Steny Hoyer

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy) for the purpose of inquiring of the majority leader the schedule for the week to come. (Mr. McCARTHY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his thought that there will not be anything in there that would make it a partisan bill. I think, as the President sent it down, it is, obviously, something that we need to do quickly and in a bipartisan way. Mr. Speaker, the majority leader and I have talked about the Dream Act. Another week has gone by and, therefore, the 6-month deadline is closer, and the President has urged us to pass legislation. Can the gentleman tell me what the expectations are to address the Dream Act? As you know, Michelle Lujan Grisham, the chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, has filed a discharge petition on the bill sponsored by Lucille Roybal-Allard and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. Can the gentleman tell me what progress we are making on that? Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his comments. I would ask him, Mr. Speaker, will the supplemental that the gentleman mentioned--which is, as I understand, approximately $29 billion, which will take care of forest fires in the West; $16 billion, as I understand it, in debt relief, which will raise the borrowing level for FEMA; and then, of course, money directly for the victims of the hurricanes. Can the gentleman tell me whether or not there will be any, what I will call, extraneous matters that might be controversial, or will this be a straight supplemental without controversy? We all want to make sure that we have the resources to help. Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his answer. Let me, if I might, Mr. Speaker, simply suggest to the gentleman, we certainly understand, and this side agrees, we want to have secure borders. There is, obviously, a disagreement on the President's proposal of a wall, I think, frankly, on your side as well as on my side of the aisle. I would hope that we would not, in effect, hold hostage the 800,000 students, workers, and young people brought here as children who know no other country. In my discussions with Mr. Ryan, and his public comments have indicated, he is sympathetic to making sure that we address that issue. He urged, as you know, President Trump not to rescind DACA. The President did anyway. I am hopeful that we can deal with the DREAMers, which I think certainly has very robust support on both sides of the aisle, in my view, Mr. Leader. I hope we can deal with that without clouding it with an issue, i.e., the wall. Not security; security I think we can reach agreement on. But I am hopeful that we can do that. The DREAMers are extraordinarily anxious. I presume you have met with some of the DREAMers. They are really very impressive people and are enhancing our communities and our country. So I would hope that we could do that. I look forward to talking to you personally about how we move forward and, hopefully, move quickly. I would like to have done it by next week. As you know, I said that it would be nice to do it in this work period, to lay to rest the anxiety of the 800,000-plus people who will be affected. But, if we can't do that, certainly I would hope that we could do it shortly after we get back after the next district work period. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, the Budget Act, adopted in 1974, requires that the House complete work on its budget for the next fiscal year by April 15. That is 172 days ago. Yet we now have a budget resolution on the floor, already into the fiscal year for which the budget supposedly is planned. Some may ask why. The answer is a simple one. This is, first of all, not a realistic budget which could or should stand as a budget resolution. No, this budget is not about putting our country on a sustainable fiscal path, and--this is indisputable--it is not a budget to inform the appropriators of budget priorities and constraints. No, the Appropriations Committee will not be informed. Why? Because we have already passed the appropriations bills. This budget doesn't have anything to do with the appropriation bills. They are passed. they are gone. They are in the Senate. This is merely a vehicle for achieving partisan tax reform of the kind that President Trump and Republican leaders in Congress outlined last week. Despite what this sham of a budget pretends, their plan is to push through tax changes that massively increase deficits--I call it the granddaddy of all debt increases--while shifting even more wealth from middle class and working families to people like Donald Trump. According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, 80 percent of the tax cuts in this proposal would go only to those who make over $900,000 a year. Hear me. The tax cuts mainly go to those making, in this Nation, over $900,000 per year. Despite promises from President Trump and Republicans here in the House, their plan actually raises taxes--hear me--while cutting taxes on those over $900,000, it actually raises taxes on 1 in 3 middle class families who earn between $50,000 and $150,000.

Mr. HOYER. Even though Republicans continue to assert the discredited supply-side mantra that tax cuts pay for themselves, no responsible economist believes that, not one--responsible is the operative word. The Tax Policy Center's analysis found that their tax cuts would add $2.4 trillion to deficits over the next 10 years. The previous speaker said this balances the budget in 9 years. That is Alice in Wonderland balance. It will never happen. I have been here for 36 years; I have heard those comments all the time. It never happened. But it is even worse, Mr. Chairman. The budget resolution also proposes to disinvest in job creation, pretends Republicans were able to repeal the Affordable Care Act--it hasn't been repealed, yet they pretend it has been repealed--to kick 23 million off their coverage and make those with preexisting conditions uninsurable. It guts Medicaid and would end the Medicaid guarantee. Furthermore, it would severely cut programs that reduce poverty and provide the kind of job training proven to get more people back into the workforce.

