Alcee Hastings

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, last night in the Rules Committee, I had dialogue with the author of this legislation and also the ranking member, Mr. Pallone. I indicated to them that I have very strong sympathies regarding persons who are in the apparent throes of death and seeking some hope, and medication can have its advantages, and experimental medication can have its advantages. My quarrel with the legislation is that it didn't go through regular order. I don't understand why, with all of the experts. I introduced into the Record in the Rules Committee last night a substantial number of organizations and individuals who have come forward. They all agree that something along the lines of what is being sought ought be undertaken, but it would allow for those persons to have added input into what ultimately may be significant legislation. But my friends on the other side plow right ahead on this matter that I reiterate was brought on suspension last week that failed, and then brought here last night for purposes of a rule along with financial stress legislation. So it is not that many of us are not sympathetic to the underlying principle that is being offered. It is that it is rank process and that we should not allow legislation to continue to come to the floor of the House of Representatives that blocks out a significant number of persons who may have input that would make the measure be much more salient to a more significant number of people. It is for that reason that I continue to ask the questions: What are our priorities here? What is the rush with reference to this matter while we are ignoring a significant number of other matters that we could be undertaking? In addition to that, we were supposed to go to the Rules Committee this afternoon on the omnibus bill; and now, evidently, there is wrangling going on between the parties and bicameral between the Senate and the House, and that measure isn't ready to come to the floor. Yet we are dealing with something that isn't the highest priority of the moment. I commented last night, anything that will help a person who is facing death is the kind of thing that we would want that person to have that opportunity to deal with. But we have children who have been killed and we have children who are facing the potential for that kind of horror, yet we are doing nothing. So, Madam Speaker, once again, I rise to appeal to my friends on the other side of the aisle: Please, listen to the American people and do more to help end the epidemic of gun violence that has plagued our Nation and that the American people are demanding Congress to do more. For example, in a recent Gallup Poll, nearly two-thirds of adults wanted stricter laws on the sale of firearms. According to a recent NPR/Ipsos poll, 75 percent of respondents said they think gun laws should be stricter. As I indicated earlier, just this morning there were reports of another school shooting just an hour and a half from Washington, D.C., in Great Mills, Maryland. The American people are begging this body to do something to end this epidemic, so I offer the majority this opportunity: Madam Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I am going to offer an amendment to the rule to bring up four commonsense gun safety bills: H.R. 4240, the Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act; H.R. 3464, the Background Check Completion Act; H.R. 2598, the Gun Violence Restraining Order Act; and H.R. 1478, the Gun Violence Research Act. These bills would close the dangerous gun show and internet sale background check loopholes, prevent the sale of guns without a completed background check, ensure that people who are a danger to themselves or others can be prevented from possessing a gun, and lift the prohibition on government-sponsored scientific research on the causes of gun violence. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. HASTINGS. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so that we can finally do something to address gun violence. Through you, Madam Speaker, I would advise my friend from Texas that I have no further speakers and I am prepared to close when he is prepared to close. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. I would say to my friend from Washington what I said last night: We would do a great service to Louise's memory if we were to make more open rules here on the House floor; and I will argue for her in that regard. Madam Speaker, before I close, I want to again reiterate the tremendous loss felt in this Chamber with the passing of our longtime colleague, Congresswoman Louise McIntosh Slaughter. She was a champion of all the issues she cared about and a giant here in the House of Representatives. Her wisdom will be missed every day. Madam Speaker, the people's House should be approaching our work in a manner that is fair to all Americans, in a manner where the appropriate committee of jurisdiction holds hearings and markups, in a manner where experts in the field are consulted, and in a manner where Members of both parties have the opportunity to offer amendments and debate the contents of the bill. The process we are witnessing here today is truly a slap in the face to regular order. A bill that has zero input from members on the Energy and Commerce Committee or that has been the subject of any thoughtful discussion is suddenly on the House floor for a vote. Now, I respect my friend from Texas' view that last year in the Senate, and even perhaps since that time, and throughout the country, right-to-try measures have passed in several States to some degree. But this particular bill that is on the floor that we are making a rule for has not gone through regular order; and that, then, disallows a significant number of persons who would have an opportunity to have input to what could be legislation that all sides could agree upon. Our failure to undertake to do that is a disservice, in my view, to the institution and to the measure that is being