Paul Gosar

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, if any single thing epitomizes American ingenuity, it is the iconic American inventor. It is our distinct pleasure, therefore, to give special recognition to the month of May as National Inventors Month. President Lincoln considered how ``certain inventions and discoveries [in history] occurred of peculiar value, on account of their great efficiency in facilitating all other inventions and discoveries.'' Mr. Lincoln specified ``the art of writing and of printing; the discovery of America, and the introduction of patent laws.'' Today, we might refer to such inventions and discoveries as ``disruptive technologies.'' National Inventors Month, 2018, it is well worth considering President Lincoln's exaltation of invention and, by implication, of inventors. Moreover, we as a nation should pause to reflect why the Sixteenth President of the United States connected patent laws with invention and ``disruptive'' advancements. Notably, he even placed patenting of inventions on par with the discovery of America and the invention of the printing press. In the same lecture titled ``Discoveries, Inventions, and Improvements,'' President Lincoln observed, ``Before then any man [might] instantly use what another man had invented, so that the inventor had no special advantage from his invention. The patent system changed this, secured to the inventor for a limited time exclusive use of his inventions . . . .'' Not only President Lincoln, but the Founders held this belief about securing patent rights to the intellectual fruits of one's labor. The Founders thought it important enough to empower and encourage invention by any American so inclined, in order to advance our nation's collective knowledge and economic strength, that they included this very special, exclusive property right within the Constitution itself. Thus, our Founders deliberately intended to stimulate invention by inventors from sea to shining sea--be they on farms, in factories, toiling in their basements, barns, garages, in corporate research and development facilities, in the laboratories of companies and of our world-class universities. President Lincoln, who has been the only U.S. president with a patent, summarized this famous, successful formula. He credited our patent system for its securing inventors' exclusive rights to use their inventions as they see fit. He phrased this famously, completing the thought in the same speech. Mr. Lincoln said U.S. patents ``added the fuel of interest to the fire of genius in the discovery and production of new and useful things.'' Therefore, we proudly recognize National Inventors Month. I encourage my fellow Americans to take this opportunity to reflect on the great benefits we daily enjoy from the inventions, great and small, of American inventors.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise for the following purpose. I want to share my concern about the arrest and conviction of Tommy Robinson in Great Britain. I am well aware that England does not share our free speech values and does not have the equivalent of a First Amendment. Indeed, the restrictive practices of England led directly to the birth of this great nation and the freedom we enjoy here. Mr. Robinson, a British activist and journalist, was arrested and jailed for simply filming outside a public courtroom, and was sentenced to 13 months for this ``crime.'' His real crime is not taking pictures; His real crime is his refusal to agree to the government's efforts to cover up crimes by Muslim gangs who are raping British girls, almost with impunity, and with little apparent regard by the British government. If this act violated a term of probation, it would mean the court system in England is a key part of the problem, covering up for criminals by imposing gag orders as terms of probation. Dissent is patriotic when the ruling class are illegitimate and oppressive. The ruling class in England appears fearful of the truth. When it bans discussion, and when it criminalizes the truth, any such government can fairly be labeled as both oppressive and tyrannical. I object to the suppression of the truth. England has a proud history and America is its progeny, but it needs to take back its liberty and freedom. ``It's all for nothing if you don't have freedom,'' Braveheart (1995).

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, on July 19, 2010, President Obama signed Executive Order 13547 and sought to implement a new National Ocean Policy. According to the House Committee on Natural Resources: ``In this unilateral action, he established a top-down Washington, D.C.- based approval process that will hinder rather than promote ocean and inland activities and cost American jobs. . . . This has the potential to inflict damage across a spectrum of sectors, including agriculture, fishing, construction, manufacturing, mining, oil and natural gas, renewable energy, and marine commerce, among others. . . . Over 80 national and local organizations representing agriculture, forestry, energy, fishing, boating, mining, transportation, and construction wrote to then Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers requesting a prohibition on funding for the implementation of the President's National Ocean Policy.'' Our oceans are home to a variety of industries, and it is critical that we maintain our offshore environments and promote a robust offshore economy. The National Ocean Policy represents the previous administration's heavyhanded, top-down approach to Federal land and water management and does not reflect the realities of our working oceans and coastal communities. Our offshore assets contribute billions to the U.S. economy, and the National Ocean Policy's vague directive sharply discouraged the development of American energy, sustainable fisheries, and our coastal economies. Policies like this cause industries to turn outside of the U.S. to do their business. Adding duplicative layers of permitting and consultation to our already highly regulated ocean industries and subject all parties to virtually unlimited legal exposure, we are seeing this firsthand in the Northeast, where direct conflict in the ocean user groups has resulted in litigation. This is the exact thing that this policy is supposed to alleviate. Years into implementation, this policy is incapable of achieving its stated goal. U.S. oceans industries are major global players, and we need to keep our industries competitive. The National Ocean Policy does the opposite. As such, I strongly oppose this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Newhouse).

