Alcee Hastings

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I lift from it one paragraph that says: The holidays are a time to reflect on how fortunate we are and help those in need. In that vein, the Congressional Black Caucus will not support a continuing resolution unless CHIP is reauthorized and fully funded for 5 years and community health centers are reauthorized and fully funded for 2 years. Mr. Speaker, this morning in the Rules Committee, beginning at 8--I might add, we were noticed that we were going to meet last night at 10, but we did not meet, and then we came in early this morning--the distinguished minority leader and the minority whip, along with the leader of the Hispanic Caucus, appeared and stayed for 2\1/2\ hours discussing the fact that we are leaving things on the table, but, more specifically, addressing the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. But let's talk about the things that we are leaving on the table: We are doing nothing about long-term flood insurance. We are doing nothing about Perkins loans that have expired. We are not funding or addressing the opioid epidemic. We are not offering legislation to help save failing pensions in this country. I talked with some teamsters from Michigan the other day with tears in their eyes concerned about their pensions. We are doing nothing with reference to long-term, bipartisan reauthorizing for CHIP and community health centers. We are doing nothing about the FISA reauthorization. We are not raising the defense and non-defense spending caps. We are leaving Medicare extension on the table. And that is just a to-do list that is partial that we are not addressing. But let me get in the weeds on something that the public doesn't quite understand. 196 people appeared right over here and signed what is called a discharge petition to bring DACA to the floor; 34 Members of the House of Representatives sent a letter to the Speaker. If you combine those numbers, you have 218. My distinguished Rules Committee chair and I had a colloquy this morning where we discussed that matter.

Mr. HASTINGS. And the fact of the matter is I believe that it would pass if it were put on the floor. But do you know what is more important? We had 58 closed rules in this Congress, completely closed. And to put that into context, we averaged 25 closed rules a year in the 4 years the Democrats were in charge. The Dream Act is a perfect example of this. As Members are well aware, we have tried time and time again to get a floor vote on the Dream Act. Mr. Speaker, we all know that this CR is the last train leaving town. You have given millionaires and billionaires help. Let's give the DREAMers a Merry Christmas.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I witnessed, as did all of us, the jubilation of my friends, the Republican majority, in passing the tax cut measure that had been advocated as tax reform for a substantial period of time, but, finally, they did admit that it was a tax cut. I rise here today just to lay down a marker. I have said, as have many of my colleagues, that what we witnessed is the beginning of what ultimately will allow for us to address the entitlements in this country. Many of us know that the deficit that the tax cuts create are going to allow, some time during the course of next year or shortly after the election, us to begin discussing Medicare and Medicaid. I think that is a mistake, and I want that to be recognized.

Mr. HASTINGS

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 thank my friend, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Buck), for yielding me the customary 30 minutes of debate. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, when the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action came before Congress, I made my objections very clear. I believed then, as I do now, that the Iran deal too quickly removed the sanctions that brought Iran to the negotiating table in the first place, allowing Iran to remain a nuclear threshold state. However, like it or not, the JCPOA is now law, and it will be wrong to undermine it for purely political reasons. Unfortunately, that is, in my opinion, what my Republican colleagues are doing here today. This is not the way to handle our country's foreign policy. Mr. Speaker, the most important question that you need to ask yourself at this time does not have to do with the substance of the legislation this rule provides for, but, rather, why on Earth this body is wasting what precious legislative time remains to bring these bills to the floor today. The checklist of important items that need to be addressed is long and time is short. Thanks to the inability of my Republican colleagues to govern, even within their own conference, we face the specter of yet another government shutdown next week. The Band-Aid that Republicans came up with last week to provide funding for the Children's Health Insurance Program, which insures some 9 million children, expires at the end of the year. Utah, Colorado, Arizona, California, Ohio, Minnesota, the District of Columbia, and Oregon are just some of the States that have had to inform families that CHIP funding is nearing its end. Why is this? Historically, the Children's Health Insurance Program funding has been a largely bipartisan effort. And why shouldn't it be? We are simply talking about helping to cover roughly 9 million low- income children and pregnant women. It has been over 2 months since CHIP's authorization lapsed, and it is far past time for a sensible solution to this problem. Does today's legislation solve this issue? No, it does not. We also have 800,000-plus DREAMers waiting for word from this Republican- controlled Congress. Will my friends across the aisle allow these fine young people to remain in the only country they have ever known