sought to be passed here today. This is not just an affront to normal House procedure; it is downright undemocratic and emblematic of the Republican majority's inability to govern. I think it will redound to their discredit that they are not allowing this House to proceed under regular order. As I indicated earlier, more than 50 percent of all of the measures that have come to the Rules Committee and have ultimately come to the floor of the House of Representatives have been under closed rules, which means that Members who represent millions of people in America do not have opportunities to offer amendments that might make the measure better or, at the very least, have their views heard with reference to substantive legislation that is moving through this body. If we continue down this path for the remainder of this session, we will probably break the 100th barrier on closed rules. We have already had more closed rules than in the history of legislating in this country. That is not fair. That is basically all we are arguing. Open up the process. Let every Member have an opportunity for input on behalf of his or her constituents. It is the right thing to do. What has been happening is the dead wrong thing to do. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I mistakenly voted no, when I meant to vote yes on Roll Call No. 108, H.R. 1116--the TAILOR Act of 2017.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank the gentleman from Colorado for yielding me the customary 30 minutes for debate. Madam Speaker, today's bills would roll back important consumer and financial protections by undermining the effectiveness of financial regulators' ability to conduct important stress tests, create unnecessary hurdles for regulators to contend with in the future, and limit the Federal Reserve Board's flexibility in determining the health and stability of our financial institutions. Madam Speaker, including these two measures, the Rules Committee will have considered 30 Financial Services bills this Congress, 15 of which were considered under closed rules. Those 15 are part of a much larger closed process that Republican leadership has wielded with brute force to push through the legislative priorities of powerful special interests. Indeed, this week, we witnessed the 73rd closed rule for this Congress, a style of legislating that is as brazen as it is broken. This critique of the majority's reliance on a closed process is not just some technical point, but, rather, an important one; because when you close out those on your side of the aisle who are not in leadership and those on our side of the aisle from offering amendments, you do not simply silence us, you silence the American people. And what has this process wrought for the American people? Well, let's take a look. Bear with me because it is a doozy First, we witnessed the majority--in what I believe was the most chaotic and convoluted process during my 25 years in the House of Representatives--try to take away healthcare from 23 million Americans. When they couldn't get that done, the majority then honed in on a tax giveaway to corporate America and the ultrawealthy not only at the expense of the middle class, but also to the detriment of future generations, as that bill will explode our national debt by an estimated $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years. Just last week, we watched as our Republican friends attacked Clean Air Act protections to give a handout to specified industries to emit more pollution into the air. Is this what my Republican friends were sent here to do: To take away healthcare from millions of people? To remove important environmental protections that keep America's air and water safe? To limit the amount of stress tests the Federal Reserve Board should run on our biggest financial institutions so that we can avoid another financial meltdown? Footnote right there. If these stress tests are so bothersome to these big old banks, how is it that they are making all of this big old money? They don't seem to have any hindrance when it comes to sopping up the resources of this country. Madam Speaker, my constituents haven't been calling me or writing or emailing my office asking that we consider or pass any of the measures the House will consider this week. On the other hand, they have written to my office asking what Republican leadership is going to do about addressing the gun violence epidemic ravaging our country. I was meeting in my office just an hour ago with officials from Tamarac, Florida, and we received an alert that two schools near the Parkland school were on lockdown. My constituents have asked about what Republican leadership will do to ensure that the DACA recipients have a pathway to citizenship. They have asked what Republican leadership will do to address our Nation's needs for serious and sustained investments in our infrastructure. Unfortunately, the answer is little to nothing. Footnote right there. When I came to this Congress 25 years ago, there were 14,000 bridges in the United States of America in need of a repair. Today, there are 56,000 bridges in this country in need of repair. Madam Speaker, since 2014, there have been over 1,360 mass shootings in America. Let me let that soak in. Since 2014, there have been over 1,360 mass shootings in America. In 2018 alone, nearly 500 teens and over 100 children have been killed or injured by guns. Last month, 14 students and 3 teachers were gunned down at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School by a former student using an AR-15 that he bought legally. And just 2 days ago, American citizens took to the grounds of this Capitol and placed 7,000 pairs of shoes on the front lawn here at the Capitol. Citizens placed a pair of shoes for every child killed by gun violence since the Sandy Hook massacre. Regardless of your views on this subject, please let that number sink in: 7,000 pairs of shoes. Madam Speaker, we should not be considering a bill to reform the Financial Stability Oversight