Mr. HOYER. This resolution is a grab bag of all the worst Republican policies: partisan tax cuts for the wealthy that leave the middle class behind, the cruelty of TrumpCare, and draconian reductions in domestic investment. The product is just as bad as the sum of its parts; indeed, it is worse. Instead, we ought to be working together to enact bipartisan tax reform that is fiscally responsible and focused on the middle class. I urge my colleagues to defeat this resolution, and I ask Republicans, who believe that tax reform must be permanent and, therefore, bipartisan, to join us in doing so. Only one person can stop spending; that is the President of the United States. He can veto spending bills. The debt under Ronald Reagan increased 189 percent. Under Bush I, 55 percent; he had 4 years. Under Clinton, 37 percent; under Bush II, 86 percent; and under Obama, who was dealing with the deepest recession of our lifetimes, 87 percent. A budget is supposed to inform the Appropriations Committee of how it ought to proceed. This budget comes after the fact, and it is only for tax cuts for the wealthy.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, Maryland was founded as a haven for freedom of worship, and our state is proud to be home to religious institutions and communities that enrich the life of our state and our country. One of those is the Har Sinai Congregation in Owings Mills. Founded on May 15, 1842, it is the oldest continuously operating Reform Jewish congregation in the United States. This year marks the 175th anniversary of its establishment. Drawing on practices adopted by some of the first Reform synagogues in Europe, Har Sinai Congregation served a small community of immigrants first in Baltimore and later, as the community grew, in the suburbs. The synagogue's first leader, Rabbi David Einhorn, arrived in 1855 and became one of the central voices of American Reform Judaism in the nineteenth century. The `Olath Tamid' siddur he published in 1856 went on to become a template for the Union Prayer Book later adopted widely by Reform congregations across the country. Rabbi Einhorn also preached against slavery, a courageous act to undertake in a Southern state where that horrific institution was still practiced. His abolitionism eventually led him to flee to Philadelphia in 1861, escaping a violent, pro-Confederacy riot in Baltimore during the Civil War. Among the clergy who followed in leading Har Sinai Congregation was Rabbi David Philipson, an American-born scholar and theologian who led the community from 1884 to 1888. A member of the first graduating class of the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, he would go on to become one of the most prominent Reform rabbis of his age, authoring books on history, theology, and literature while speaking out against anti- Semitism and, in his later years, the rise of Nazism. Today, the congregation is led by Rabbi Linda Joseph, a native of Australia and the first woman to lead the community, having taken up the pulpit there last year. Now a congregation of more than 400 families, and with more than 200 students in its religious school, Har Sinai Congregation has become one of Maryland's most active and dynamic synagogues. With the mantra of `worshipping together; caring together; working together,' its members are putting into practice the ancient Jewish precepts that call for social justice, charitable works, education, and community engagement. On Shabbat and holidays, congregants gather in worship and join in liturgical song, led by Cantor Robert Gerber, as they continue the traditions of American Reform Judaism that Har Sinai Congregation helped establish. I join in congratulating the clergy, lay leadership, and congregants of Har Sinai Congregation on reaching this milestone in the community's history, and I wish all of them a Shana Tovah U'Metuka--a sweet and happy new year for 5778.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the majority leader for the purpose of giving us the schedule for the week to come. Mr. Speaker, before I yield, however, to the majority leader, I want to join all of our colleagues in saying how very grateful we are and pleased we are with the return of the majority whip, Steve Scalise. All of us who sat here and heard Steve, our friend and colleague, give his reaction not only to the hateful, vicious action that took place as he was practicing for the charity baseball game where Republicans and Democrats come together to raise funds for young people and people who need help, and they do so together in a spirit of good will and common purpose, I think Steve Scalise, our majority whip, spoke movingly, and I am sure all Members were impressed with his courage and with his comments about that which is important. He talked about his prayers having been answered and the prayers of literally millions of people around this country. And in talking about some of the world leaders who called him and expressed their concern, because they knew, as he said and as Leader Pelosi said: An attack on Steve Scalise was an attack on us all, and it was an attack on our democracy and an attack on peacefully resolving differences, no matter how strongly they may be held--a lesson for all of us. I want to congratulate and thank Jennifer, his extraordinary wife, who shouldered a responsibility and a burden that she did not expect and, as Steve said, did it with great courage and great grace. His children, Madison and Harrison, and their entire family, I know, were responsible for Steve being able to be back here with us, and so we thank them. He is back with us today, and we look forward to him being a vigorous, as he was and is, part of the deliberations of this House and of reaching decisions in a positive, constructive way. Steve and I have a difference of opinion on whose crabs are better. We had a crab dinner not too long ago, my staff