Steny Hoyer

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, on April 22, Bowie State University celebrated the leadership and career of its ninth president, Dr. Mickey Burnim, at its annual Founders Gala. The annual Founders Gala marks the anniversary of the founding of the school in 1865 that would later become Bowie State University. While I was, unfortunately, unable to join the celebration in person, I want to express my great thanks to Dr. Burnim for all he has achieved during his tenure and congratulate him on being honored at this year's gala. I also join in wishing him well on his upcoming retirement. When Dr. Burnim steps down as President of Bowie State University, he will complete eleven very successful years leading one of Maryland's great institutions of higher education and one of our nation's oldest and most illustrious historically black universities. Having come to Bowie State after serving as Chancellor of Elizabeth City State University in North Carolina and as Provost and Vice Chancellor of North Carolina Central University, Dr. Burnim brought to his presidency an already long and distinguished career in university administration. At a time when higher education costs are rising, Bowie State has been recognized for its outstanding value, including being ranked by The Economist for having the best higher education value in Maryland. An economist by training, Dr. Burnim has recognized the criticality of securing a sound fiscal future for the University, and during his time in office he took steps to put Bowie State on a solid footing for long- term expansion. With new resources secured, one of the focuses of his tenure has been the construction of new campus buildings, including a new student center, a performing arts center, and a new $107 million facility for the study and practice of Science, Mathematics, and Nursing. Recognizing how important it is to connect graduates with career opportunities and to foster young entrepreneurs, Dr. Burnim worked with the City of Bowie to launch the Bowie Business Innovation Center on campus. Under his leadership, Bowie State has continued to expand the programs it offers and to conduct groundbreaking research across a number of disciplines. I am very proud to represent Bowie State University in Congress. Since its founding as the Baltimore Normal School after the Civil War, Bowie State University has served as an important nexus of education and opportunity for African Americans, and after 152 years it has grown to become one of our country's great universities and educates students from all backgrounds. Bowie State joined the University System of Maryland in 1988 and, along with the other institutions of higher education across our state, helps make Maryland one of the best places to pursue study in the country and, indeed, the world. Within the University System of Maryland, Bowie State has earned a reputation for leading in the fields of science, technology, engineering, the arts, and mathematics--or `STEAM'--and creating innovative interdisciplinary programs that bring them all together to prepare students for success in emerging industries of the twenty-first century economy. It was Dr. Burnim who led Bowie State's effort to adopt the Education Innovation Initiative (EI\2\), a STEAM-enrichment program that makes early career pathway exposure accessible to under- represented students throughout Prince George's County. Dr. Mickey Burnim has been instrumental to the University's achievements and its strong trajectory for growth in the years ahead. I have been honored to work with him to ensure that Bowie State has had a partner in the federal government, and I thank him for all his hard work over the past eleven years as President and throughout his four decades in higher education. I wish him all the best, and I join in celebrating his very successful tenure that has made a real difference in the lives of tens of thousands of students across Maryland and the United States.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I am so pleased to be here in the House. I am not pleased that we are considering a continuing resolution. To that extent, I presume that I share the opinion of the chairman of the committee, Mr. Frelinghuysen. I presume, as she has just articulated, that I share the opinion of the ranking member from New York. Mr. Speaker, we are now 7 months into fiscal year 2017. We have 5 months remaining, and the majority party has been unable to fund government for the balance of the fiscal year. They have over 218 votes in this body, and they have over 50 votes in the Senate. Now, you need 60 votes in the Senate, so it is more complicated. I understand that. But they now have a Republican President. As we did for the 2016 budget, which we passed in December of 2015 to the balance for September 30, 2016--I know all those dates run together--it was my desire and my advice, Mr. Speaker, that we do the same thing last December: pass an omnibus, take all the bills that the Committee on Appropriations has spent literally hundreds of hours hearing and making decisions on, make the compromises necessary in a democratic body so that 218 votes would be available. Now, the American public, if they