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I ask for a ``no'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chair, this isn't a jurisdictional aspect of power across the West. This is fraud. This is workplace violence--20. This has nothing to do with jurisdictional application of water or power. This is an unsafe application within the workplace. This is a bully in an agency who is weighing in and doing unwanted things. We have an obligation, an absolute obligation, to rein somebody in like this. That is what is wrong here. If we can't do this to a swamp creature of this magnitude, then what can we do.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Simpson).

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, the current application of the Holman rule authorizes three specific uses in an appropriation bill: the reduction of amounts of money in the bill, the reduction of the number and salary of officers of the United States, or the reduction of the compensation of any person paid out in the treasury of the United States. Let's go back through this. Look at this fraud. Look at these 20 complaints of violence. I have to tell you: Are you sure you want to defend this guy? Inconceivable. Inconceivable that we are going to allow this. We owe it to the Federal employees under this gentleman to have an employment environment to be well taken care of. Mr. Chair, I ask for the Members to vote on behalf of this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. Yes.

Mr. GOSAR. Will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chair, may I inquire how much time I have left.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chair, I rise today to offer an amendment that utilizes the Holman rule to hold WAPA Administrator Mark Gabriel accountable. On Gabriel's watch, millions of taxpayer and customer dollars were flushed down the drain on fraudulent and improper transactions while a culture of fear from the highest echelons of the agency enforced silence as to the true nature and scope of these misdeeds. Wasteful and fraudulent expenditures by WAPA in recent years include things like ammunition; specialized weapons, including numerous purchases of $1,200 rifle scopes; an unauthorized ATV at a cost of $14,000; a John Deere lawn tractor; personal clothing; prohibited purchases of $349,000 to accessorize personal cars; $271,000 at book stores; $102,000 to deck out motorcycles from shops and dealers; and questionable expenditures from one employee to the tune of $50,000 per month. Now, in response, the Western Area Power Administration slow-walked investigations, covered up the fraud, and intimidated anyone bold enough to call it out. A 14-year Federal employee who once worked for the U.S. Attorney's Office told reporters: ``Instead of aggressively going after corruption, WAPA's bosses slow-walked the investigation, retaliated against those who uncovered fraud, and failed to protect them from threats.'' Unfortunately, this employee is not alone. A former WAPA vice president for procurement went on record to state that, during his 30 years of Federal service, he had never seen anything like this and certainly had never felt unsafe at work until he worked at WAPA on a daily basis. Disturbingly, 20 complaints of violence in the workplace occurred over the last 3-year period. The mismanagement, corruption, and culture is so bad at WAPA that an independent consultant did a violence assessment in late 2015 and found: ``Multiple employees reported having been threatened directly or heard others being threatened regarding the current investigations. . . . Several indicated they had not bothered to report the incidents for reasons of fear and/or the belief upper management would not act. Because of past failures to address these issues more seriously, it is very likely the incidents will increase in number and severity.'' Assessors also reported: ``Employees mentioned bosses who actively seek to intimidate employees, especially women, and who tolerate and perhaps promote a culture of unacceptable behavior in their teams.'' Equally troubling, Administrator Gabriel is routinely and publicly insubordinate as an agency head. At an April 12, 2018, budget hearing, Mr. Gabriel took a public position contrary to that of the current administration, advocating for tip funding even though the budget proposal proposed to eliminate such funding. This commonsense amendment seeks to hold this rogue bureaucrat accountable to the American people and the victims who have suffered under his tenure. I am pleased to have the support of FreedomWorks, who is key voting this amendment; Club for Growth, who is key voting the amendment; the Tea Party Patriots; Americans for Limited Government; Texas' Michael Q. Sullivan; the Grand Canyon State Electric Cooperative Association; the Mohave Electric Cooperative; the Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Cooperative; Arizona Pork Producers; New Mexico Cattle Growers Association; New Mexico Wool Growers; Sulphur Up North Jobs, Incorporated. Numerous customers and Federal employees no longer want Mr. Gabriel in charge, having understandably lost faith in his leadership. It is far past time that the Department of Energy clean house and show this Obama administration holdover the door. Mr. Chair, I commend the chairman and the committee for their efforts on this legislation. I urge support of the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, the ARPA-E program first began receiving funding through the 2009 Obama stimulus and is currently unauthorized. ARPA-E grew out of those years' overly optimistic perception of the Federal Government's ability to lead in areas of commercially viable energy research and technology, particularly in renewables. The obvious problem with this premise is that the government, unlike our Nation's industries and corporations, has never been in the business of cost-benefit maximization, as other blunders from that period, like the Solyndra scandal, demonstrated. This is because the Federal Government is competent and accomplished in the areas of basic, early-stage scientific research but poorly positioned to move