and his staff, and he brought some crabs up from Louisiana, I brought some crabs from Maryland, and it was a split decision as to which were the best. It will not surprise you who was for which crab. Today, we are filled with joy to see him back on the floor and on the road to full recovery. We also continue to be grateful for the recovery of U.S. Capitol Police Officers Crystal Griner and David Bailey. I want to join Steve, and I know all of our Members, as we rose and clapped to show our respect and our appreciation for those in the Capitol Police. Some of us are privileged to, as Steve pointed out, have a detail, and they become family. We are so impressed with their commitment, their talent, the extraordinary training that they have received and display every day; and, of course, Crystal Griner and David Bailey responded and, in responding, were injured themselves. They put their lives at risk for not only Steve Scalise but for all the Members who were on the field at that point in time. I want to join Steve, and I know all of our colleagues and the majority leader, in expressing appreciation and great respect for those who serve us in the Capitol Police. I say to my friend, the majority whip--he has left the floor now--we are glad to have you back. I wrote him a note this morning saying whatever I could do to help him, I was available to do that. I am sure he took it that that did not mean I necessarily would vote the way he wants me to vote, nor did I think he would vote necessarily the way I wanted him to vote, but we will continue in this great institution we call the House of Representatives, but, as Steve called it and I call it and so many of us call it, the people's House. Every 2 years, they send us back here to try to make policy to make their lives better and our country stronger, and, more than the public knows, we work together to accomplish that objective. They see the confrontations, but they don't always see the cooperation. Now, at this time, Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy), the majority leader, my friend--we cooperate more than people will see from time to time, I want to thank him for that--for the purpose of inquiring of the schedule for the week to come. (Mr. McCARTHY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for the information on the schedule to come. I want to speak to two things that are not on the schedule, Mr. Leader, but I know that both of us are focused on this and realize that we need to move and we need to move quickly. First of all, I want to speak of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. The leader and I, Mr. Speaker, were scheduled to try to go to Key West and to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands this weekend. I am not sure that that is going to be able to happen, given some of the logistics on the ground, but whether that happens or not, Mr. Speaker, I know the leader and I are going to work very hard on this. There is a humanitarian crisis that has confronted Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Key West, at least you can drive to Key West still, and we can get relief to Key West and to Florida and to victims of Harvey. Obviously, our fellow Americans who are residents of two islands, or actually more than two islands, but that comprise Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, are in life-threatening distress. I talked today to Dr. Price, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, about the availability of dialysis on the island. There are people who have already died because they were not able to get to dialysis centers, and those centers don't have all the electricity they need, so there is a humanitarian crisis, as I pointed out, Mr. Speaker, and I know the leader appreciates this. Mr. Leader, I know we don't have anything on the floor with reference to additional resources that might be and are necessary to meet this humanitarian crisis in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, but I would urge the majority leader, as I have done and I think he has done, to be in contact with the administration, be in contact with FEMA. In particular, I was pleased to see that General Kim has now been appointed, as General Honore was for New Orleans and Katrina, to coordinate activities. We have extraordinary resources in the Armed Forces of the United States, and I would urge the President, as Commander in Chief, and the Department of Defense to allocate every resource necessary to get the American people who live in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands to a point where communications, the availability of food, the availability of water, the availability of medical services are up and running, hopefully, full bore by the end of this weekend. This is a crisis. And I know the majority leader shares that view, and if he wants to make a comment on that, I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his comments. Clearly, this is not a partisan issue when an American or a group of Americans or a large number--in this case, over 3.5 million people, all of them at dire risk. We want to act together, we want to act quickly, and we do not want to fail to deploy any resource that is necessary to help our fellow Americans. Secondly, Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring up an act, which although not the crisis that Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, in particular, confront us with, as did Harvey and Irma in Texas and in Florida, but, Mr. Speaker, I notice that the Dream Act is not a part of next week's schedule. The leader and I have discussed the Dream Act, along with Speaker Ryan. I know that the President has said, if we pass the Dream Act, he has said publicly that he would sign the Dream Act. He is obviously concerned with security at the borders. We share that concern about security at the borders. But this is an item