Steny Hoyer

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. He was an employee and working for the Justice Department. He was under the aegis of the Deputy Attorney General of the United States. He was not an independent actor, a special prosecutor. He was an employee of the Justice Department. And the rules that Mueller followed under the Justice Department are that you cannot indict a President. He said, however, the Congress can take action. He said that. He said we were the proper authority to take action in a case like this. We are doing that. He puts a lot of emphasis on ``inquiry.'' Investigation, inquiry, hearing--it is a fact-finding process in the pursuit of our constitutional duties to find out whether high crimes and misdemeanors have been committed by the President of the United States. It is a hearing. It is an investigation. Call it an inquiry. The Speaker said ``inquiry.'' I adopt that language--investigation, hearing, whatever the language is.

Mr. HOYER. But the substance of these charges--and I asked him about one. He hasn't answered the question of whether he thinks it is appropriate to ask a foreign leader for a favor. He says, no, he didn't ask for a favor.

Mr. HOYER. Why did he mention the Bidens?

Mr. HOYER. That is reaching.

Mr. HOYER. Because that was the subject of the discussion, Madam Speaker.

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, we adopted the rules adopted by the Republican majority in the last Congress dealing with this subject.

Mr. HOYER. Of course not. You are talking about subpoenas and right to documents.

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, he is talking about subpoenas; he is talking about the right to see documents.

Mr. HOYER. I am willing to follow the rules that you imposed upon us.

Mr. HOYER. We didn't have an impeachment inquiry.

Mr. HOYER. No, the rules of the committee in terms of subpoenas and witnesses. We are following that rule. He complains about it. Madam Speaker, he hasn't answered the substantive question. They don't have an answer to the substantive question. Clearly, the testimony that was given yesterday by the Acting Chief of Staff clearly indicated putting leverage on Ukraine to get something we want, and, clearly, the President mentions the election of 2020.

Mr. HOYER. Are you reclaiming your time?

Mr. HOYER. The gentleman mentioned the Justice Department. Mr. Barr is essentially Mr. Trump's lawyer. Mr. Trump mentioned him in the transcript, too--it is not a transcript; it is a report of the call-- and said: Talk to Barr, and he'll come over there with you and talk about this corruption, i.e., Hunter Biden and Joe Biden, not CrowdStrike.

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, the Justice Department refused to investigate this case, notwithstanding the waterfall of facts and information that raise questions. We haven't resolved the answers to those questions, but we are investigating them because it is our constitutional responsibility. And I would say to my friend: We could go on for the next 5 hours talking about this. We would not agree. You would continue to talk about process. My perspective is we are pounding on the table because the facts don't want to be discussed. The only reason I brought up Turkey is because, by a vote of 354-60, we said the actions of the President of the United States were inappropriate and dangerous and helped our enemies, not our allies. That is what we said in that resolution, and, very frankly, two-thirds of the Republicans voted for that because they were concerned about our national security interests. We are concerned about our national security interests when a President of the United States is talking to a foreign leader, talking about elections, past, present, or future--inappropriate, in our opinion, and, we think, inappropriate in the minds of the American people. But we will see, and we will have a vote on that at some point in time. But, first, we are going to find out what the facts are, and we have witnesses coming forward to give us those facts, with every Republican member of the committee able to be there, able to question witnesses, with equal time because we believe that is fair. And, very frankly, he says: Well, they don't have a right to call witnesses. They do have the right to suggest calling a witness, and the committee can vote on it, under the Republican rules that we adopted. So, Madam Speaker, I would hope that perhaps we could go on, perhaps, to something else because we are not going to reach agreement on this. We are going to continue to have what we believe are fair, proper, consistent with the rules, consistent with the Constitution of the United States, consistent with the laws of the United States of America, to find out whether this President has committed high crimes and misdemeanors. And then, when we conclude an answer to that question, every Member of this House will have availability of all the information. And, very frankly, Mr. Schiff says in his letter to all of us, that once the witnesses have been concluded that we can see that. What he doesn't want is to have the witnesses reading one another's testimony and parroting it. That is a fair thing, to make sure that we don't have one witness just simply adopting the testimony of another witness. We want the truth, not parroting of other information. So, I would hope we can move on. I am prepared to continue to speak about this, but I don't think we are going to reach any conclusion beyond what we have already stated on both sides.