have been watching closely, will see that not a single major appropriation bill has passed this House without Democratic help, so that everybody in this body knows that whatever is done in a major fiscal bill has to be done in a bipartisan way. The good news for this House is Mr. Frelinghuysen understands that well, based upon his experience and his observations, and, in my view, is willing to work together. I know that that also applies to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey). I had the opportunity to be on the Committee on Appropriations for 23 years. I am still a member of that committee on leave because I am a whip at this point in time. I am going to vote for this continuing resolution, but I want to put my colleagues and the American people on notice, Mr. Speaker, that I will not vote for another one. I said to the press a month ago that I would vote for a continuing resolution today only if we had an agreement and the continuing resolution was for the purpose of allowing sufficient time to memorialize that agreement; in other words, put it down on paper and pass it through the House and the Senate. We are, unfortunately, not in that position today. It is my understanding from Mrs. Lowey, with whom I talked this morning, that there are still significant items that are not resolved. Mr. Speaker, I talked to the Speaker, Mr. Ryan, and to the majority leader standing right there on the floor just hours ago yesterday. It is my understanding that the Speaker's intention is that we have a bill filed Monday night so, in the Speaker's words, we can give 72 hours to review that bill and then pass it on Thursday.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I hope that the Speaker's intention is carried out, which will require, over the next 72 hours, hard work by Members and by staff and a willingness to understand that each side has some things it must have and each side has some things it cannot do. That is the nature of the legislative process. If we exercise the responsibility that our constituents hoped that we would exercise when they sent us to this body, surely we can do that. I want to tell my friend, the chairman, for whom I have great respect--I hope that doesn't hurt him too much on his side of the aisle--that I want you to be able to say that Mr. Hoyer said he was going to urge his colleagues not to vote for another CR, and that, therefore, unless you have 218 votes on your side for whatever the product that you produce, that if we are going to fund government, as we surely should do, that we come to an agreement. Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Committee on Appropriations for 23 years, I was very proud, it was the most bipartisan committee in the Congress, and we understood our responsibility that the appropriation bills are the one bill that must pass if we are to continue to serve our public and keep America strong and vibrant and economically growing jobs. This is a serious matter. Continuing to kick the can down the road ought to be an unacceptable alternative.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I urge every one of my colleagues--there are not a lot of people on the floor, Mr. Speaker, but I hope they are watching on television--to understand that the basic responsibility that we have of ensuring the functioning of the government of the people of the United States is one that we ought to perform in a responsible, effective, and timely fashion. Mr. Chairman, I will work with you, and I will work with Mrs. Lowey over the next few days to ensure that next week we have a product that can pass this House because it has bipartisan support and is in the best interests of our country.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy), the majority leader, 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. Mr. Speaker, I thank the majority leader for the information on the schedule for next week. I would ask him, with respect to Korea, that being on the floor-- also, as I understand it, the committee has been working on a Syria sanctions bill. Obviously both of those areas are critically important. Does the gentleman have any information when we might anticipate the Syria resolution coming forward as well? I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his focus on that issue because we agree, of course, that that is a serious and volatile matter with which we need to deal in a hopefully effective way. Two items, one that the gentleman mentioned. We just passed a continuing resolution, as the gentleman noted. And pursuant to our discussions, Democrats and Republicans both overwhelmingly voted for that, and it passed handily. I don't know whether the gentleman heard my remarks on the floor, but what I had indicated is--and I have indicated to him privately--that we Democrats are in a position of not supporting an additional continuing resolution. In my discussions with Mrs. Lowey, our ranking member on the Appropriations Committee, she believes that there is a possibility to get an agreement between the two parties, but it appears that the committees themselves have reached a point where they think they will need additional assistance from leadership, I presume, on both sides