Council. We should not be considering a measure that limits the frequency of stress tests on our financial institutions. What we should be doing is considering a ban on bump stocks. We should be considering a ban on weapons of war. We should be considering protective orders allowing people to petition a court to temporarily remove firearms from an individual in crisis. We should be considering a measure to provide for comprehensive background checks, and maybe this time try not to sabotage it by attaching a controversial concealed carry provision to the measure. Madam Speaker, the Republican majority is also ignoring the plight of 22,000 Dreamers who have lost their protected status since President Trump ended DACA, and the other hundreds of thousands of Dreamers who remain in legal limbo. Every day, 120 of them lose their status. Madam Speaker, 25 times--25 times--House Republicans blocked a vote on the bipartisan Dream Act, which protects innocent Dreamers from this cruel Republican inaction. Every day of inaction on the part of my friends across the aisle means another day that families are needlessly made to live under the threat of being torn apart. Madam Speaker, all across America, our infrastructure is in need of repair and greater investment. Every Member in the House of Representatives likely received a visit from members of the National League of Cities around the United States of America, and every one of them is talking about infrastructure needs. Every one of them. Yet the Republican majority has stalled on presenting a single infrastructure bill. Even President Donald John Trump's infrastructure plan faces an obstacle: his own budget cuts. President Trump claimed the Federal Government was investing $1.5 trillion to our infrastructure, but, in reality, the White House's plan actually only proposed $200 billion in Federal funding. At the same time, he proposed slashing critical infrastructure funding to the Department of Transportation by nearly 20 percent, and the Army Corps of Engineers' budget by 22 percent. How does that work, Madam Speaker? The truth is, it doesn't. Madam Speaker, we stand here today with a to-do list a mile long and an ocean wide. I suggest the following: that we stop being forced to spend our time checking off items on the wish lists of powerful corporate special interests, and we turn to the business of the American people--Republican and Democrat, independent, conservative, and liberal American people. For starters, we could work together to end our country's gun violence epidemic, bring relief to DACA recipients, and bring thought- out and serious legislation to the floor that will invest in our infrastructure. Now, I am sure that my friend is either thinking or likely to say that we are here about financial services measures, and he is correct. That is what these rules call for. But what these rules are about, in the final analysis, is a diversion from things that we know are more critical. Why, then, are we not dealing with prioritized matters that we know that the American people want, rather than those that the corporate greedy, needy, big old businesses want? Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, it has been one month since the tragic events at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. The district that I am privileged to serve is adjacent to that school, and I have two of my remaining cousins in life that live in Parkland, and I live within 30 minutes of where that school is situated. A gunman killed 17 innocent students and teachers. Since that heartbreaking day, Americans from coast to coast have raised their voices and said: Enough is enough. Yesterday, thousands of students from across our country walked out of their classrooms to protest this body's inaction. Two days ago, as I said earlier, 7,000 empty pairs of children's shoes were laid on the Capitol lawn to commemorate all the children who have been tragically killed by gun violence since the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. I might add, not only at schools, but in Nevada, in California, in Texas, in South Carolina, in churches, in Orlando bars, these mass shootings are occurring. People don't think it is an epidemic. My friends on the other side of the aisle did bring a bill to the floor yesterday that I voted for that was also cojoined by my friend, Ted Deutch, whose district is where the Parkland school is. He, too, was involved with that legislation, but it was done to improve school security. Much more needs to be done, and it needs to be done now. So, today, I offer my colleagues yet another opportunity to show the American people that they value their safety and the safety of their children over the lobbying of the National Rifle Association and the gun manufacturers. If we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up four commonsense gun safety bills: H.R. 4240, the Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act; H.R. 3464, the Background Check Completion Act; H.R. 2598, the Gun Violence Restraining Order Act; and H.R. 1478, the Gun Violence Research Act. These bills would close the dangerous gun show and internet sale background check loopholes, prevent the sale of guns without a completed background check, ensure that people who are a danger to themselves or to others can be prevented from possessing a gun, and lift the prohibition on government-sponsored scientific research on causes of gun violence. Let me send a message to gun owners in this country. I own a gun. I believe in the Second Amendment. I don't want anybody to take anybody's gun; but nobody can persuade me that anybody, other than military and police officers, are deserving of having in their possession automatic weapons. I believe every American feels the same way. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. HASTINGS. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn), my very good friend that I knew before we came to Congress together, and the distinguished assistant Democratic leader.