that, now, one-sixth of the time that was available has run, and we have 5 months left to go. I will tell the majority leader that I am very hopeful. I know the majority leader and the Speaker have formed some task forces to look at this issue, but I am very hopeful, Mr. Speaker--and I ask the majority leader to perhaps comment on this--that before the end of this work period--there are another 14 days left after this week in this work period--that we might be able to bring the Dream Act to the floor. A discharge petition has been filed. I would hope that the discharge petition not be necessary for either the rule or for the Dream Act itself. The discharge petition on the Dream Act itself will be mature as of October 5, and I expect a discharge petition to be filed on that, as well. But I am hopeful, Mr. Speaker, that that will not be necessary. Given the fact that the President has said that he thinks DACA was issued beyond the authority of President Obama, we disagree with that conclusion. But whether that conclusion is correct or not, the President observed that we need to fix this legislatively. So my question to the majority leader is: How soon does he believe that we could address this issue in regular order? We continue to pursue a discharge petition, as we did, frankly, for the Ex-Im Bank, which, when it was called to the floor, had over 300 votes in favor of it, including the majority of the majority party voted for that bill. We believe, Mr. Speaker, strongly, that if the Dream Act is brought to the floor, which over 8 in 10 Americans agree with, frankly, we believe large numbers on both sides of the aisle agree that these young people are not to be sent home. Lastly, let me just quote Senator Orrin Hatch, who is a senior Member in the United States Senate and the chairman of the Finance Committee. He said: ``I've urged the President not to rescind DACA. . . .'' He did, and gave us 6 months to solve this, legislatively. Senator Hatch observed that if DACA were rescinded, it would be ``an action that would further complicate a system in serious need of a permanent, legislative solution.'' He was referring then, Mr. Speaker, to a comprehensive immigration reform. ``Like the President, I've long advocated for tougher enforcement of our existing immigration laws. But we also need a workable, permanent solution for individuals who entered our country unlawfully as children through no fault of their own and who have built their lives here. That solution must come from Congress.'' And I agree that that decision must come from Congress. Rush Limbaugh said--and I don't usually agree with statements that Mr. Limbaugh makes: ``Nobody's gonna win anything by deporting a bunch of kids that we let in, whoever did, Obama, whatever. If we can get the strict enforcement of existing immigration law . . . then the DREAMer thing may be an acceptable payoff,'' he went on to say. I don't think this is a payoff. This is responding. And that is why the overwhelming majority of the American people support the Dream Act. As I say, over 8 out of 10 Americans. So I ask the majority--and I know that was a relatively long statement. This is a critical issue, however, as I have expressed in private to the majority leader, because we have but 5 months left to go. Hopefully, we could do this in this work period to allay the fears that these young people have, who are making such a positive contribution to America, to their communities, and to their families. So I am hopeful that we could resolve this issue as soon as possible. I yield to my friend, the majority leader.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I welcome the majority leader's thought that he wants to do it sooner rather than later. I will support him, of course, in that effort. I would say on his comment, Mr. Speaker, with reference to a comprehensive solution, we are for a comprehensive solution. We would like to see that because that is the only way we will stop this from coming back. The Senate passed a comprehensive immigration bill 3 years ago. We have not seen that on the floor as of yet. Again, we think that that would have a substantial vote and, perhaps, I think, a majority vote. I am not as confident of that as I am with the Dream Act, which I think clearly would enjoy the majority of the House's support. But I am glad that he wants to move this quickly. We will work with him to get that, I would hope, as I said, by the end of the work period, to allay the great fears and anxiety. Very frankly, we have had some young people thinking of going back to a land they do not know, a language they do not necessarily speak, and a culture they have, as adults, never been exposed to and don't know. This, for all intents and purposes, in anything other than having the paper that says so, is their country. They have gone to school here, they work here, and they have been positive citizens here. And, hopefully--as the President said, he loved these children--we could relieve their fears and, in effect, redeem the American Dream for them. There are other issues, obviously, with which we have to deal, and I would urge the majority leader, as well, at some point in time, to make a path forward for comprehensive immigration reform, because it is a system we all agree is broken and needs to be fixed and is part of the problem. Two more issues, Mr. Speaker. The majority leader mentioned the budget would be coming to the floor. This is the 2018 budget. This is obviously late, but, nevertheless, it is being brought to the floor, and we will be able to consider it. Can the gentleman tell me: Will this include reconciliation instructions and, if so, what those reconciliation instructions will deal with? I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Leader, will it assume the repeal of the ACA in fiscal year '17 or fiscal year '18, either one of those years, which clearly has not