of the aisle to resolve some of the thorniest issues that are still outstanding. I want to thank the majority leader and the Speaker. In our discussions yesterday on the floor in private--they weren't, I don't think, private discussions because there were other people around. Both the Speaker and yourself are desirous of getting this done before the end of the weekend, posting something either as early perhaps as Sunday night or as late as Monday night on an omnibus, which would fund government between next week and the end of the fiscal year September 30. So the first question would be: We share that objective in common, I presume; is that accurate? I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for that, and I would urge the Speaker and the majority leader to engage with others because I think that would be useful in facilitating the reaching of an agreement. I know that Leader Pelosi and I will also be available to the extent that we could facilitate that. I know there are some thorny, tough issues still outstanding, but I know the majority leader agrees with me that the funding of government on a sporadic basis on a continuing resolution is very bad for morale of the Federal service, very bad for anybody who wants to plan on how to execute their obligations and responsibilities, and frankly very disconcerting not only to the American people but to people around the world who contemplate the shutdown of the Government of the United States of America on which so much of the world relies for some degree of stability. It is simply not a thing that we ought to be doing. So I would urge the leader and myself to be as engaged as we need to be to get us to that objective next week. Secondly, Mr. Majority Leader, I know we had some discussion about a healthcare bill. The Affordable Care Act, as you know, we think is working. We think, working together, we can make it better. I know the majority leader and his party disagree with that and want to see it repealed and that there is legislation to do that. The majority leader did not mention it in his comments, but does he anticipate the American Health Care Act, with or without amendments, being considered next week? I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for that comment. The gentleman is certainly correct, we have very substantial disagreements. We believe the Affordable Care Act is working. I was pleased to see the administration, at least in the short-term, indicate that they will not take actions to undermine it or sabotage it without passing a replacement, without having the ability to give to the American people an option. I think the administration did the right thing. I hope they will continue to do the right thing in making payments consistent with the law. We will have a very significant debate on that bill. Therefore, I would urge the majority leader if, in fact, the majority leader is going to bring that bill to the floor at some point in time, that significant notice be given so that not only Members of Congress, but that the American people can have the opportunity to assess the ramifications--in our perspective, the very serious adverse ramifications--that the passage of the American Health Care Act would have on the health care and the cost to every American of health insurance. The President, as you know, has indicated that he wants to make sure--and he said he would support a program where every American has insurance, not access to insurance. He has made comments numerous times during the course of the campaign and since he has been President of the United States that his program would provide for every American to have health insurance at a lower cost with better quality. I have told the people that, if he sends such a bill down, I would be inclined to support such a bill. He has not, of course, sent such a bill down. So, Mr. Leader, the bottom line is I am simply saying that this will be a very controversial item and deserving of very significant debate, discussion. Hopefully, we will get significant notice as to when the majority leader expects to bring it to the floor so that we could be prepared for that debate. I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, at the end of the week, President Trump will reach his 100th day in office. These first 100 days, unfortunately, have been defined by chaos, contradiction, and conflicts of interest, and he has broken campaign promise after campaign promise. He claimed he would be the greatest jobs President God ever created, yet he has failed to put forward a single jobs bill and is taking credit for jobs that were created or announced long before he took office. He said he would fight for working families, yet his budget would slash investments that create jobs and opportunities. He said he would drain the swamp, yet he refuses to release his taxes, which would shed light on his own conflict of interest. Washington is now practically drowning in the swamp President Trump has rained down on our Capital. He promised to balance the budget in 9 years. It took him, unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, less than 30 days to abandon that pledge, and his most recent proposals--tax cuts--would plunge our Nation even