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

Mr. HASTINGS. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Carbajal), a member of the Armed Services and Budget Committees of this House of Representatives.

Mr. HASTINGS. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Murphy), my colleague who represents my home area that I was born in, a member of the Armed Services and Small Business Committees.

Mr. HASTINGS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Speaker, I would advise the previous speaker that I knew Jay Dickey, I served with him here, as did many other Members; and my understanding is that, before his death, he indicated that he thought that his measure that has carried forth was a mistake. Madam Speaker, my friends across the aisle have clearly demonstrated where their priorities lie. And for the benefit of the American public, if it looks like we are ships passing in the night, then doubtless we are when it comes to priorities. I would ask anyone in this country and anyone in this House: Which do you think should be a priority? Addressing the gun epidemic in this country or bailing out big old banks with more opportunities to potentially carry us to yet another financial disaster by simply disallowing them having to undergo the stress test that they need? I listened to my friend when he talked about stress tests, that they don't know how they are going to be tested or what part they are going to--well, my goodness gracious. Kids in school don't know what is going to be on the test; so why should the bank know what is going to be on the test? But in the deal, when it goes down, whether they know or not, they still are making a ton of money; and, therefore, the regulations aren't affecting them in the way that we make it sound here. And there again, I ask the question: Which is your priority, America? Whether we address gun violence in this country and the epidemic that it is or whether we address these financial services regulatory measures that are more for corporate America than they are for you? Americans working hard to make ends meet need answers--working hard to get their kids off to school, working hard to make sure they can put food on the table at the end of the day, working hard to ensure that they can put a little money aside for their child's education, working hard to ensure that they can put some retirement money aside. Footnote there. What are we doing to protect the pensions of people in this country? We are not addressing that. We are addressing big banks. That they don't have to keep working two or three jobs for the rest of their lives, that is what Americans are looking for. Well, if they are working hard, then we need to be working hard, and we need to be working hard for them. It is with their interests in mind that we are sent here, and we do a disservice to them and to our country when we abandon that responsibility and consider bills like those put before us today rather than addressing the many, many needs that this country has. Madam Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with great sadness to honor the life and legacy of my dear friend, Captain George Frank Myles, Jr. George passed away peacefully on March 4, 2018 at the age of 69 in Boca Raton, Florida. He was a husband, father, grandfather, brother, nephew, uncle, friend, and dedicated public servant. George is survived by his wife of 46 years, Jacqueline Williams Myles; their three daughters: Tequisha, Kendyll, and Kersti Myles; one grandchild Savannah; sister, Fossteen Reese (Ellenwood, GA); brother, Michael Myles (Augusta, GA); aunt, Juanita Phillips (Decatur, GA); and numerous nieces, nephews, cousins, and godchildren. A native of Augusta, Georgia, George was a star football and basketball player at T.W. Josey High School. Through football, he attended Morris Brown College in Atlanta, GA. In 1970, George graduated with a Bachelor's degree in Sociology and a Minor in Psychology. That same year, ``Brick'' Myles, as he was known on the football field, was drafted by the Miami Dolphins. As his professional football career was beginning, his draft number was called to serve his country. As the first African American to graduate from the Georgia Military Institute's Officers Candidates School in Milledgeville, Georgia, George subsequently joined the Florida National Guard. In 1971, George went to work for Sears, Roebuck & Co., and became a manager there in 1983. He served as General Manager at the Westside Mall in Miami, and at SearsTown in downtown Fort Lauderdale. George always made it a priority to diversify the workforce by employing local minority residents. In 1991, he retired from Sears to start his own business. George entered politics in 1993, where he was a Commissioner for the City of Lauderhill. During the course of his career, George served on the boards of numerous community organizations such as the Greater Fort Lauderdale Chamber of Commerce, Urban League of Broward County, the United Negro College Fund, National Conference of Christians and Jews, Broward County Girl Scouts of America, as well as countless other organizations. Mr. Speaker, George's civic engagement in our community will never be forgotten. He was a true gentleman, who served this nation and our great state with distinction. George's positive contributions to the community were a true reflection to his generosity, humor, love of public service, and family. I was so truly honored to have known George, and to call him my friend. My thoughts and prayers are with his family and friends during this most difficult time. He will be dearly missed.