Alcee Hastings

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor 41 high school seniors from Florida's 20th Congressional district, who have chosen to enlist in the United States Armed Forces. Of these 41 fine young people, 14 have joined the United States Army, to include: William Bethel, Cameron Clayton, Javier Hernandez, Cassidy Anderson, Mack Cromer II, Derly Dormeus, Benjamin Gacel, Clayton Gibson, Ryan Golubovic, Tyler Grove, Ryan Julien, Corey Pritchett, Sean Riley and Julio Alvarez. Seventeen have joined the United States Marine Corps, to include: Jason Marquez, Cristal Verdugo, Patrick Rhoden, Maikel Suarez, Kathy Sylvestre, Henry Rivera, Albert Londono, Lindel Coffie, Maya Colson, Weston Boyd, Nicolas Franco, Errohl Cruz, John Osegueda, Jonathan Thompson, Caitlin Silva, Melissa Edwards and Pierre Chery. Five have joined the United States Navy, to include: Jade Apolo- Hecker, Miguel Scott, Brittany Stewart, Shinequah Stone and Ofelia Velasquez. Four have joined the United States Army National Guard, to include: Cobe Pate, Adamary Hernandez, Melissa Gutierrez and Moises Fernandez. Thanks to the dedication of patriots such as these, we are able to meet here today, in the United States House of Representatives, and openly debate the best solutions to the diverse issues that confront our nation. On behalf of myself and all my constituents in Florida's 20th Congressional district, I thank them for their service. I wish them the very best of luck now and in their future.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and work of my good friend and a most dedicated public servant, Dr. Abraham ``Abe'' Fischler, who, sadly, passed away on April 3, 2017. He was 89 years old. For 22 years, Abe Fischler was President of Nova Southeastern University (NSU). There were only 17 students enrolled when Abe joined NSU. He became President in 1970 and oversaw NSU's growth into the large and well-respected institution that it is today. Abe was born in Brooklyn on January 21, 1928. He was a member of the ``Greatest Generation,'' serving in the United States Navy during the Second World War. He married his beloved wife of 68 years, Shirley, in 1949 and in 1951, graduated with a degree in Biochemistry from the City College of New York, eventually earning a Doctorate in Education in 1959 from Columbia University. Among the many innovations Dr. Fischler brought to NSU was the development of a long-distance learning program. Abe thought there should be a way for professionals who wanted to pursue advanced degrees to do so without having to leave their jobs. We didn't have the prevalence of internet technologies we do now at the time, so Abe would actually have the university fly adjunct instructors to various spots around the country to teach small groups of students outside of regular business hours. At the time, this was very unusual, but today, long distance education is both common and expected at most institutions of higher learning. Abe Fischler was one of the first to do it. In 1992, Abe retired from NSU, but he did not spend his retirement idly watching the world go by. By 1994, he was back in the thick of it, and got elected to the Broward County School Board, where he would serve for four years. He continued to be involved in educational issues, as well as his involvement with Nova Southeastern as President Emeritus until his passing. Dr. and Shirley Fischler have four children, four grandchildren and one great-grandson. My own son holds a Doctorate from, and is part of, the Nova Southeastern Family I am honored to have worked with Abe Fischler and to have represented him in Congress. He was a wonderful friend and will be dearly missed.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I thank the gentleman for yielding me the customary 30 minutes for debate. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to debate a rule for a piece of legislation that many on this side of the aisle do not necessarily have a serious issue with. The attempt here today is to ensure that a thing that is already happening continues to happen. I suppose that, the next time we meet, we will take up a bill that declares that the Moon is not the Sun. Doing so is a complete waste of time, but that does not seem to necessarily be dispositive when deciding whether we should legislate on an issue these days. Look, I get it. My friends across the aisle took one on the chin the other week when their Affordable Care Act repeal bill--a bill they spent 17 days working on, even though they had 7 long years to prepare for it--went down in flames in a most public and spectacular fashion, and now they need some time to dust themselves off and become reoriented. The problem is, while they are doing that, while they are recovering from the miserable failure that was their attempt to strip 24 million Americans of their health care, they are burning valuable time--time that should be used to tackle more pressing issues like addressing the debt ceiling and fixing our crumbling infrastructure. Let me also take this opportunity to remind my Republican colleagues that, while we spend our time here today debating these filler bills, there are only 7 legislative days, including today, remaining before the government runs out of funding. But are we tackling any of these importance issues or ensuring the government remains open? No. Instead, we have before us a bill that addresses an issue that is not an issue. On top of that, this legislation was actually supposed to be the third bucket of their three-bucket strategy to end health care for millions of Americans. We saw how sturdy the first bucket was a couple of weeks ago. In fact, the bucket we are talking about today was actually referred to as the ``sucker's bucket'' by Senator Cruz. That is not exactly a glowing endorsement. Indeed, some, like Senator Cotton, have referred to all this bucket