more deeply into debt. But perhaps most emblematic of the failure of this Presidency's first 100 days was his attempt to repeal the Affordable Care Act and purportedly to replace it. The President has promised insurance for everybody--not access, insurance for everybody. He said that over and over again. But TrumpCare would do exactly the opposite, kicking 24 million people off their coverage and precluding millions more from being able to get health insurance. The President promised coverage that is much less expensive and much better, but TrumpCare would force Americans to pay more for less. Not my observation--the Congressional Budget Office's. The President promised he wouldn't cut Medicaid, but like so many other broken promises, TrumpCare cuts Medicaid deeply. As was true of the President's campaign, he brought no unity to his attack on America's health, and his plan was not even voted on. Indeed, that has been followed by Republican efforts to make their proposal even more draconian. The second 100 days looms even worse as the Trump White House continues to be focused on kicking Americans off their coverage and making the rest pay more and getting less, saying it intends to bring an even more draconian version of its TrumpCare bill back. Mr. Speaker, Republicans control both the House, the Senate, and the administration. They are now, theoretically, the governing party, and whatever happens to our healthcare system on their watch will be their responsibility. So as this administration reaches its 100th day in office, it has a choice. It can continue to rack up the failures that it has amassed or it can turn the page to constructive cooperation. The President can, contrary to his promises, keep trying to take health coverage away from the American people and make it more expensive, or he can set partisanship aside and work across the aisle to make sure the Affordable Care Act works for everyone. We ought to be working together to accomplish that objective. He must start by ensuring that the promised cost-sharing reduction payments under the Affordable Care Act are made. If he does not, millions of people will be deeply hurt, the insurance system will be destabilized, and Americans across this country will find their policies more expensive. On jobs, he can continue doing nothing or he can finally show the American people a plan to invest in jobs and infrastructure. Send us the legislation you promised, Mr. President. And he can keep hiding his tax returns from the American people and ducking and weaving when it comes to his ties to Russia, or finally draw the curtain back and show what he has been hiding and support a bipartisan, independent commission to seek the answers Americans deserve and America must have. Mr. Speaker, in these first 100 days, if they are a prologue of that which is to come, I grieve for us all. America is a great and good nation, an exceptional nation and people. We must not, by demagoguery, irrationality, and negligence, on the wings of a tweet, allow it to be brought low.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia for yielding, and I thank the chairman for bringing this resolution to the floor. Mr. Speaker, as I was sitting here listening to Congressman Johnson, I got so inspired that I just want to go out and jump in a soapbox or jump on a soapbox to give my talk. I have been at this for a very long period of time. The soapbox derby has been going on for 76 years; 36 of those years, I had the great privilege of serving in this body. I rise each year to sponsor the resolution allowing the Greater Washington Soap Box Derby Association to hold its annual race on the Capitol Grounds. It is appropriate, I think, that it is here at the Capitol. The inspiration of the Capitol, the inspiration of the dome, the inspiration and excitement of which Congressman Johnson just spoke, I think, captures the sense of what ``soapbox derby'' means. This year marks, as I said, the 76th year of the derby, Mr. Speaker, at which young people from around the region, from age 8 all the way to age 17, compete in three divisions. Those divisions are stock, super stock, and masters. So you are talking about these sophisticated soapboxes. They are not your father's soapbox, that is for sure. It is not only a fun and exciting event, it is also educational and brings children together, young people together, young adults together with their parents, grandparents, siblings, and neighbors to plan and build their soapbox racers. You know, one of the things we need in America is more engineers. I am a lawyer. I don't know that we need more lawyers. And we need doctors, of course, but people tell me, if we are going to make things in America, we need more engineers, people who work with their hands, people who create, people who design, and that is what this soapbox derby is about. Doing so, participating in this contest helps connect these young people with hands-on engineering and manufacturing lessons which promote greater interest in the STEM fields which we all talk about: science, technology, engineering, and math. This has been the case, Mr. Speaker, since the first soapbox derby in 1938, and this long tradition now continues in the 21st century. The