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like first to thank the gentlewoman from Wyoming (Ms. Cheney), my friend, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes for debate. Today's bills would modify Clean Air Act regulations, or the act itself, to give a handout to specified industries to emit more pollution into the air. These bills, in my view, would result in more smog, more fine particle pollution, and more toxic air pollution. The effects would be worse, resulting in more asthma attacks, more kids in emergency rooms, more bronchitis, more cancer diagnoses, and more birth defects. Mr. Speaker, these bills represent a fundamentally unfair and deeply troubling approach to regulation. In bringing up these bills, the Republican-controlled Congress is granting favors to special interests at the expense of public health. Shocking, but not surprising. By bringing up these bills, the majority intends to overturn evidence- based, scientific decisions made by the Environmental Protection Agency, States, and courts after a transparent and extensive process. To date, the Trump administration, with the help of the Republican- controlled Congress, has targeted 67 environmental rules. One of those rules was the requirement that mining companies prove they have the financial wherewithal to clean up their pollution. Another is the rule regulating airborne mercury emissions from fossil fuel power plants. And most recently, the administration announced it was targeting oil rig safety regulations, regulations that were implemented after the 2010 Deepwater Horizon explosion and oil spill, a spill that burned for 36 hours, released 4.9 billion barrels of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico, spread 3,850 square miles, and resulted in billions of dollars of losses to the U.S. fishing industry and the Gulf Coast tourist industry. Mr. Speaker, since passage of the Clean Air Act in 1970, America has made substantial progress in cleaning up this Nation's air. We have done this by following a fundamental principle: holding polluters accountable for their pollution. Instead of following this commonsense, bedrock principle, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle insist on creating loopholes for a few favored industries: waste coal plants, brick manufacturers, and those who manufacture residential wood heaters. Mr. Speaker, the first of these bills, the ironically titled SENSE Act, weakens the critical Mercury and Air Toxics Standards rule, which established the first national standards to address power plant emissions of toxic air pollutants. This Mercury and Air Toxics Standards rule requires coal-fired power plants to meet emissions standards for mercury, other metals, and acid gases. Has the majority engaged in any in-depth analysis of what will happen when this rule is weakened? Has the majority filled its ranks with experts, scientists, and doctors who will be able to put forth a case for why undermining this rule is good policy? Of course not. Mr. Speaker, here is what we know: The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that for every dollar spent to reduce pollution under this rule American families receive up to $9 in health benefits. In fact, the EPA estimated that, in 2016, the MATS rule would avoid up to 11,000 premature deaths, 2,800 cases of chronic bronchitis, 4,700 heart attacks, 130,000 cases of aggravated asthma, 5,700 hospital and emergency room visits, 6,300 cases of acute bronchitis, 140,000 cases of respiratory symptoms, and 540,000 days when people miss work. My Republican colleagues want to do away with those health benefits and, instead, permit favored industries to pollute more. Mr. Speaker, the second measure combines two bills: H.R. 1917, the BRICK Act; and H.R. 453, the Relief from New Source Performance Standards Act. The BRICK Act unjustifiably delays reductions in toxic air pollution from brick manufacturers by allowing them to continue to pollute until all their lawsuits are exhausted. The bill throws out existing judicial process by providing a blanket extension for any compliance deadline, regardless of the merits of the case. Under well established legal norms, the court of appeals for the district circuit may stay a rule during litigation if it finds that the party seeking the stay