Mr. HOYER. The polls reflect that the public believes we ought to be doing what we are doing.

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, we have moved over 250 bills to the Senate. A number of those are very important bills in the sense that they affect a large number of people. We passed making permanent the Land and Water Conservation Fund, and 133 Republicans voted for that bill. It sits, languishing, in the United States Senate, led by a Republican leader. We passed that anti-hate resolution, and 173 Republicans voted for that. We passed comprehensive background checks, and only 2 Republicans voted for that. And 90 percent of America--90 percent of America-- supports that bill. It sits, languishing, in the United States Senate, unattended. We have passed 96 percent of the funding of government prior to June 30--96 percent. It hasn't been done before. It sits. Not a single bill has passed the Republican-led United States Senate--not a single appropriation bill. We passed a number of bills to make sure that the ACA was stable and preexisting conditions--Republicans didn't vote for that. Well, actually, eight did. It sits, languishing, in the United States Senate. We passed a bill on climate action, what the Joint Chiefs of Staff say is one of the major challenges to our security. Three Republicans voted for that. It sits languishing in the United States Senate. We passed disaster relief. That did pass. We passed a lot of health legislation and prescription drug legislation. We said that prescription drug companies can't pay generics not to bring their product to the market. It is called ``pay to delay.'' We passed that. It sits languishing in the United States Senate. Now, it either sits languishing in the United States Senate because Mitch McConnell is against all of those or it sits languishing so the Republicans can say: You haven't done anything. All you are doing is impeachment. That is baloney. Madam Speaker, we had a markup yesterday on a major bill that is going to save $345 billion, according to CBO, and bring prescription drug costs down for every American. It was marked up yesterday. We are going to bring it to the floor before we leave here this work period, and we are going to pass it. I don't predict how many Republicans are going to vote for it, but I predict this: It will sit languishing in the United States Senate. We passed the Equality Act so that every American would be treated consistent with our declaration that all are created equal, not just some. It sits languishing in the United States Senate. So don't say we haven't done anything. Don't say impeachment is taking all of our time. It is not. We have one committee right now-- other committees also--one committee now that is giving attention, as it should. But the Energy and Commerce Committee, the Ways and Means Committee, the Education and Labor Committee, and so many other committees are dealing with substantive issues to make sure the lives of our people are better for the people. I could read another 30 bills like that languishing in the Republican-led United States Senate. We are doing our work. The government was shut down when we took over, the first time in history the government was shut down when a new Congress was sworn in--the first time. We spent 30 days just opening up the people's government. We passed appropriations bills. But not one has passed the United States Senate, led by the Republican leadership in the United States Senate. So sad. We ought to be doing our business. We are doing our business. We are doing the people's business. We are making their lives better, and we are going to continue to do it. And we can do the same as well in dealing with the constitutional protections and the protections of our national security dealing with the President of the United States.

Mr. HOYER. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOYER. You know how this process works. Let them pass whatever bill they want; we will go to conference. We have our position; they have their position. It is led by your party. They haven't passed a single bill. You talk about getting a 302(b). We sent them an offer 30 days ago. We haven't heard any response. Your party runs that. You want to pass those bills? You think they are wonderful bills? Tell Mitch McConnell: Pass those bills and send them over here. Let's see what we do with them. We have a two-House legislature. Madam Speaker, the Republicans control the Senate. Let them pass a bill. You say everybody is for it? Then it ought to pass. But don't say Democrats aren't passing. We passed appropriations bills. We have passed substantive bills on prescription drugs. We have passed substantive bills on healthcare. We have passed substantive bills on education. We have passed a substantive bill on the environment. We have passed climate change protection. We have passed lots of bills. Now, if they don't like those bills, pass their own bills and send them over here, Madam Speaker. We will have a conference, and we will try to resolve it. That is how the legislative process works. Don't say that we have to do your work and our work. We have a perspective, exactly as you did when you were in the majority, and you jammed us over and over again. We are not trying to jam you. You had a perspective; we had a perspective. You passed your perspective. You knew the President of the United States, when it was President Obama, that he wasn't going to sign those. You knew the Senate wasn't going to pass them. Your position was, however: No, that is our position. We have a right to do that. You were right. You had a right to do that. But you want to deny us that right, like you want to deny us following your rules that you say are unfair. Madam Speaker, I don't get it. We have done our work. We will continue to do our work. We will continue to do our work on both sides of the ledger, doing our constitutional duty and doing our legislative duty, which may be one and the same.