winner in each division will then qualify to race against the regional champions from across the Nation later this year, at Derby Downs, at the All-American Soap Box Derby in Akron, Ohio. This year, the Greater Washington Soap Box Derby will be held on June 17, Mr. Speaker. The derby has been called ``the greatest amateur racing event in the world.'' I don't know whether it is the greatest, but it is certainly one of the great contests in the world and teaches participating youth about fortitude, about leadership, about engineering, sportsmanship, and pride of achievement. In addition to bringing families together, the Soap Box Derby brings communities closer together, Mr. Speaker. Many of the races are sponsored and cheered by their local civic groups, police, fire departments, and service organizations. I have been proud, as I said, Mr. Speaker, to sponsor this resolution for 26 years, and I believe strongly in the importance of this tradition and am convinced of the very positive impact the Derby has on young people from my district who participate, around this region, and around the country. Maryland's Fifth District, my district, has been home to a number of Greater Washington Soap Box Derby winners, including the winners from 2007, 2008, 2009, 2012, 2013, and 2014. The Washington region is millions of people. My young people and their advisers, otherwise may be called parents, are doing pretty well in this, and we are proud of that. Our racers even won the national championship in 2007 and 2008. I hope my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, will join me in supporting this resolution and thanking the organizers of the Greater Washington Soap Box Derby. I hope they will also join me in congratulating, in advance, all of the young people from the region who will be participating on June 17. I also want to thank my cosponsors: Gerry Connolly, Don Beyer, John Delaney, Jamie Raskin, Anthony Brown, Eleanor Holmes Norton, and Barbara Comstock. This is a bipartisan resolution. I am sure everybody will support it, and I am sure that the excitement of which Congressman Johnson spoke will be experienced by those young people as they race towards victory. Whether they win the number one spot, they will be winners for having participated in this creative contest that makes them better people.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to offer my gratitude and congratulations to an outstanding public servant and firefighter, who has been truly a gift to the people of Prince George's County, Maryland. Chief Marc Bashoor retired in February after leading the Prince George's County Fire Department for the past six years and following a career in the fire service that has lasted more than three decades. Throughout that time, he has won well-deserved praise from county, state, and national officials for his skill at management and his efforts to streamline operations and provide steady leadership. Chief Bashoor has also received high marks from residents across the county, grateful for the peace of mind that comes with a well-run fire department. Chief Bashoor, a native of Bowie in Prince George's County, came to the fire service at the young age of sixteen, when he began as a volunteer firefighter there. It was there at Station No. 39 that he met his wife, Laura, a fellow volunteer firefighter. Their wedding celebration prominently included a County fire truck, naturally. Chief Bashoor became a paid firefighter with the Prince George's County Fire Department in 1987 and served until 2004, when he retired and took a job as Director of Homeland Security for Mineral County in West Virginia. Thankfully, Prince George's County Executive Rushern Baker was able to convince him to return in 2010 as Fire Chief. I, and so many in my district, am very glad that he did. During his tenure in office, Chief Bashoor oversaw a major expansion to meet the needs of the growing county. He hired more paid firefighters, recruited more volunteers, purchased more vehicles and equipment, and worked to bring new fire stations online. He advocated for the Department to have a budget increase of 30 percent. It paid off, with response times to emergency calls going down measurably. We cannot even begin to speculate how many lives and properties were saved as a result. I've been fortunate to work closely with Chief Bashoor throughout his tenure. As a Co-Chair of the Congressional Fire Services Caucus, I've worked to increase F.I.R.E. and S.A.F.E.R. grants and ensure that the Prince George's County Fire Department and departments all across the country have the resources they need to keep their communities and their personnel safe. I've also joined with him to advance the work of ensuring that the families of fallen firefighters receive the benefits they deserve as well as the honor and gratitude they are owed. Mr. Speaker, our nation counts on dedicated fire service leaders like Chief Bashoor every day, and I join in thanking him and all who work or volunteer on the fire line. I hope my colleagues will join me in wishing Chief Bashoor well in his retirement and in thanking him for his extraordinary service to Prince George's County, the State of Maryland, and our nation.