seemed possible at this point in time? I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the majority leader for that observation. Obviously, we disagree, as he knows, on the success or failure of the ACA. As a matter of fact, every health organization in America, every major health organization in America opposed the repeal, a bill that came to the floor. Senator McCain, I thought, gave a very powerful exhortation to all of us when he said, on July 25, we ought to do this in a bipartisan way. We found, now, three efforts to repeal by the majority party, who control all three--the Senate, the House, and the Presidency--an inability to do that. Mr. Speaker, I believe--and I would hope the majority leader would pursue efforts, and we would do the same on our side. We believe the ACA has been working. We believe that 20-plus million more people are insured under the ACA than were insured before the ACA. We believe people with preexisting conditions were able to get insurance. We believe seniors saved substantial money in purchasing prescription drugs as a result of that. We believe that people did not have--we know they did not have the specter of being canceled because their expenses in any one year were above a limit and that their lifetime limits would not be imposed when they get a serious critical illness. So we think it worked. The majority has tried to repeal it. They have not succeeded at this point in time, but they have created, Mr. Speaker, great anxiety and uncertainty in the marketplace. And to the extent, for instance, that premiums have risen in our State, the head of Blue Cross/Blue Shield, the largest insurer in our State, said the reason for at least 50 percent was the uncertainty that had been created by the administration and by the debates that have occurred in this House and the proposals that have occurred in this House, which have undermined the market. I talked to him the other day, and he said, in fact, if there were stability, he believes rates would come down significantly because insurance companies, providers, would have an opportunity to have a stable environment in which they could assess the cost of health insurance. Did the majority leader want to say anything? I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. Mr. Speaker, we could go on, I presume, all day, and our friends who want to do a 1-minute or a Special Order would not be happy with us, and they are maybe not happy now, but the fact of the matter is that this is a critically important issue to our country. When he talks about providers, the providers said they didn't like any of these bills. We have had three opportunities: one that was offered but not put on the floor; then one that came to the floor and passed this House and then went to the Senate, and the majority of the Senate has not agreed with any of the three alternatives; plus the alternative that Senator Graham brought forward along with the Senator from Louisiana. The majority in the Senate has not agreed, and, Mr. Speaker, what that has done is provided the insurance industry, providers, doctors, medical authorities with total lack of confidence on what is going to happen tomorrow. Nobody in business believes that you can have proper pricing if you do not know the context in which you are pricing your product. So, yes, there has been a disruption. What we ought to do, as Senator McCain said, is come together and make sure a system works. We believe the ACA is working--not working as well as it should right now, it is not working as much for the small market or people on the exchanges as it should. It can. Almost every medical provider and the majority of the American people over these last 8 months has changed from not liking the ACA and not thinking it is good for them, to where the majority of the American people now support it, and 7 out of 10-plus want the ACA fixed, not repealed. So in that context, it seems to me it is both good politics and good policy for us to come together and to create a system that works for the American people. We believe that is by fixing the ACA, and to that extent, we reflect the majority of the American people. Secondly, Mr. Speaker, the last issue I want to bring up are two items that were not included in the FAA bill, but which are important programs. One is the Perkins Loan Program for students. We know that the cost of education has skyrocketed and that we need to extend that act. That bill, by the way, Mr. Speaker, has 226 cosponsors, so it is not as if there is not a majority of the House that already supports that extension. The second thing that needs to be done: we need to deal with a comprehensive health system in our communities, the Community Health Centers. We need to deal with the teaching hospitals. We need to deal with the disproportionate share of hospitals. So there are many things that we did not include in the bill that we passed today that need to be addressed and need to be addressed immediately. They are not on the schedule for next week. Can my friend give me some idea when we might consider those, which, of course, expire on September 30? So September 30 will come and go before we start next week's schedule. Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. I appreciate that. You mentioned SCHIP. Can you refer to the Perkins Loan Program? Does the gentleman know whether that is also moving forward? Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that SCHIP is on the committee's agenda for next week. Hopefully, that can be brought to the floor before we leave in this work period, perhaps just before or just after the Dream Act is brought to the floor. Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend, the majority leader.