talk as simply a bunch of political spin. Whatever it is, it is certainly a bucket that has a hole in it. In all of the uncertainty facing my Republican friends, one thing becomes crystal clear: they have no plan whatsoever to help working Americans achieve the American Dream. They are adrift, in general, and most particularly when it comes to health care. What do they really want? At first, it was repeal, then it was repeal and replace, then it was repeal and delay, followed finally by access to coverage, and would you believe another one: patient-centered. That is repeal, repeal and replace, repeal and delay, access to coverage, and patient-centered. We still don't have a plan. Then it turned toward a three-bucket strategy that makes little to any sense, let alone to the American people but even to powerful elected leaders in the Republican Party. At the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, do you know what all this talk was? Exactly what Senator Cotton said: nothing but political spin. My fear is that it will all come down to whatever it takes to win in the eyes of the other side of the aisle, regardless of the consequences to the American people. While we were told there was no plan B, we now hear there is a plan B. Donald John Trump ``doesn't lose,'' and doesn't like to lose. So I guess they are going to pass something, even if it is just this bill that does absolutely nothing, just so our Republican friends can say they did something. I am sure Donald John Trump will tweet about this great victory. Mr. Speaker, Republicans must end their secretive plan B option and embrace the opportunity to do what is right, which is to pursue a path that strengthens and builds upon the strong foundation that has been set by the Affordable Care Act. Democrats stand ready to work with my friends in the Republican Party on this task to continue to provide affordable coverage to millions of American citizens. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, yesterday, Donald John Trump signed into law a measure that eliminates Americans' internet privacy. With Trump's signature, internet service providers will now be able to sell your personal information to the highest bidder. Mr. Speaker, we stand here ready to fight for the privacy of the American people. If we defeat the previous question, I am going to offer an amendment to the rule to bring up legislation which would reinstate the Federal Communications Commission's internet privacy rule. 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 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Rosen), a member of the Armed Services and Science, Space, and Technology Committees to discuss our proposal.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. It is time for my friends on the other side of the aisle to end their self-proclaimed political spin designed to bewilder and confuse average Americans, making them believe that their Republican representatives are fighting for the future of their health care and the health care of their families, when what they are really doing is fighting for powerful corporate interests. Now is the time for us to face facts and accept truths. Fact: House Republicans made an attempt to replace the Affordable Care Act with a bill that caused such an outcry from their own constituents that they were forced to pull it. Truth: There are serious issues in health care that need to be addressed for the betterment of all Americans, and it is going to take the effort of both parties in both the House and the Senate working together to strengthen our healthcare system. No more smokescreens, no more political rhetoric, only collaborative discourse using only the well-being of the American people as our compass. It is this approach that will steer us back onto course for the betterment of this and future generations. Unfortunately, this bill does not further that effort. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule and underlying measure, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

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

Mr. HASTINGS

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

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of National Pet Day, which takes place every year on April 11th. While loving our pets is something we do every day, National Pet Day encourages us to give special care to pets who may not get that extra attention. This day was founded in 2006 by Pet and Family Lifestyle Expert and Animal Welfare Advocate Colleen Paige, to help raise public awareness about the plight of many different kinds of animals. This is a common sentiment among animal rights activists, and I want to give recognition to all the organizations we have worked with personally in the mission to protect our beloved pets. The Animal Hope and Wellness Foundation, the Humane Society of the United States, and Social Compassion in Legislation have worked extensively to better the lives of our four-legged friends. Together, we introduced H.R. 1406, the Dog and Cat Meat Trade Prohibition Act of 2017, which prohibits the slaughter and trade of dogs and cats for human consumption in the United States. On January 6, 2017, I reintroduced H. Res. 30--Condemning the Dog Meat Festival in Yulin, China, and urging China to end the dog meat trade. This horrific festival dates back to 2009 through 2010, when it was launched by dog meat traders as a commercial enterprise to boost flagging sales of dog meat. More than 10,000 dogs are reported to be captured, transported and slaughtered every year for this Dog Meat festival, with more than 10 million dogs killed annually in China for the dog meat trade. Animal welfare groups have found that a number of these dogs are stolen pets taken from their homes, still wearing their collars when they reach the slaughterhouse. Many dogs die during transport to