Mr. HOYER

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

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for that information. As the majority leader knows, after today we will have 8 legislative days left before the CR runs out on April 28. We will be gone, as the gentleman knows, for 2 weeks, or a few more days than that, for the Easter break. We have not enacted any appropriation bills except for the MILCON-VA and the Defense Appropriation bill we passed through this House in a bipartisan vote and that is pending in the Senate. Given the limited number of days in session before April 28, we are going to require relatively quick action if we are to fund the government for the balance of the year past April 28. Mr. Leader, can you tell me--because no appropriation bill or CR or omnibus was on the schedule for next week, can the gentleman tell me when he expects some form of continuing to authorize expenditures for the balance of the year between now and September 30 will occur? Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for those comments. Does the gentleman contemplate the possibility of a short-term CR being necessary? Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for that information and comments. Frankly, I want to tell the majority leader, honestly, nobody on my side, maybe someplace else, but nobody on my side is wanting to shut down the government. We don't want to shut down the government. Of course, I will remind my friend, the majority leader--and I appreciate his comments about our cooperation and ability to work together--the only way the government has been kept open over the last 5 years has been with Democratic votes. My friend didn't have 218 votes on his side of the aisle that would do that. So I think that belies the fact that we want to shut down the government. I would assure my friend that that is neither our intent or desire. As a matter of fact, we want to work quickly to avoid that happening. That is not good for, obviously, the American people, it is not good for managers trying to plan on how to deliver services, and it is certainly not good for our Federal employees. So I would want to work with you to make sure that doesn't happen. As we have in the past, we will be prepared to provide votes, as we have every time, to ensure that that does not happen. Let me ask my friend, as we work towards the end of not shutting down government and passing, hopefully, an omnibus which will complete the 2017 appropriations process and fund the government through September 30, let me ask him--he was quoting some information. I have a quote for him as well. I know he would be disappointed if I didn't have a quote. This is not nearly as difficult as some of the others, however. It says: House Republicans are considering making another run next week at the passing of the healthcare bill that they abruptly pulled from the floor in a setback to their efforts to repeal ObamaCare. Two Republican lawyers say the leaders are discussing holding a vote, even staying into next weekend, if necessary, but it is unclear what changes would be made to the GOP's healthcare bill . . . That was in Bloomberg News on March 29. Does the majority leader have any information or expectation that we would be considering another bill seeking to repeal the Affordable Care Act next week? I know the majority leader didn't announce that for next week, and I know on Thursday we will break for the Easter break. Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for that information. If I hear what the gentleman just said, my interpretation is that we don't expect anything next week, but that does not mean that we don't expect something in the future. Is that a correct reading of it? Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, last week was an historic week in many respects. My Republican colleagues have indicated, for 6 years, they wanted to repeal the Affordable Care Act. They introduced a bill which really did not accomplish that objective, but it did undermine, very severely, the protections and the opportunities that the Affordable Care Act provided our citizens. That bill did not come to a vote. Had it come to a vote, it would have lost very substantially. Mr. Speaker, the proclamations last week by Republican leaders are that the Affordable Care Act will now remain in place. As Paul Ryan, our Speaker, said on Friday: ``ObamaCare is the law of the land.'' The Affordable Care Act is, indeed, the law of the land. Mr. Speaker, I rise, however, in a deep concern that the Trump administration and its allies in Congress will take steps to undermine the law and weaken it, to the detriment of millions who will see their health care put at risk. In other words, in my view, they may well try to do indirectly what they could not do directly. Let it be absolutely clear: Republicans control the White House, the Senate, and the House of Representatives. As a result, they are the governing party and will be responsible for anything that happens to our healthcare system on their watch. Even without the passage of a repeal bill, the Trump administration's actions could fundamentally undermine the law and the stability of our healthcare system. First and foremost, the Trump administration must commit to continuing payments for cost-sharing subsidies. We met with insurance companies yesterday to see whether or not the environment that was being created by the administration was undermining confidence so that it would undermine the ability to price the product that Americans need: healthcare insurance. Cost-sharing payments, paid for and in the bill, are being put at risk by a suit that the Republicans in the House of