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. Margarida Curtis has been a longtime employee of the United States Senate and, as a result, an employee of the people of the United States. Margarida, you have always done your work with great ability and clarity. We very much appreciate your service to the Senate, but also to this House, to the Congress itself, and to the American people. They are grateful for all you have done. God speed.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. President Stearns and Vice President Frost, and Tom, who is going to tell you what to do, welcome back; although, I see a lot of you, from time to time, as you walk the halls and remind us of the good old days. We have had quite a session so far, as I think you have noticed. You heard me talk before, and I am sure you have made this recognition already, we lost one of the great Americans with whom many of us have served, Bob Michel. Bob Michel passed away. Bob Dole is still with us, still with a great sense of humor, and, frankly, I miss those two Republicans dearly, and I miss a lot of you as well. We can remember when we were much more collegial than we now find ourselves. We saw an election in Alabama which does not bode well for future collegiality in the United States Senate, I think. We will see what happens in that election. Obviously, that was the primary. We will see what happens in the general. I think all of us have a responsibility to talk about the Congress that we have served in over the years. This is my 36th year in the Congress. I don't know that any of you served that long, and some people are asking why I am serving that long. Nick Rahall, how many years did you serve?

Mr. HOYER. Thirty-eight. So I have to run one more time at least. Right, Nick? But in any event, I like to be with each of you every year that you come back here. As I say, I see some of you. And the Historical Society obviously does a wonderful job. I think that when I see you and we say ``hello'' to one another, it is in a different context in which we meet as people who have participated in a very important and historic way, have worked together, have respected the institution, have respected the process of the institution, and have differed, obviously, but, nevertheless, were able to come to a place where we agreed to disagree and to at least act on that on which we could agree. I think that was very important for our country. As I have said before, and as you know, I continue to be very concerned about what we project to the country. The Congress now has single-digit approval. They don't believe the board of directors of the United States of America is working, and I think that is of great concern to all of us as citizens, as Americans, that we can't be successful as a nation if we have so little respect from the people who we represent, or confidence that we are doing the work that they want done. I try to convey to them, and I want to tell you, as you know, the majority leader, Kevin McCarthy from California, and I get along well. We don't always agree, obviously. Roy Blunt, who is one of my best friends, as I think some of you know, is now a Senator from Missouri but was the minority whip, and was the acting minority leader and minority whip for a period of time. He likes to say, ``Connie, Steny and I always agree when there are at least 420 other people voting the same way,'' which is to say unanimous consent essentially we agree. Roy and I didn't agree, but when we agreed, we made things happen in a bipartisan way. Kevin McCarthy and I do the same--not as often because we are more polarized than when most of you served in this Congress. When you served in this Congress, you remember, there were real confrontations. Some of us served in the Gingrich years, and they were pretty tough years, but even in those times when you served, there was an ability, I think, to work more closely together than now exists. John Boehner is not in the Congress because he wanted to work together, and we did on some very significant things. And John finally said: Look, if I can't get 218 on my side, I am not sure I want to be Speaker. He wasn't pushed out. People who say John Boehner was pushed out are wrong. John Boehner decided to leave. He wasn't pushed out. He would have had the majority of support on his side of the aisle all the time. There was no doubt about that. But I think John just got frustrated about his inability to galvanize a majority. I think Mitch McConnell probably empathizes a lot with John Boehner right now. Probably all of you think so as well. But I like to come here, and I thank you for staying engaged, staying involved--raising the institution, as opposed to the partisanship, but the institution and what its role is in our democracy. People talk about: Every 2 years, you really ought to change that. I am not sure that we ought to change it. The Founding Fathers were undoubtedly right, in my opinion. Does it cause us problems? Yes, it does. I tell my colleagues on my side: You cannot solve America's problems in 24-month cycles. What I mean by that, of course, is if all we have is thinking that goes from election to election, we won't be able to solve America's problems because they are not just subject to a 24-month solution. We have got to think longer term. I am very worried about the debt, as I am sure some of you are, but we continue to do either spending or cutting taxes, and both sides that do that talk about how we need to balance the budget. We are not there. I thank you for staying engaged. I thank you for continuing to communicate with the public, with my constituents and your constituents, your former constituents, and your broader constituents as your fellow American citizens, to try to encourage them. When people say: When are you guys going to get together? My response to them is: As soon as you do. And they look at me quizzically. I say: As soon as you elect, on both sides of the aisle--Nick, have I talked too long? Is that my signal? What Nick is saying is: You junior Members need to get off the floor.