as home? Will you let those DREAMers who have served this country bravely stay in this country so that they may start their own families here in the United States, start their own businesses, and go to college? The idea that my friends would drag their feet on such an issue, let alone actually allow DREAMers to be deported, is anathema to what this country stands for, and it will darken the beacon this country has been for millions of people since our founding: a place where those of differing backgrounds but dedicated to freedom and the rule of law come and make a life for themselves. Mr. Speaker, Republicans control the House; they control the Senate; they control the White House; and what has that control translated into for the American people? Absolutely nothing at this point. In fact, it is looking increasingly more like the first year of a unified Republican government in over a decade will end with nothing getting done. In an attempt to distract from their failures, Republicans have taken to blaming, and I quote them, ``obstructionist Democrats.'' They point to this side of the aisle as the cause of their governing woes. That is a neat trick, but the American people are not going to fall for it, and I think you saw that last night in Alabama where new stars fell on Alabama. It wasn't the Democrats who tried to take healthcare away from 32 million people. It was Republicans. Thank goodness they failed. It is not the Democrats who are trying to give the wealthy and rich corporations a tax break on the backs of hardworking Americans. It is the Republicans. I hope this equally misguided effort likewise fails. I have some advice for my Republican friends. If, like this side of the aisle, you spent more time working on policies that help the American people instead of the wealthy and rich corporations that are doing just fine, you would likely see more legislative success. Democrats remain ready to work in a bipartisan way to accomplish all that remains left to do this year. We are ready to fund the government and provide for smart investments for the future of our country. We are ready to pull the hundreds of thousands of DREAMers out of unnecessary limbo and provide them with the status they deserve. We are ready to provide the funding and authorization needed to give millions of low- income children the health insurance they need. The list goes on and on. But, Mr. Speaker, if Republicans continue to not even allow Democrats in the room to address these issues and if they continue to burn legislative time on the bills we have before us today, then it won't be just the Republican majority that pays the price. It will be the American people. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am expecting another speaker. If we defeat the previous question, I am going to offer an amendment to the rule to bring up the bipartisan bicameral bill H.R. 3440, the Dream Act. Just last week, a group of 34 of my Republican colleagues sent a letter to Speaker Ryan urging a vote before the year's end on legislation that would protect the DACA recipients. This means, if we defeat the previous question and bring up the Dream Act, the bill would garner enough bipartisan support to pass the House today. Mr. Speaker, I ask how much longer will this body be complicit in the Trump administration's assault on DREAMers? It is time we listen to the vast majority of Americans and this body and act to protect these courageous young people. 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, when my speaker arrives, I will allow Mrs. Torres to discuss this matter further. Mr. Speaker, at this time, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I would advise my good friend that I have no further speakers and I will be prepared to close when he is prepared. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, continuing, we are faced, as I said earlier, with another government shutdown. The National Flood Insurance Program, which is particularly critical to those of us in coastal States, is set to expire. The Republican Band-Aid to keep the Children's Health Insurance Program funded will run out, leaving millions of children without the healthcare they need. The authorization of an important intelligence tool to keep this country safe is set to expire, and millions of Americans in California, Texas, Florida, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands desperately wait to find out if they will receive the resources they need to recover from the devastating hurricanes and the wildfires that we have seen this year and that are continuing in California. I have said repeatedly that FEMA is not only dealing with hurricanes and floods, they are dealing with tornadoes and with all sorts of matters, and the wildfires manifestly have kept them occupied over the course of time. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Torres), my good friend, as I previously noted, to discuss the proposal that I spoke of with reference to the DREAMers.