has demonstrated that there is a likelihood of success on the merits, the prospect of irreparable harm to the party requesting the stay, and, most importantly, whether granting the stay is in the public interest. To date, not one of the industry litigants have even asked the court to stay the Brick and Structural Clay Products rule. Not one. Presumably it is because they recognize that they cannot meet this legal standard. Mr. Speaker, the existing judicial process is the appropriate method to seek a stay of the rule and is the preferable method to unnecessary congressional intervention proposed by the BRICK Act. This brings me to H.R. 453, the Relief from New Source Performance Standards Act, which delays cleaner burning wood stoves until 2023, on top of the 5 years manufacturers already had to comply, exposing communities to additional years of unhealthy fine particle pollution, carbon monoxide, and volatile organic compounds. In 2015, the EPA strengthened the pollution control requirements for new residential wood heaters. The new standards would cut fine particle pollution and volatile organic compounds from new wood heaters by almost 70 percent and will cut carbon monoxide pollution by 62 percent. The EPA even included provisions in the rule to help manufacturers achieve the new standards, giving the manufacturers 5 years to comply. Mr. Speaker, these pollutants combine with other pollutants in the air from smog, black carbon, and benzene, harming the health of the American people, particularly our kids and seniors, who will have to pay for these special interest breaks with their health and, in some cases, with their lives. These three bills sacrifice Americans' health with additional years of unnecessary pollution. Mr. Speaker, it is as disappointing as it is frustrating that we come here today to debate bills that will increase pollution in our country and also have very little hope--let me underscore that: very little hope--of ever becoming law. We have real work to do in this place, and these bills are not that work. This body must turn its attention to finally addressing the gun violence epidemic that has taken over our country. Most recently at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, in a district adjacent to the district that I am privileged to serve, less than a month ago, a 19-year-old legally purchased a semiautomatic AR-15 and used it to methodically murder 14 of his former classmates and three teachers. What was the response of this body? Well, we did prayers and thoughts, which is good. But did my Republican colleagues bring to the floor a bill that would ban assault weapons? Did they bring to the floor legislation to close the gun show loophole? Did they bring to the floor legislation that would raise the minimum purchase age for rifles? Or mandatory comprehensive background checks for gun buyers and ban bump stocks? Or allow the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to study gun violence? No, Mr. Speaker. Instead this body offered, as I said, its thoughts and prayers. And I have said it before and I will say it again today: those who stand in the way of legislation that will address our country's gun violence epidemic are increasingly culpable for its needless continuation. So what we choose to talk about is pollution. What we should be talking about is the gun epidemic, and I will get to DACA a little bit later in my closing. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, 6 months ago, Donald John Trump decided to end the DACA program, a program which gave hundreds of thousands of hardworking young people hope for the future. He gave Congress until March 5--that was 2 days ago--to pass a bill. Since then, House Democrats have tried 23 times to pass bipartisan legislation to fix this problem. Donald John Trump even tweeted: ``Total inaction on DACA by Dems. Where are you?'' Well, Mr. President, where we are is right here, waiting for this deal that you say can be made. Yet, on 23 occasions, it was our friends on the other side of the aisle who refused to make a deal and rejected even considering the bipartisan Dream Act that was deadlined by you, Donald John Trump, on March 5. We need to address this vital issue now. Approximately 120 Dreamers lose their status each day. Over 22,000 have lost their status since the administration ended the program. Mr. Speaker, I implore my colleagues: Let's do something now to lift the cloud that hangs over these young people who are American in every way except on paper. Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I am going to offer for the 24th time an amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 3440, the Dream Act. This bipartisan, bicameral legislation will help solve the problem created by Donald John Trump's decision to end the DACA program. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Costa), my good friend, a member of the Agriculture and Natural Resources Committees of this Congress, who will discuss our proposal.