the slaughterhouses after days or weeks without food or water, and others suffer illness and injury during transport, such as broken bones. These dogs suffer mentally from watching other dogs being disemboweled and blow-torched in front of them. Yulin's dog slaughter takes place in residential areas and public marketplaces, imposing scenes of extreme animal cruelty on local residents, including young children who may, as a result, suffer psychological trauma and desensitization. The capture, transport, and butchering of dogs and the consumption of dog meat poses a risk to human health by exposing people to a multitude of diseases, including rabies and cholera. This practice, in my opinion, is completely unacceptable, and can be stopped by the diligent efforts of members of the Chinese government. Although the Yulin city government withdrew as a sponsor of the Dog Meat Festival, it has taken no meaningful action to enforce China's existing laws and regulations on animal disease control, food safety, trans-provincial dog transport, or youth protection, all of which are breached by the dog meat trade. Activists from across the globe have continued the fight against this barbaric practice. I have been honored to work with Humane Society International, the Animal Hope and Wellness Foundation, the Vanderpump Dog Foundation, Duo Duo, the Animal Welfare Institute, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), Citizens Lobbyists for H. Res. 30, as well as countless other organizations to bring awareness and hopefully change to this inhumane practice and torture of dogs. Next month, I will be introducing a resolution denouncing the global dog meat trade, by urging all countries that allow this cruel and barbaric practice to end it once and for all. Furthermore, in the lead up to the Yulin Dog Meat Festival and after the introduction of my global dog meat trade resolution, I do plan on holding another Congressional Briefing on Capitol Hill to provide an opportunity for animal rights activists to speak on behalf of the voiceless. I also want to recognize and thank the animal welfare organizations in Palm Beach and Broward Counties, whose tireless efforts each and every single day are to be commended. In Palm Beach, the Animal Rescue Force South Florida; Peggy Adams; Palm Beach County Animal Care & Control; Justin Bartlett; Second Chance; Big Dog Ranch Rescue; Gaisha, Tundra & Spirit's Place Husky Rescue; Adopt a Cat Foundation; Tri- County Animal Rescue; South Florida Rabbit Rescue, and the Everglades Golden Retriever Rescue. In Broward County, the Florida Humane Society, Humane Society of Broward County; Broward County Animal Care and Adoption Center, Animal Aid, Inc.; and Abandoned Pet Rescue. The work that all of these organizations do for animals is truly heartwarming and the lengths that they go to ensure their welfare is inspiring. National Pet Day reminds us to do all that we can to make certain animals are taken care of everywhere. Whether it is taking supplies to animal shelters, volunteering, helping a friend with his or her pets who is recovering from an illness, or adopting a pet. Mr. Speaker, in honor of National Pet Day, I once again want to reiterate my heartfelt gratitude to those who have dedicated their lives to help, protect, and save animals not only here in the United States, but also across the globe.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a resolution Celebrating the Importance of the 15th Anniversary of the Arab Peace Initiative as a Meaningful Effort by Arab Countries to the Commitment of Peace in the Middle East. I recently travelled to Israel for the 18th time as a Member of Congress. While in Israel and Jordan, I attended a number of bilateral and multilateral meetings focused on security and the outlook for the region in the coming year. I always welcome these opportunities to meet with senior leaders on such a wide range of issues, and our conversations touched on political developments, regional security in the Middle East, the peace process, and strengthening the bilateral relationships between the United States and these nations. Although the Israeli-Palestinian conflict continues to be a major challenge, I believe we must stay actively involved in peace negotiations. I am happy to say that recently, Israel and some Muslim- majority Arab nations in the Middle East have made progress in regional cooperation. I believe that, using the Arab Peace Initiative as a baseline, these recent developments present a renewed opportunity for progress--one that we cannot afford to miss. Mr. Speaker, my resolution highlights the importance of the Arab Peace Initiative and urges the nations to continue the hard work of fostering stronger relationship. Under the right circumstances, the Arab Peace Initiative allows for gradual progress towards the normalization of bilateral relations between Israel and its neighbors. We all know that the relationship between America and Israel is paramount, and I have faith that, in time, the relationships between Israel and other nations will also strengthen. I commend the regional countries that have taken steps to facilitate the end of the Israeli- Palestinian conflict, while simultaneously strengthening regional security through discussions with the State of Israel. I urge all parties to continue these important dialogues. I would also like to take a moment to acknowledge the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan's ascension to the Presidency of the Arab League. The United States established relations with Jordan in 1949 and our countries have a long history of cooperation. Jordan has taken on an important role in pursuing progress for the region. I congratulate my friend King Abdullah II and wish Jordan the very best as it assumes this new leadership role for the foreseeable future. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce this resolution today, and recommend its expeditious consideration and passage.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to honor Mr. Brenden Shipley of West Palm Beach with the Congressional Award of Bronze and Silver Medals. Since 1979, the Congressional Award has inspired our nation's youth to set and achieve personally challenging goals that build character and foster community service. Recipients are committed to bettering themselves and to giving back to the communities in which they reside. It is the fulfilling of that commitment, which makes these young people so extraordinary. Mr. Shipley took on the challenge of earning two medals: Bronze and Silver. Earning these awards requires a minimum of 400 hours of community service. He served his community by volunteering at the Kids Cancer Foundation, tutoring kids in math, cleaning the football field at school, and helping one of his friends move into his new home. In addition, he learned how to build a house and commercial buildings, and improved his physical fitness for his senior year football season by weightlifting and boxing. Furthermore, Mr. Shipley planned a seventeen day trip to France, England, Ireland, and Wales to immerse himself in an unfamiliar culture and to develop a spirit of adventure. Mr. Speaker, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. once said that: ``The function of education is to teach one to think intensively and to think critically. Intelligence plus character--that is the goal of true education.'' I believe that Mr. Brenden Shipley is a remarkable young man who exemplifies that true character. I am honored to present him with the 2017 Congressional Award for Bronze and Silver Medals, and to recognize him for all of his hard work in the West Palm Beach community. I wish him much success in all of his future endeavors.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I say good morning to America. This is not a health bill that we are readying ourselves to vote on. It is a tax bill for wealthy people. I just left the Committee on Rules. We started our session there at 7 this morning. I have in hand a closed rule that will allow for 4 hours of debate. Later on this afternoon, the Republicans will accomplish what they set out to do. The bill provides $274.9 billion in tax cuts for the highest income Americans. Over half of the tax cuts in the bill go to millionaires. In the year 2020, 61 percent of the cuts go to those earning more than a million dollars. At the same time, Republicans cut Medicaid by more than $880 billion. That is money for poor people that will not have those benefits. Republicans cut Medicaid by that amount for working families. Donald Trump's people and his Cabinet will do very well.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, today is a sad day for this institution. Why are we here? Well, after 13 hours at the Rules Committee on Wednesday, did we report to the floor the Republicans' replacement to the Affordable Care Act? No. And why not? Because the legislation was not extreme enough. It didn't hurt enough people. It didn't make enough people uninsured. It didn't give a large enough tax break to the wealthiest among us. That 13-hour exercise yielded nothing except to reveal the callous depths of the Republican Party's attempt to deprive health care from 24 million people. So after my friends on the other side of the aisle added yet another manager's amendment, bringing the total to five, and after stripping away essential health benefits, we are here this morning to push this extreme, dangerous, and callous bill under martial law. But why are we really here? Is this bill actually about improving health care in this country? By my estimation, and by the analysis of virtually every healthcare group--Mr. McGovern has introduced some of them: hospitals, medical organizations, and the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office--the answer is a flat-out, resounding no. Premiums are going to rise. Millions upon millions of people will lose health coverage. Essential benefits will be stripped away, and 400 of the wealthiest Americans will get a substantial tax cut, while Medicaid is being cut by $880 billion. Mr. Speaker, during that 13-hour marathon meeting that yielded nothing but a rule allowing Republicans to continue to ram this measure through Congress, I quoted from Scripture, from the King James Bible, Matthew 25:45. It says: Then shall He answer them, saying, Verily, I say unto you, inasmuch as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me. My friends on the other side of the aisle often cite Scripture in their legislative motivations. I ask them now: How does cutting the benefits from the least among us, while showering more wealth upon the wealthiest among us, square with these teachings? In addition, Mr. Speaker, I noted to them that we hear from them all the time about liberty. So I noted that, in the Preamble to the Constitution, the document that guides our great Nation and that we all swear an oath to uphold, that we are entrusted to also, and I quote from the Preamble, ``promote the general welfare.'' I also note for you that this charge is placed before the first mention of the word ``liberty.'' Does stripping away of essential health benefits, which include maternity and newborn care, pediatric services, and emergency services, promote the general welfare? Does cutting $880 billion from Medicaid promote the general welfare? Does ensuring that, by 2026, 56 million people under the age of 64 will be left without coverage promote general welfare? Finally, Mr. Speaker, in the debate at committee on this shameful bill, I answered the Republican charge that this bill was about freedom when I quoted a verse from Janis Joplin's ``Me and Bobby McGee.'' What she was saying is: ``Freedom's just another word for nothin' left to lose.''