research from concept to market. And ARPA-E provides even further demonstration of that. The Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies defunded the program in their FY18 draft passed bill. The administration and the Republican Study Committee have both advocated eliminating this stimulus-era program and have continually indicated that the proper role of government in energy research is at the level of basic research taking place in existent, well-funded programs like the Office of Science and the applied energy research and development program. Those DOE programs that they point to are more worthy recipients of Federal dollars, are effective, and produce results because they focus on the right goals. For this reason, the administration is also strongly opposed to continued funding for the ARPA-E program. The White House stated in its fiscal year 2019 budget proposal: Appropriations for ARPA-E were only authorized through 2013 under the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010. In addition, there has been concern about the potential for ARPA-E's efforts to overlap with research and development being carried out, or which should be carried out, by the private sector. No new appropriations are requested in 2019. The Department would request reprogramming of prior-year unobligated balances for program closeout activities to ensure full closure of ARPA-E by mid-2020. Any remaining contract closeout and award monitoring activities would be transferred elsewhere within DOE. This proposed elimination reflects both a streamlining of Federal activities and a refocusing on the proper Federal role in energy research and development. In a May 15 view letter to House Appropriations on the Energy and Water bill, the White House stated: ``The Administration is disappointed that the bill does not eliminate ARPA-E. The Committee is encouraged to explore options to incorporate certain ARPA-E attributes, such as cross-cutting research coordination and enhanced flexibility, into the Department of Energy's primary research efforts within the Office of Science and Applied Energy Research Programs rather than maintain a separate program through ARPA-E.'' In a June 5 Statement of Administration Policy, the White House stated: ``The Administration believes that the continued funding of ARPA-E makes little strategic sense given the existence of applied energy research elsewhere within the Department. The Congress is urged to eliminate ARPA-E and incorporate its more successful elements, such as coordination with industry and cross-cutting research, into the Department's applied energy programs.'' The innovations ARPA-E supporters crow about must come from the market or from academic research institutions, because the Federal Government's track record of responding to commercial incentives in a cost-beneficial way to the taxpayer is absolutely poor. The proper Federal nexus for research is the early-stage work being done at the existing Office of Science and the applied energy research program, not projects foisted onto the government that weren't compelling enough to receive private funding. Heritage Action, Freedomworks, Club for Growth, and the National Taxpayers Union are key-voting this amendment. The amendment is also endorsed by the Americans for Limited Government and Taxpayers for Common Sense. I urge adoption of this amendment that supports President Trump's agenda. I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, any program that receives this much funding has individual successes proponents can point to. The problem with this program is that the ratio of successes to the failures is far lower with this one than comparable Federal research programs. It also targets an area of research that is inappropriate for Federal research. Basic early-stage research is a profit avenue for Federal dollars to go, not late-stage research on projects approaching commercialization. If a concept or technology is nearing commercialization, that is the right nexus for private industry to get involved. Our country's major companies in tech, engineering, and energy are flush with cash, and projects that they think are commercially viable are getting more funding than ever before. Failure by the government to salvage a project means that the projects, on the whole, aren't worth being salvaged by government, industry, or anyone. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, once again, this is an unauthorized program and it treads on existing jurisdictions at the Department of Energy, specifically, the Office of Science and Applied Energy Research program. It is a program in search of justification. Let's take, for example, Solyndra. That is a wonderful success. Really? Private sector couldn't do that? They could do it a ton better than that type of application. I ask my colleagues to vote for this amendment. This is sound. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

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

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of my good friend and colleague, Representative Amodei's, amendment. The amendment aims to streamline a bureaucratic process that is hampering the production of defense critical metals and minerals. Strategic and critical minerals are important to national security and help provide our troops with the equipment and weapons they need to keep us safe. A nonclassified defense study recently found that failure to have a reliable supply chain for at least 16 of the 35 critical minerals has already caused significant weapon system production delays for the Department of Defense. A recent report published by the Department of the Interior and the U.S. Geological Survey found the U.S. is 100 percent net import reliant on foreign countries, including China, for 20 different critical minerals. Such reliance threatens our national security as well as our ability to make equipment and weapons that our troops need to be successful in their missions. I applaud Representative Amodei and his strong leadership and tireless efforts to support the needs of our men and women in uniform, and I urge the adoption of this amendment.