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I have watched this last year as members of the Republican majority worked diligently to eliminate Federal environmental regulations that serve to keep the American people safe from harmful toxins in their air and water. I couldn't help but be amused by my colleague on the right's comments at the end that we will be using sticks instead of bricks. Very clever. But the real truth of the matter is, in certain parts of the world--and I would urge him to visit some of them--there are examples of things other than brick for construction. I have no quarrel with the brick industry. I just urge--and in many instances they are already doing it--that they do everything they can not to pollute the environment. I have watched members in the Republican majority work relentlessly for special interest groups instead of working for all of the American people. I have watched members of the Republican majority put the wish list of the powerful corporate gun lobby ahead of the safety of the American people. On Monday, we all watched a self-imposed Republican deadline slip by, to the detriment of thousands upon thousands of young people in our country who we have identified as Dreamers, young people who know no other country as home than the United States of America. Every day of inaction on the part of my friends across the aisle means another day that families are needlessly and cruelly made to live under the threat of being torn asunder. My colleague, Lois Frankel, and I were at a men's club before a couple of hundred of men in the Valencia Cove in Boynton Beach. The question was put to both of us: Why do we support illegal immigrants in this country? We tried to make the distinction for him with reference to Dreamers and the fact that all of these young people were brought here against their volition by their parents. So it is the Dreamers that we are supporting. I think he finally understood the importance of our doing comprehensive immigration reform in this country. Democrats have offered to bring the Dream Act to the floor now 24 times. We are going to give them one more chance. We have done it 23, and every single time this effort has been blocked by the majority. To address my friend who correctly cited that we were bringing this up: It is not so much to change the topic of the day. We don't have that prerogative. But we do have embedded in this rule the prerogative to bring a previous question, and that can be on any subject that we choose. What we choose to do is to prioritize things that we consider to be important. It would not have blocked this particular measure. But the fact is, enough is enough. The President says he wants to fix this problem. The Speaker says he wants to fix this problem. We on this side of the aisle clearly want to fix this problem. So let's do it now. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule, on the previous question, and on the underlying bills. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, as the Ranking Democratic Member of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (U.S. Helsinki Commission), I rise today to denounce the human rights abuses taking place across the globe. In particular, I call attention to the ongoing Syrian Civil War. Since 2011, it is estimated that almost 500,000 Syrians have been killed with millions more displaced, creating a refugee crisis across Europe and the Middle East. On March 15th, we will sadly mark the seventh anniversary of the Syrian Civil War, which is one of the bloodiest wars of the last 70 years. I traveled to Syria in January 2010 and personally met with President Bashar aI-Assad. As I pressed him on the importance of honoring the right of his people to exercise their civil liberties and fundamental freedoms, I knew immediately that he would not give in. Many others, like me, recognized this long before civil war erupted. And yet, years have passed without the necessary effort by the international community to stop the violence. On May 28, 2013, I sent a letter to former President Barack Obama and Ambassador Susan Rice, urging them to support imposing a no-fly zone over Syria, particularly in light of the continued indiscriminate shelling of innocent civilians and the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime. I renewed my calls for a no-fly zone to President Obama again on September 25, 2015. Mr. Speaker, what we have witnessed since the start of this civil war is indiscriminate, brutal attacks against civilians. The international community must no longer sit idly by and let more families be torn apart and more civilians become refugees. According to the United Nations (UN), nearly 3 million Syrian children have lived their entire lives gripped by civil war. This is absolutely outrageous, and something needs to happen, and it needs to happen now. Mr. Speaker, it has been seven years, let me repeat myself, seven years, since this civil war began. This crisis, in which millions of innocent Syrians find themselves today, demands our full attention and fervent commitment to creating a strategy that will bring an end to the deplorable conditions facing the Syrian people. The need for immediate and strong action remains. With each passing day, the violence has grown more sectarian, militarized, and radicalized at the cost of innocent Syrian lives.