Mr. HOYER. I am about to end. My point to you is we need to work together to make sure that our citizens do not believe that if you make an agreement with the other side you have sold out. I don't care which side you are on. Democracy is about compromise. Democracy is about working together. Democracy is about the creation of consensus. If we can't do that, we won't succeed as a country. Forget about Republicans and Democrats, we won't suceed as a country. I know you continue to do that, and, very frankly, looking at so many of you with whom I have had the honor and pleasure of serving, I know that when you were here, you worked at doing that. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Frost.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to offer my thanks to Kevin Chambers for over thirty-five years of dedicated service to the United States House of Representatives. Kevin will be retiring this Friday, September 29. He is a constituent in Maryland's Fifth Congressional District, living in Calvert County, and I am proud to represent him and his family in Congress. Kevin has been the very definition of exceptional customer service that all Chief Administrative Office (CAO) employees strive to provide to the House community. His thorough leadership and oversight in assisting Members with setting up their offices and with relocations during numerous Congressional transitions has provided a template for success for many years to come. Kevin's extensive knowledge of House furniture and its history and his mastery of building and sustaining relationships with Members and staff has resulted in cohesiveness and joint partnerships throughout the House campus. He has also maintained strong relationships over the years with colleagues from the CAO and Architect of the Capitol offices. For all who have had the pleasure of working with him, Kevin has been an invaluable asset and will be greatly missed. Kevin began his career with the House CAO on December 12, 1980 as a Laborer. In March 1987 he advanced to Assistant Warehouse Manager and became Warehouse Manager in 1990. In that capacity, he served as a point of contact between CAO staff and Members of Congress regarding service orders for office furnishings. In 2001, the CAO called upon Kevin to offer his expertise to the newly developed First Call customer service center as a Senior Customer Solutions Consultant. There, he provided guidance, advice, and assistance to House offices regarding the selection and purchase of office furniture, equipment, and supplies. Later, Kevin became a Senior Team Lead with the Modular- Transition office. In 2016, Kevin moved to the Manager role and led the team on House-wide projects, including the Cannon House Office Building Renewal Relocations effort. Over many years, Kevin has provided guidance to management as a subject-matter expert on House operations, and he has been an integral part of the CAO. Among his many accomplishments over the years, Kevin supervised the CAO's Transition Office staff over the past eight Congressional transitions. He was always the first to arrive and last to leave. He provided the transitional move coordinators with the knowledge and support necessary to assist incoming freshman Members and participating returning Members effectively and efficiently. Not only has Kevin been thoroughly involved with Congressional Transitions, his extensive CAO and House knowledge put him in a position to become the Clerk's Office's main point of contact for all Congressional special elections. Furthermore, Kevin has dedicated his career to making the CAO and the House of Representatives a better place to work and a place that runs as smoothly and efficiently as possible. He has passed along his many years of project management and customer service experience to staff and coworkers so they can continue the extremely high standards of quality service expected by the CAO. On behalf of the entire House, I extend congratulations to Kevin for his many years of dedication and outstanding contributions. I hope my colleagues will join me in wishing him and his wife Cynthia many happy years together in retirement.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to the Paul Hall Center for Maritime Training and Education, which is located in Maryland's Fifth Congressional District. It is one of the leading schools for merchant mariners in the United States and a major contributor to the development and maintenance of our nation's proud maritime traditions. The Paul Hall Center, which was founded in 1967 by late Seafarers International Union President Paul Hall, runs the leading training program for unlicensed merchant mariners in the United States today. It offers more U.S. Coast Guard-approved training courses than any other school in the nation and has trained tens of thousands of mariners since its founding. The Paul Hall Center's apprenticeship program, which is registered with the U.S. Department of Labor, has been praised as one of the most effective apprenticeship programs in the country and was honored as an ``Innovator and Trailblazer'' by the Labor Department in 2012. Today, the Paul Hall Center provides students a world-class education, preparing new merchant mariners to take their places on vessels sailing in both foreign and U.S.