Mr. HOYER. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Madam Speaker, it is a two-House legislature. One is led by Republicans; one is led by Democrats. The reason we don't have 302(b) is because the Senate couldn't agree with itself on 302(b)s. I talked to Mitch McConnell in January of this year. Mitch McConnell comes out of the Appropriations Committee; I come out of the Appropriations Committee. Both of us said that we need to get 302(a)s, which is the big number. You then subdivide it into 12 different committees. He agreed that we ought to do that, but he said that we have to have the President agree. Very frankly, the Acting Chief of Staff, who served in this body, did not want to do that. The leadership of the Republicans had as much trouble with him as we had with him. Just ask Mr. Boehner and Mr. Ryan. He didn't want to have a deal. He wanted a CR. Actually, he wanted less than a CR because he wanted to go back to the sequester numbers. That is why we don't have a 302(b), because neither the White House, Madam Speaker, nor the Acting Chief of Staff would agree. Mr. McConnell said: I am not going to do anything the President of the United States won't do. Unlike being the independent, Article I body that we ought to be, acting independently and then sending it down to the President, and he makes a decision as to whether he wants to sign it or not, we are simply saying, in the United States Senate: If he won't agree with it, we won't put it on the floor. He doesn't have to veto it. The public has to be so extraordinarily confused and angry about our unwillingness and inability to get our work done. Madam Speaker, we have done our work. The Senate hasn't sent us anything. It is not like they have sent us something that we have rejected in a partisan way. They haven't sent us anything. They are too busy appointing judges that they think will reflect their ideological point of view. So I am frustrated, along with the citizens of this country. Everybody here who wants to do a 1-minute or a 5-minute is really frustrated. I get that. I am hopeful we can end this because we are not going anywhere. But we are going to continue to do our job. We are going to continue to pass legislation that we think is for the people, to make their lives better, to focus on them, not us. We are going to focus on the Constitution and the laws of this country, to make sure that they are faithfully executed and carried out.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet on Monday next, when it shall convene at noon for morning-hour debate and 2 p.m. for legislative business.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I have the sad task of announcing what probably most of you already know. We have lost a great American, a decent American, a wonderful Member of this body, Elijah Cummings, who died early this morning of illnesses he had been suffering from for a significant period of time. Members of the House, the people of Maryland, and the people of the United States of America woke up to this sad and shocking news that we had lost this dear friend, a devoted public servant, and a dedicated patriot, who reflected courtesy and respect for all. At a time of confrontation, disagreement, anger, and, yes, sometimes hate, he was a beacon of civility, of fairness, and of justice. He was chairman of the Oversight and Reform Committee. He passed away too early at 68 years of age. All of us who served with him knew his passion for justice; his sharp intellect, having graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Howard University, where he was president of the student government association; his wit; and his devotion to the cause of making government work for the people. It will be surely said of Elijah that he worked hard until the very end. He was on a telephone call with all of us on Sunday talking about how we ought to proceed with the heavy duties that confronted him, his committee, and the Congress. He never wavered in his dedication to the causes he made the hallmarks of his career, even in recent days when, as I said, his health was waning. Those causes were equality and opportunity for all, the son of a sharecropper who rose to be a great leader in this country. He was concerned about voting rights, civil rights, alleviating poverty, establishing justice, and ensuring that those entrusted with high office are held accountable and carry out their responsibilities lawfully and ethically. Elijah Cummings was, of course, a true son of Baltimore, a city of grit and hope, a city of dreams and hard work. He was loved in the city of Baltimore. At a time of great distress in the city of Baltimore, it was Elijah Cummings in the streets bringing calm and peace to that city. His life will forever be an example to all of us of striving to better one's community and one's country, a passion and service to one's fellow man and woman, and a perseverance in the face of adversity while in pursuit of making this country and the world a better place. Whenever he believed we were falling short of the vision of our Founders--and many of you will hear this resonate in your ears--he would say to all of us in a loving way, as he said throughout our State at a time of trouble and difference: ``We are better than this.'' As we see conflict, as we see people disparaging one another, we want to think to ourselves, ``we are better than this,'' and think of Elijah Cummings, a man of great faith, of great humility, of great humanity, and of great service. We will miss Elijah Cummings. We are a lesser place for losing him. Like the prophet for whom he was named, he was taken from us too young, too soon, too suddenly. We can say, with Shakespeare: He should have died hereafter. Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow. Elijah will not have those tomorrows, and we will not have them with him. We will miss him dearly. My thoughts are with his wife, Maya, and his three children. I offer my condolences to the people of Maryland's Seventh Congressional District, who loved their Congressman. They had confidence in their Congressman, and they knew that he was, in fact, better, and they were better for his service. May God bless Elijah Cummings, his family, all of us, and this great country.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Today, Mr. Speaker, is a sad day. It is a sad day for us; it is a sad day for this institution; and it is a sad day for America. We have lost a wonderful human being, a good and decent human being, a human being who made a difference for this institution, for all of us who knew him and were his friend, for his constituents, and for all Americans. All of us in this House lost a respected colleague. Many of us lost a dear, longtime, and good friend. He came in 1996 to this body, and every time I ran for a leadership position, my friend Elijah Cummings nominated me. The passing this morning of Chairman Elijah Cummings of the Committee on Oversight and Reform was a painful shock to all who have served with him, more, of course, to his family, Dr. Rockeymoore Cummings, his wife, and his three children. Elijah was a prophet of God whose name means ``my God is the Lord.'' Elijah Cummings was true to his name. He was a leader for our country and for our State of Maryland, and we have the Members, including our favorite daughter. He was a leader for our State. He was a leader, like our brother John Lewis, for principle, for comity, and for civility. He was a quiet man who did not seek the limelight, but he was not afraid to step out into the arena and fight hard for the causes in which he believed strongly. As all of us know, those causes were justice, equality, opportunity, civil rights, education, and children. He liked to say that children are the message we send to a future that we will never see. His parents sent Elijah into the future, and how much better the future was. He was beloved by his constituents, both those in the city of Baltimore and those in its suburbs. Indeed, Elijah was probably better loved in my district than I am. Most of my colleagues will understand that, of course. He worked hard, even in his final days. The Speaker is going to speak, and I am sure she will say something about the telephone call she had with him just days ago, doing the people's business. As his health faltered, his passion for his work did not. In the days ahead, we will have many opportunities, of course, to speak about our friend, Elijah, about his passion for service, his many contributions to Maryland and our Nation, and his deep convictions as a moral leader and a man of decency and love for his neighbor. Some of you recall Elijah at the time of great distress in Baltimore--anger, outbursts. Elijah walked among them as a man of peace and, like no other person in our State, brought peace where there was no peace. We will have opportunities to remember that. And we have a chance to reflect on the love he had for his wife, Maya, and his three children. Today, in remembering Elijah Cummings, we have a chance to promote the vision he held of the people's House coming together in a spirit of unity and purpose. Sadly, today, that purpose is to mourn his passing and remember a dear friend who will no longer be with us as we continue his work to which he gave his all. But, hopefully, his example will be with us. Elijah used to say, when he saw conflict and confrontation, when he saw things he thought were not up to the standards we had set for our country and for ourselves because of our faith, our Constitution, and our Declaration, he would say, ``We are better than that.'' As we human beings do things, from time to time, that are not kind to one another, not thoughtful, and not respectful to one another, let us say to ourselves: We are better than that. That is what Elijah said to himself. Mr. Speaker, in that spirit of unity, I will be yielding shortly to the Republican leader to share his reflections. But first, as I referred to her as Maryland's favorite daughter, I am honored to yield to the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi D'Alesandro. Now she would say Nancy D'Alesandro Pelosi. I understand that. We are so proud of our Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi).

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), Speaker of the House, for her remarks. I know Elijah felt very strongly about her and his support of her and her leadership and how proud he was that she was from the city of Baltimore that he loved so greatly. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy), my friend, the minority leader, and another good friend of Elijah's.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his remarks. Mr. Speaker, in that spirit, I will ask for a moment of silence. But before I do that, let me mirror the remarks of the leader on the other side of the aisle. A moment of silence will not be enough to respect the life of Elijah Cummings. What will be enough is we follow his example for a lifetime-- not for a moment, but for a lifetime--if we give one another the respect that he would give to us, if we give one another the consideration that the leader indicated that he gave to him. So, Mr. Speaker, I ask that we stand for a moment of silence and a lifetime of following an example.