Mr. GOSAR

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment offered by my good friend and colleague, Mr. Banks. The previous administration's Waters of the U.S. rule, commonly referred to as WOTUS, attempted to assert Clean Water Act jurisdiction over nearly all areas with even the slightest connection to water resources, including manmade conveyances. The Obama administration threatened the very livelihoods of farmers, ranchers, small businesses, water users, and property owners when unilaterally enacting this overreaching water and land grab by executive fiat. Contrary to claims by the Obama administration, this regulation directly contradicts prior U.S. Supreme Court decisions which imposed limits on the extent of Federal Clean Water Act authority. Although the agencies maintained the rule was narrow and clarified the Clean Water Act jurisdiction, it would actually aggressively expand Federal authority under the Clean Water Act while bypassing Congress and creating unnecessary ambiguity. In fact, even the agencies admitted, when announcing the final rule, that WOTUS would expand agency control over 60 percent of our country's streams and millions of acres of wetlands that were previously non-jurisdictional. Moreover, the rule was based on incomplete scientific and economic analysis. In recent years, the House has voted at least five different times to block or reduce the damage associated with the Obama WOTUS rule. In January 2016, the House and Senate passed legislation blocking WOTUS, utilizing the Congressional Review Act, and put a bill on President Obama's desk that he subsequently vetoed. WOTUS is a dream-killer for future generations and will result in significant job losses as well as considerable harm to our economy. Congress must take action today to repeal this fundamentally flawed mandate once and for all. I applaud Representative Banks for his strong leadership and tireless efforts to protect the livelihoods of farmers, ranchers, businessmen, and other local stakeholders by repealing this unconstitutional power grab. Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of this lawful and necessary amendment.

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment offered by my good friend and colleague, Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. This good governance and commonsense amendment will reduce costs associated with consultation and allow important projects to move forward while ensuring these actions don't negatively impact species and result in more private contributions that help recover endangered species. In recent years, local landowners showed unprecedented support for lesser prairie chicken conservation and committed approximately 4 million acres and more than $26 million toward these efforts. Unfortunately, current practices do not allow conservation measures that take place outside of designated critical habitat to count in relation to Federal actions. This arbitrary interpretation results in less conservation efforts for species and stifles private investment that would otherwise be encouraged if the totality of habitat conservation measures underway were allowed to be considered. Last year, Senator John Barrasso pointed out that, of the more than 1,600 species of animals and plants listed on the Endangered Species Act since 1973, only 3 percent have been recovered. That is 3 percent. This is failure by any definition or reason. This amendment encourages voluntary conservation that will help recover threatened and endangered species. Property owners, States, and local communities should be encouraged to be part of the solution, not pushed aside in favor of Federal micromanagement. I applaud Representative Johnson for his strong leadership and tireless efforts to improve an outdated system that is failing to protect species and failing to consider the totality of conservation measures underway before moving forward with new Federal actions. I urge adoption of this amendment.

Mr. GOSAR

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

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of my good friend and colleague Congressman Gianforte's wildfire salvage operations amendment. I am glad that, with the farm bill package, we have the opportunity to look at the forest industry and wildfire issues from all sides. This amendment is part and parcel of a broader wildfire strategy that requires proactive action from Congress for the steps before, during, and after wildfires are expected. Specifically, this amendment will ensure that the National Forest System forest is cleared and replanted if a catastrophic wildfire chars it to the ground. Our National Forest System lands will be rehabilitated after wildfire devastates them, but in a way consistent with forest plans. That way, the ecosystem of the new forest will have better management and be less susceptible to another large-scale burn-down event. This is a forward-thinking amendment to fix a backwards system we have devised in Congress, and I urge Members to vote for this demonstration that shows Congress isn't willing to just give up and let our forest system lands be catastrophically burnt. Mr. Chair, I applaud Representative Gianforte for his strong leadership and tireless efforts to reduce the threat of dangerous wildfires. I urge adoption of this commonsense amendment.