-flag fleets. It is critical that our country maintain a merchant marine capable of transporting a large share of the seagoing commerce of the United States. The Paul Hall Center's programs help ensure a sufficient number of well-trained, highly skilled merchant mariners to crew U.S.-flag vessels both for the privately owned merchant marine and for U.S. government-operated fleets. To that end, I hope my colleagues will join me in recognizing the significant contributions that the Paul Hall Center for Maritime Training and Education has made to our economy, our homeland security, and our national defense through its support of the U.S. Merchant Marine. I hope they will also join me in congratulating the Paul Hall Center on reaching this fiftieth anniversary milestone. I'm proud to represent this wonderful institution in the United States Congress.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, last week on the east front outside the Capitol on the lawn, I met with a group of DREAMers. DREAMers, of course, refers to young Americans who were brought here as children without proper documentation, but who have grown up in our communities, studied in our schools, and are American in every way but on paper. The DREAMers I met with, Mr. Speaker, were fasting--fasting to protest the President's destructive decision to end the DACA program that allowed them to register to live and work in the only country they consider to be theirs. They were fasting to encourage us in this House to take action to remedy their situation by enacting a permanent fix, as President Trump has suggested. One of the young DREAMers, Mr. Speaker, I met was a young man named Diego. He is 28. Born in Mexico, he came here as a young child and was raised in Arkansas. He didn't make a decision to come here. He was brought here by his parents. Thanks to DACA, he was able to get a job, a driver's license, and pay taxes to support the country he loves. Diego is now a graduate of the University of Arkansas, and a Public Policy Fellow with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute. How stupid it would be to send him to some other country that he does not know. I also met Karen from Florida, age 22. She also was brought here from Mexico at a very young age. Now she attends college and owns a small business. There was Fernanda from Alabama. She is 23 and graduated from a 4- year university with honors, thanks to the scholarships she could apply for once registered under DACA. How stupid it would be to say to her: Leave. There is Brandon, age 19. He told me that he has a younger sister who was born here. He, of course, does not want to be separated from her as a result of being deported. What kind of a judgment is it that we would divide a sister and a brother, particularly a brother who has made such a positive impact on his community? Mr. Speaker, this issue is about real people. Real people. They are Americans in mind and in spirit because they grew up here, they love this country, and they contribute to building our communities and Nation every day. Let's not forget that. That is why so many thousands of businesses and major business groups in America have said: Keep DACA in place. That is why the President said: Fix this, and I will sign the bill. That is why so many churches and communities and educators and medical personnel have said: Keep these folks here. They are making a positive difference for America. Mr. Speaker, I urge the Speaker and the majority leader to bring a bill to this floor that will do what President Trump says we ought to do and put DACA in legislation. Pass the Dream Act. We are going to have an opportunity to do that at the end of this month, next month, and hopefully we will get that done. Let's pass this bipartisan, bicameral Dream Act without delay so that Diego, Karen, Fernanda, Brandon, and so many thousands more who see America as their country, who are making a positive contribution to their country, can stay here. They know of no other home than America, and they want to be a part of building this country's future. Mr. Speaker, immigrants have always made that contribution. It is immigrants who built this country. My father came here at the age of 32 in 1934. He came from Denmark. I am the son of an immigrant, born here in America. He served in World War II and became a citizen through his service in World War II. I rarely quote Rush Limbaugh. He said: We are not going to send these kids home. Eighty-four percent of the American people, in that neighborhood, believe that we ought not to send these kids back to the countries of their birth, which are not their home. That is bad policy. Let's listen. Let's act. Let's make the lives of these young people more secure and more productive for America.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Will the gentleman yield?