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, if this extreme bill becomes law, a bill which has been rushed through Congress, amended without care, brought before us without hearings, without a CBO score, without thoughtful consideration, without a Democratic amendment being approved, and without a clue, I fear--indeed, I know--that the American people will find themselves with nothing left to lose when it comes to their and their family's health care, which is the most perverse and wretched kind of freedom as you may have ever seen.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall Vote number 184 on H.R. 372, I mistakenly recorded my vote as ``nay'' when I should have voted ``yea.''

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall Vote number 178 on H.R. 1353, I mistakenly recorded my vote as ``nay'' when I should have voted ``yea.''

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to note my introduction of the African Descent Affairs Act, as we continue to highlight the International Decade for People of African Descent. We have seen a sharp increase in racism, anti-Semitism, xenophobia, homophobia and other forms of discrimination across the world over the last year. Human rights violations emanating from racial prejudice and discrimination have negatively impacted people of African descent around the world, resulting in racial bias and disparities in education, employment, health, housing, justice, and other sectors. We must act now to reverse these disturbing trends. The International Decade for People of African Descent provides an opportunity to not only draw attention to these inequities, but to also join efforts with countries around the globe to develop and implement national strategies honoring the vast contributions of people of African descent and to combat continuing issues of prejudice and discrimination such as those currently gripping our nation. To aid these efforts, I have introduced the African Descent Affairs Act. The Act seeks to improve the situation of people of African descent around the world by establishing within our State Department a Global Office of African Descent Affairs to establish global foreign policy and assistance strategies for people of African descent; creating a ``Fund'' to support antidiscrimination and empowerment efforts by African descent led civil society organizations; and requiring Annual State Department Human Rights Reports to include a section on discrimination faced by people of African descent. I believe that U.S. foreign policy strategies such as these have improved the situation of vulnerable groups internationally and would greatly assist in responding to increasing levels of prejudice and discrimination faced by people of African descent around the globe. The State Department has already launched many successful initiatives that have aided vulnerable populations, such as the Office of Global Women's Issues, the Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism, the Special Advisor for International Disability Rights, the Special Representative to Muslim Communities, and the LGBT Global Equality Fund. Implementing a Global Office of African Descent Affairs will continue this tradition and facilitate the full and equal participation of people of African descent in society, promote knowledge of and respect for the diverse heritage, culture and contributions of people of African descent, and strengthen and implement legal frameworks that combat racial discrimination. Mr. Speaker, I sincerely hope that my colleagues will embrace the challenge of combating prejudice and discrimination across the world. I encourage them to join me in recognizing the collective history and achievements made by people of African descent by supporting the African Descent Affairs Act.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Reclaiming my time, that is what you should have said rather than say that I didn't offer specifics, and I just want to make that very clear to you. I don't think that people with diagnosis of schizophrenia, that have been allowed--that their fiduciaries have determined that their mental illness allows that they should not get a gun, I suggest to you and to anybody that those persons that have a gun--and I made the distinction. You evidently didn't hear that part either. I made the distinction about the Second Amendment and how much I support it and I support veterans, and I support veterans' rights to defend themselves. But I don't support crazy people having guns, whether they are veterans or not, and it is just that simple.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Takano), the vice chair of the Veterans' Affairs Committee.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank the gentleman, my friend from Colorado, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes for debate, and I rise to debate the rule providing for consideration of the three bills related to the Department of Veterans Affairs--interestingly, all under one rule. We have been doing two bills under one rule. We are now headed to three. I recommend we just put all of our bills under a rule and save us a lot of time. The first bill under today's rule, to improve the authority of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to hire and retain physicians and other employees of the Department of Veterans Affairs, the bipartisanship reflected in this bill is certainly a rarity in this body and, frankly, could have easily come before us under the suspension of the rules. There are nearly 47,000 job vacancies for doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals throughout the Veterans