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, as we approach the end of 2017, and with just a few legislative days left, the Republican majority is focusing on the wrong things. Plain and simple, the bills before us today are more evidence of that. Over the next couple of weeks, we face a terrifyingly long to-do list, the outcome of which will affect every single American. Let me be very clear. My friend from Maine and my friend from Texas, my friend from Maine, especially, passionately put forward significant matters having to do with Iran. My recollection is that I, for one, as did many members of the Democratic Party, voted for the transparency that he calls for and are likely to do so again. While this is an important matter, it is not nearly as critical at this time that we be occupying this kind of legislative time. The simple fact of the matter is we could have put this on the suspension calendar and not been exercising ourselves in the Rules Committee, occupying legislative time that could be addressing the Flood Insurance Program, the Children's Health Insurance Program, and intelligence tools that keep this country safe that are about to expire. We could have been addressing the hurricane relief for Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and southwest Louisiana. We could have been addressing the fires in California, Oregon, Montana, and other areas of the country. We could have been addressing the flood in Texas that devastated portions of that area, as well as, during that same period of time, we had tornadoes and other issues indicating how critical it is that we support these matters. We could have been dealing with a real infrastructure measure. Everybody in this country knows that our roads and bridges are in despicable shape at this point, and it is not as if we do not have the ability to do something about it. We don't have the political will. So we are wasting legislative time here today with these daunting tasks before us, and this is what the Republican majority chooses to focus on: trying to pass a tax bill, for example, that gives most of the benefits to the wealthy and rich corporations while adding over more than $1 trillion to the deficit. I have said before: Look out. When we finish whatever this tax bill is--and now it is being called what it is, a tax cut and not tax reform that is needed in this country. When we finish with that, the next words out of many of my colleagues' mouths next year are going to be, ``We need to address the entitlements,'' meaning Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid. I can assure you that that is what we will hear from my former deficit hawk friends who are now in charge of this country. Mr. Speaker, I urge my Republican friends, for the sake of the American people, to abandon this reckless tact and return to regular order. That is something that we are not doing and have not done. We have had more closed rules in this session of Congress than in the history of the United States Congress. They need to work with Democrats in a bipartisan way. I think Alabama told us that last night, and I hope that that message is pervasive and allows for us in this body, as well as in the other body, to understand the importance of everybody, all of these brilliant people that Americans sent here to work, to work together to solve many of the issues of this country and address its needs in a meaningful way, not the needs of the wealthy few. Given everything there is to do, anything less is abdication of our duty as legislators. 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, I rise today to honor the life and legacy Mrs. Nezzie O. Marion of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, who passed away at the age of 102 on October 14, 2017. Born on May 15, 1915 to Mr. & Mrs. Allanza and Katie Oglesby, Mrs. Marion was Georgia-born and raised. Married to the late Mr. Willie Preston Marion in 1937, the young couple moved to Fort Lauderdale in 1940. Mrs. Marion's spiritual life began at a young age. She was a faithful member of the New Mount Olive Baptist Church for 77 years, where she served on the Usher Board and the Pulpit Aide Ministry. Mrs. Marion led her family by example as a strong Christian loving mother, embodying what it means to be a true servant to her community. Fond memories of her will forever remain with her four children: Willie Marion, Polly Harden, Lonzie Marion, and Beverly Hardemon; two sisters: Mary Caldwell and Annie Wallace; eleven grandchildren, nineteen great grandchildren, and eight great-great grandchildren, along with a host of nieces, nephews, cousins, and other loved ones. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Nezzie O. Marion will be remembered by the many people she touched in her 102 years of life. She was truly a blessing to the Fort Lauderdale community. I am so pleased to honor her life and legacy. She will be dearly missed.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of Mrs. Annie Jackson of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, who passed away at the age of 99 on October 27, 2017. Mrs. Jackson was born in Waynesboro, Georgia and received her education in the Georgia State School system. She held a variety of jobs in her lifetime and retired from the Broward County School System, where she worked for over 29 years. At the age of fourteen, Mrs. Jackson's spiritual life began at the Third Chapel Church in Midville, Georgia. She later joined and continued to serve at New Hope Baptist Church, until her health began to fail. Married to the late Mr. Jackson, Mrs. Jackson spent her time ministering to the needs of her church, family, and community. Mrs. Jackson led her family by example as a strong Christian loving mother, and endless server of her community. Fond memories of her will forever remain with her son Rayford Smith; her sisters Florence Smith and Mae Julian Smith; four grand-children; three great grandchildren; two great-great grandchildren; a great-great grandniece; her caretaker and host of other relatives and friends. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Annie Jackson will be remembered by the many people she touched in her 99 years of life. She was truly a shining star of the Fort Lauderdale community. I am so grateful to honor her life and legacy. She will be missed tremendously.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, my friend from Iowa, Mr. King, had two amendments that were rejected last night in the Rules Committee. I join him in saying that we need to get back to regular order. Mr. Speaker, would you be so kind as to inform me and my friend from Georgia how much time we have remaining?

