tax returns is just one example of his administration's historic lack of transparency as we near the 100-day mark of the administration. As questions about his associates' ties to Russia continue to swirl, yesterday, the White House refused to provide information about General Flynn's Russia contacts to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Just before the Easter holiday, the White House also announced that it will break with precedent and will not make its visitor logs public. This is added to the fact that the President's meetings and golf outings at his properties in Florida, New Jersey, and elsewhere--where he has so far spent one-third of his Presidency, according to The Washington Post-- are also off the books. Who is the President meeting with? Who does he listen to? Do his personal financial interests come first, or do the interests of the country come first? The President's business empire makes him more susceptible to conflicts of interest than any President in our history, yet he has done less to address these conflicts than any President in modern history. Since 1978, every President has placed their assets in a real blind trust. Instead of following this tradition, the President has turned his business over to his sons in an arrangement that the nonpartisan Office of Government Ethics called ``meaningless from a conflict of interest perspective.'' It was later revealed that the President can draw profits from this trust at any time, and his son acknowledged that he will provide his father with periodic reports about the state of his family's businesses. This is not right. This simply does not pass muster for anyone in the country. This is not Republican or Democratic. This is not partisan. The President should release his tax returns. Now, as the gentleman said previously, this is, again, critically important because it is reported that the President is going to come out with a tax plan today and reportedly cut the tax rate on pass- through entities.