Administration's healthcare system. The VA is consistently rated as one of the worst Federal agencies in terms of pay and leadership, and since 2009, the number of VA employees resigning or retiring has risen every year. As of the new year, 547,000 patients were waiting more than 30 days for care at a VA hospital. It is clear that we must act to improve the VA on a holistic level, and this bill is a good start. This legislation establishes staffing, recruitment, and retention programs to enable the VA to build a stronger workforce. However, I am disappointed that the Rules Committee majority did not make in order an amendment that I offered to this measure, which would have allowed the Secretary of the VA to fill any existing vacant positions within the Veterans Administration, regardless of whether the position was vacated before or after the reckless hiring freeze imposed by Donald John Trump. I would also note that Representatives Schrader and Moulton offered an amendment that would fully lift the hiring freeze, but the Rules Committee blocked this amendment as well from receiving a vote on the House floor. I remain disheartened at the way the majority continues to operate the business of the House of Representatives. The bipartisanship this bill enjoys dissipates when we move to another bill wrapped in today's three-rule measure, and that is H.R. 1181, the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act. Before I launch into all of my remarks regarding this, I want to make it very clear that I and most Members of the House of Representatives will do everything we can to protect the Second Amendment rights of U.S. citizens and veterans especially. This legislation, however, if enacted, would immediately enable approximately 174,000 veterans currently deemed mentally unfit by the VA to purchase firearms. At its core, this bill assumes that all veterans with mental illness should have unfettered access to guns, regardless of whether they will turn the weapon on themselves or their loved ones, and that any determination otherwise is simply wrong. The broadly reaching bill arbitrarily removes every veteran flagged by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System from its rolls, literally putting tens of thousands of lives at risk. Let's look at the facts. Under procedures currently in place by the VA and the Department of Justice, an individual who lacks the mental capacity to contract or to manage his or her own affairs can be prevented from purchasing a gun. This term applies to veterans with severe mental illnesses who require a fiduciary to help manage their VA benefits. If the veteran thinks there was an error or that he or she was unfairly disqualified, the veteran can utilize the same due process and appeals procedures that are available for other VA decisions. Under the current process, which was codified in the 21st Century Cures Act just a few months ago, the veteran is allowed a hearing before the Board of Veterans Appeals and given several opportunities for judicial review and appeal in Federal court. Mr. Speaker, this bill turns this sensible and humane approach on its head. It is time that we acknowledge where we are as a country. It is time that we deal with the fact that we are in the midst of a veterans' suicide epidemic. Twenty veterans kill themselves every day. That is 7,300 of our finest and bravest persons in our society. Two-thirds of these suicides are carried out using firearms. A Department of Veterans Affairs report, provided to Congress in 2015, revealed that nearly 20,000 veterans diagnosed with schizophrenia, 15,000 diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder, and thousands more diagnosed with dementia, Alzheimer's, and serious depression were on the NICS rolls. Under this bill, these individuals and many more would be given immediate access to guns, putting themselves and others in danger. Even as our Nation suffers shooting after shooting, Congress has not acted. Democrats held a sit-in in this very room in that well in this last Congress to protest the callousness of the House Republican leadership in preventing us from even considering legislation to protect our citizens with reference to guns. Rather than act to address gun violence, we instead considered legislation like this, which will actually lead to more gun violence, Mr. Speaker. The logic and lack of compassion in such an approach absolutely escapes me. Our country has witnessed horrific shootings in the past few years. Dozens of children were murdered at Sandy Hook. Nearly 50 people were killed at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando. One of our very own from this Congress was nearly assassinated while holding a townhall event in 2011. We continue to ignore the ramifications of shootings at Oak Creek, Aurora, Virginia Tech--I could go on and on--Charleston. The list just continues. 