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Georgia for yielding me the customary 30 minutes for debate. Mr. Speaker, this is the 54th closed rule brought by the Republican majority to the floor. Yesterday, in the Rules Committee, I pointed that out, as well as the fact that there were 25 Members of this body who offered amendments that were not made in order. Significant numbers of them were germane, and they were bipartisan. We cannot continue to ignore the importance of allowing full membership to participate on behalf of their constituents. Today's bill combines two bills: one, a bipartisan supported approach to strengthening background checks; the other, a disgraceful handout to the powerful gun lobby and gun manufacturers. I also pointed out last night that the NRA, in many respects, is two bodies: those at the top and the rank-and-file members. Many of the rank-and-file members, for example, support universal background checks that we could be talking about in this measure if an amendment seeking to have that made in order had been made in order. A month ago yesterday, this country grieved with our brothers and sisters in Sutherland Springs, Texas, as they reeled from one of the worst mass shootings this country has ever suffered. A man walked into a house of worship as churchgoers prayed and sprayed bullets throughout the building. He killed an 18-month-old baby; he killed eight members of one family; he killed the pastor's 14-year-old daughter--a total of 26 people--and he was able to do so in a matter of minutes. We learned later that this man had served in the Air Force and, while there, had been court-martialed for committing acts of domestic violence against his wife and infant child. As part of his sentence, he was prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms. Tragically, this information was never put into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, and we call that NICS. He was able to pass a background check and come into possession of several guns he would use to murder 26 innocent people in Sutherland Springs, Texas, on November 5, 2017. This tragic event is instructive to the bill brought by us today. Clearly, our background check system must be strengthened. The problems with our background check system are more grave than we previously could even imagine, as recent reports indicate that the FBI has sought to retrieve guns from thousands of people that the background check system should have blocked from buying a weapon but who ultimately were allowed to do so. I think we can all agree that, if we have a system through which people like the murderer in Sutherland Springs can buy a gun or one in which thousands of people who should have never been allowed to buy a gun in the first place are able to do so, then we really have no system at all. Today's bill, in part, would have been a good first step in addressing those weaknesses. But, Mr. Speaker, my Republican colleagues, in a fashion so common for their majority of this Congress, have decided to sabotage a commonsense, bipartisan bill by combining it with a reckless piece of legislation that will allow guns to be carried all over this country. Let us remember that the gunman in Texas was a known domestic abuser. He abused his wife and he abused his child. Under today's concealed carry bill, all we would have to do is change ``wife'' to ``girlfriend,'' and in some States he would be able to obtain a concealed carry permit for a handgun. Should today's bill become law, he would then be allowed to bring that concealed handgun into your State, even if your State does not allow convicted domestic abusers to have concealed weapons. For example, Mr. Speaker, the State that I am privileged and proud to represent, Florida, stops abusive dating partners from carrying loaded, hidden handguns in public. However, my friend from Georgia's State, right over the border, does not have that same restriction. Under this legislation, Florida would be mandated to allow abusive dating partners with concealed permits from Georgia to carry their weapons in Florida. Under H.R. 38, violent offenders and people with no firearms safety training would be able to carry hidden loaded guns even if they could not otherwise legally purchase a gun in the State. Footnote right there: like my friend from Georgia, I, too, have a concealed carry permit in the State of Florida, and I am a firm believer in the Second Amendment and a person's right to own a weapon, but I also think we should be discussing today matters such as the bump stock, and there were amendments that dealt with that that were not made in order. I think we should be discussing assault weapons in the hands of the public. I, for the life of me, do not understand how anybody, other than people in law enforcement and the military, need an AK-47 or a multiple-firing gun. Mr. Speaker, this idea that we are presented with here is so terrible, so anathema to common sense and decency, that one has to wonder aloud, where did such an idea come from. Well, we have an answer, and it is probably not too surprising. Today's concealed carry bill is brought to you by the Republican Party via their very influential friends in the powerful gun lobby. Footnote right there: the gun lobby does the bidding of gun manufacturers, who benefit immensely. Why don't we just pass a mandate that every woman, man, and child in America must buy a gun, and maybe that would satisfy or satiate gun manufacturers with reference to how they continuously cause us to do things that are not commonsense matters as it pertains to guns. In fact, this bill, which will allow domestic abusers to carry concealed weapons across State lines, is the top priority for the gun lobby. Well, happy holidays, fellows, but we here on this side of the aisle are going to do everything that we can to make sure you don't get it. When this matter gets to the other body, I can assure my friend from Georgia, and all of the speakers on either side today, that it is going nowhere. So what are we doing by bringing this measure in the first place? Is it a distraction? Is it an absolute necessity that we do this? Mr. Speaker, just so we are crystal clear, what is happening right now in the people's House, let me reiterate, just over 2 months after a gunman killed 58 people and wounded