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, in a few moments I will manage today's rules; but right now, I would like to thank the staff of the Rules Committee on both sides for the hard work that they do, especially the staff director for the Democrats, Don Sisson. I would like to also take a moment to recognize Ms. Kira Sisson, a senior from Albion High School in western New York. Kira is here with us today, along with classmates from her school. Don is her uncle. Today we will not address Dreamers. Today we will not address the gun epidemic. I encourage all adult Americans to work with the students on March 24 that are coming here to Washington in a march for what they describe as our future. I hope adult Americans will encourage massive attendance at this march, and that this Congress will take action to abate the gun epidemic.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, it is my great privilege to rise today to honor Ms. Francesca Alfano, for her outstanding community service work in her hometown of West Palm Beach, Florida. Ms. Alfano was one of five students selected by Florida's Hometown U.S.A. Program, Inc. this year. She is a high school junior at Alexander W. Dreyfoos School of the Arts, a public high school located in West Palm Beach, Florida. She is the daughter of Monique McCall and Gianpaolo Alfano. Throughout this year, Ms . Alfano will proudly represent West Palm Beach as she travels to visit nursing homes, children's hospitals, Veteran's hospitals, charity events, and other activities throughout the State of Florida. She certainly reflects the values of Florida's Hometown U.S.A. Program, Inc., which encourages and supports students who have a desire to volunteer. There is truly no limit to the difference students like Ms. Alfano can make in the lives of their neighbors with the support of organizations like Florida's Hometown U.S.A., Inc. Florida's Hometown U.S.A. Program, Inc. is a non-profit educational youth organization, which has received Disney's Helping Kids Shine Award, Disney's VoluntEAR of the Year, the Governor's Points of Light Award from former Governor Jeb Bush, and the national President's Daily Points of Light Award from former President George W. Bush. Mr. Speaker, I am proud that Ms. Francesca Alfano represents my district. She is a student and community member whom we can all admire and respect. I commend her for her deep commitment to volunteer work, and wish her the best as she pursues her high school diploma and beyond.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Ms. Holly Adams. Holly has been an intern in my Washington, D.C. Congressional office since the beginning of January, through the Uni-Capitol Washington Internship Programme (UCWIP). For the past 19 years, the program has paired students from nearly a dozen partner universities in Australia with offices on Capitol Hill, giving hundreds of students the opportunity to work in the halls of Congress. I have been honored to host a number of extremely talented interns through the UCWIP. Holly is, of course, no exception. Holly is currently enrolled at Deakin University in Geelong, Victoria, where she is pursuing a Bachelor of Laws Degree and a Bachelor of International Studies Degree: As a student of International studies, she has already travelled extensively, participating in international politics study tours in Boston, Philadelphia, Washington, New York, as well as Tokyo. Holly has proven herself to be a very hardworking and dedicated individual. Throughout her internship, she has interacted extensively with my constituents, by drafting correspondence, helping to address questions, comments, and concerns for those contacting or visiting my office. She has also attended a number of hearings and briefings on a wide range of topics facing our nation and world. ' Indeed, Holly proved herself to be so capable, she prepared a FY2019 Programmatic Request letter for circulation throughout the U.S. House of Representatives on rail safety. It is no wonder that she was chosen by her classmates to give the ``valedictory'' speech at her program's closing reception. Last year, Holly was accepted to study international human rights at Kings College, London. I have no doubt that she will do great as she continues her studies. I am proud to congratulate Holly on all of her achievements, and to thank her for everything that she has done for my office, my district, state, and our country. She has a very bright and exciting future ahead of her, and I wish her the very best.