32,000 Americans lose their lives every year from gun violence. We have grieved together. And I, along with several of my colleagues, have stopped standing down here in the well for a moment of silence and then going back to our regular business after hundreds of our people are killed throughout this society. We have demanded change together, and we have been shocked by the paralysis that has gripped this institution when it comes to taking commonsense steps to end our country's gun violence epidemic. Today, we see in this bill another measure coming out of Republican leadership that sprints toward the goal set by this country's powerful gun lobby. Listen up, NRA, there are people like me that aspire to have a zero rating by you every year. And it is not just the gun lobbyists, it is gun manufacturers as well. It may be great for the gun manufacturers' bottom line and the NRA's bottom line, but it is terrible for those brave men and women who have served this country so fully, those brave men and women who suffer wounds that may not be visible to the naked eye, but are no less real and worthy of our attention. With each new tragedy that occurs, whether it be a mass shooting or the 20 servicemembers we lose every day to suicide, those who stand in the way of legislation to address our country's gun violence epidemic are increasingly culpable for its continuation. I am disgusted with this morally bankrupt obfuscation, and I think the American people are, too. Let me lay down a marker. Of the 435, plus six Members of the House of Representatives and the 100 U.S. Senators, I want to see the first person when this measure goes into effect, if it does, and 174,000 veterans are taken off of the NICS rolls and can access guns, the first one that dies--and I hope we track it--I want everybody to stand up and remember that we had a chance to stop it here. Don't tell me, if 20 veterans are killing themselves every day and if 7,000-plus of them are killing themselves every year--and we won't even mention domestic violence and the horror that comes from those guns--if we continue this effort, we will allow more deaths along those lines. Before concluding, Mr. Speaker, I want to say a few words about the final bill encompassed in this rule, H.R. 1259, the VA Accountability First Act of 2017, and the Republicans' continued assault on the working people of this country. At its core, this bill is an attack on workers' rights, plain and simple, and will do more harm than good in our efforts to improve care at the Veterans Administration. This legislation would strip the collective bargaining rights of VA workers. It weakens an employee's right to appeal. It weakens protections for VA workers who speak up against mismanagement and patient harm. Republicans claim they want to help fix our VA system, yet, with this bill, they do that by insulting, undermining, and attacking the very employees who serve and care for our veterans, including the over 120,000 veterans who work for the VA. Yesterday, one of our colleagues presented at the Rules Committee a statistic that I didn't know. Of the 2 million Federal employees in this great Nation of ours, 640,000 of them are veterans. So when we get ready to pare back this government that somehow or another people have targeted for all sorts of cuts, if you read today's budget proposal by Donald John Trump, you will see that lots of these veterans will be losing their jobs, in addition to all of the things that we have already discussed. We need to make improvements at the VA. Everybody knows that. That is clear. But singling out VA employees and their protections is counterproductive, to say the least, and only compounds manpower shortages plaguing the agency. This legislation will exacerbate recruitment problems and impair retention at the agency. It threatens the agency's ability to build a robust clinical workforce by threatening the quality of care that the VA will be able to provide. I don't know what the pique is by my Republican colleagues with reference to workers in this country. They talk a very good game about protecting workers and we are going to bring back jobs and we are going to do all of these things that are going to protect the middle class. I will get a chance to talk about this a little bit more, but I am very proud of the unions in this Nation. They are the unions that people like my father and countless of us who served in the House of Representatives worked in and helped build this Nation. They are the people that our veterans from the Second World War, the Korean conflict, and Vietnam who became union members and went on to do things for collective bargaining that made workers' rights be better for people in America. And I don't see tearing them down--let alone in the VA administration--is something that we need to do. Mr. Speaker, my friends on the other side of the aisle know exactly where their priorities lie with this bill, and it is certainly not with improving the quality of care of our veterans, but rather in exploiting yet another opportunity to attack the rights of working men and women across our country. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I have great respect for my colleague whose district abuts a portion of my district in Florida. I want to make it very clear that it is important to listen to what a person says. My colleague just commented that I did not offer the specifics with reference to persons who suffered some form of mental illness; and he said that, in my passionate remarks, I failed to provide those specifics. Let me go back and read you my remarks again. A Department of Veterans Affairs report provided to Congress in 2015 revealed that nearly 20,000 veterans diagnosed with schizophrenia, 15,000 diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder, and thousands more diagnosed with dementia, Alzheimer's, and serious depression. Is that specific enough for you, or do I need to add additional reasons? Evidently my colleague didn't hear that.

Mr. HASTINGS. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. HASTINGS. Reclaiming my time, is schizophrenia one of those things that isn't specific enough for you?

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I would urge my friend from Colorado to know that I have no additional speakers and I am prepared to close if he is prepared to close. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.