nearly 550 people in Las Vegas, and just over a month after another gunman killed 26 people in their church as they prayed, this Republican majority, in response to those atrocities, saw fit to bring to the floor a bill that would allow violent offenders to carry concealed weapons all across the country. Let that sink in. This isn't the only time that we have done something along these lines. After Sandy Hook, after children were killed and their teachers were killed, we did nothing. After Virginia Tech; where people were killed in significant numbers at a military base; in Colorado in a theater; in Orlando, Florida, in a nightclub, repeatedly we have seen these multiple shootings, or mass shootings as they are referred to, where three or more people are killed, 330 times this year alone we have had mass shootings, yet we come here with a bill talking about carrying concealed weapons. Every day in America, 93 people on average are killed with a gun, seven of them children, but in the midst of this gun violence epidemic, and that is what it is, what do my Republican colleagues do? Did they bring to the floor legislation to close the gun show loophole, or did they close loopholes to prevent domestic abusers from purchasing guns, or are they considering a ban on so-called bump stocks that do turn semiautomatic weapons into illegal automatic guns, most recently used to rain carnage down on innocent concertgoers in Las Vegas? One country music singer pointed out that his band had legal guns, but they were afraid to bring them out in Las Vegas because the authorities couldn't ferret out who was doing the shooting. We had that in a Wal-Mart that all of us saw posted, the shooting where people with guns caused confusion among the police. A footnote there: this bill proposes to study the issue of bump stocks. Mr. Speaker, we don't need a study. As my colleague, Congresswoman Dina Titus, who represents the city of Las Vegas, said last night at the Rules Committee, the only study we need is to go look at the 58 crosses in her district. That is what bump stocks do. That is your study. Did my Republican colleagues bring to the floor a bill that would have addressed any of these commonsense proposals? Of course not, because even though those proposals have the support of an overwhelming majority of American people when it comes to guns, that is not what motivates my Republican friends. What they care about is the gun lobby and gun manufacturers and their wish list. That is why we are here today. Mr. Speaker, my friends on the other side of the aisle like to compare a concealed carry permit to a driver's license, but let me set the record straight, because that comparison is nothing but a gross exercise in false equivalency. A driver's license must meet stringent, uniform Federal criteria established under the REAL ID Act. This includes a photo of the license holder and data including their date of birth and their State of residence. There are absolutely no such uniform standards when it comes to concealed carry permits. In some States, they could look like a paper library card. In others, they may have photo identification. There is no national database, no hotline that contains permit information from all 50 States, so law enforcement would be in a position of having to find each individual issuing agency to verify that a concealed carry permit is valid, and that is impossible. My Republican colleagues often tout their support for our first responders. Well, I urge them to heed the warnings of those brave men and women. Major law enforcement groups understand how dangerous this bill would be, and that is why so many of them oppose what the majority is trying to do here today. Organizations like the Major Cities Chiefs Association, Police Foundation, and Police Executive Research Forum all stand in strong opposition to today's bill. To make matters worse, this piece of legislation even exposes members of the law enforcement community to personal litigation if they mistakenly question someone's ability to carry a concealed weapon. Mr. Speaker, this is not just some small issue limiting a law enforcement officer's ability to carry out their job; this limit on challenging concealed carry permits will cost lives. In fact, a recent study conducted by Stanford University found that when States weaken law enforcement's authority to deny a permit to those who pose a danger to the community, violent crime goes up by 13 to 15 percent. This research is clear, convincing, and not at all difficult to fathom. When you lift limits on who can carry a concealed weapon, gun-related crime goes up. It is that simple. Mr. Speaker, among the many important issues this body must address, the following stand out: as of this moment, we are roughly 72 hours away from a government shutdown; we have 800,000 persons whom we refer to as DREAMers who continue to wait for us to do the right thing and bring them fully into the only country that they know as home; and we have 9 million children and their parents facing an unconscionable lapse in lifesaving funding for the incredibly important Children's Health Insurance Program. Given all that, what does the Republican-controlled Congress do? They bring a bill to the floor that will make it easier for domestic abusers to cross State lines with concealed weapons. This is shameful and no way to run a government. Last night, I thought actively too long trying to go to sleep about the acronym GOP, Grand Old Party, the conservatives, the States' rights conservatives, the fiscal conservatives who are about to dump serious debt on our children should be called now by their acronym, rather than GOP, in light of the choice that they make with reference to guns, perhaps GOP should stand for ``Guns Over People.'' Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Jayapal), a distinguished member of the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel), a very good friend of mine.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), my good friend, who is a member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva) to discuss our proposal.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), my good friend.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moulton).

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin), my good friend