Representatives have filed. They ought to withdraw that suit to give confidence to the system. We all know that confidence in markets is critically important. This is essential to preserving the affordability and accessibility of health care for millions of Americans and to ensuring stability in health insurance markets. The uncertainty around cost-sharing subsidies that has been perpetrated by the administration's silence on this issue, must come to an end. The administration has said the system will implode. It will only implode if they are forced to do so by the administration through executive action. Insurers are preparing to file rates as soon as next month in some States. Without a clear and public commitment from the administration, we could very well see premiums spike and insurers flee. Americans have made their opinion pretty clear. They said: Do not do that. Do not undermine the system. Second, already, President Trump has undermined that requirement through lax enforcement that the individual responsibility requirement--a Republican suggestion, a Heritage Foundation suggestion, a Romney-adopted policy in the State of Massachusetts--a premise of personal responsibility that is being undermined right now by the Trump administration. The individual responsibility requirement is vital to ensuring that those with preexisting conditions can be guaranteed coverage. To my friends across the aisle who talk often about defending our Constitution, I would remind them that the President has sworn an oath to faithfully execute the laws of this Nation; not picking and choosing which ones he likes. Third, the administration can--and I would suggest it should-- encourage States that have not yet accepted expanded Medicaid to do so. It works. According to a 2016 report by the Department of Health and Human Services, in the expanded-Medicaid States, premiums were 7 percent lower on average. Mr. Speaker, just yesterday, the Republican-controlled Kansas State legislature--Republican Governor, Republican House, Republican Senate-- sent a bill to the Governor that would expand the State's Medicaid program. Presumably, they made a judgment that was in the best interest of their State and the best interest of their people. The Republican sponsor of the bill, State Senator Vicki Schmidt said: ``I don't believe we can wait for D.C. They had an opportunity, and they didn't take it.'' So her response was, and the legislature's response has been: adopt Medicaid expansion. We have heard a lot from Governors of both parties from States with expanded Medicaid, almost universally extolling the benefits that they provided, and urging Congress not to roll it back. The Trump administration must recognize the importance of Medicaid expansion and support ongoing efforts in States like Kansas, Virginia, and Maine to do what is right for their people and their State. Fourth, the Department of Health and Human Services, under Secretary Price, has a responsibility, a duty, an obligation to focus at least as much on outreach and enrollment, as did his predecessor, Secretary Burwell, to let people know what options they have, what opportunities they have, what protections they have, what securities they can achieve. Earlier this year, the Trump administration, instead, intentionally sabotaged enrollment efforts in the final week, pulling media ads to let people know what they could sign up for, and ending other outreach programs. This move resulted in half a million fewer people obtaining affordable coverage through the marketplaces--the first decline in the history of the law. Those people will be hurt because some of them are going to get sick. Some of them may have a catastrophic accident, and they will need insurance, and they will not have it because they did not get the information that they needed. Now that the Affordable Care Act will continue to be the ``law of the land,'' to use words first spoken by former Speaker Boehner in 2012, the issue in 2012 was the Affordable Care Act--President Obama's probably crowning achievement. Republicans called it ObamaCare, derisively. We call it the Affordable Care Act, supported by President Obama. After the 2012 election, Speaker Boehner said, well, we resolved that issue. The American people have voted to confirm a President whose principal law that was. But the Republicans kept trying to undermine it. They kept trying to say they wanted to repeal it. And now they have all of the power. They haven't done that. Don't break it. If you couldn't do directly something, don't do it indirectly. Don't undermine the security of the American people indirectly; not through law. So when open enrollment comes later this year, Mr. Speaker, it would be a dereliction of duty--let me repeat that: it would be a dereliction of duty--not to inform Americans to know how they can benefit under the law, what options they have for finding coverage at more affordable rates or through expanded Medicaid. Let there not be a dereliction of duty. The larger point here, Mr. Speaker, is, as I have said, that Republicans cannot now simply throw up their hands and say: We failed to offer a viable alternative, and we will now, by action and inaction, by negligence and malfeasance, conspire to undermine the options that are available to the American people. More than two-thirds of Americans have said that is not a responsible policy. The Affordable Care Act has brought protections and benefits to millions. Twenty million more people are insured in America. But now my Republican friends, who have no workable alternative, are in power; and it is now their duty to ensure that they faithfully execute existing laws to benefit the American people. If they fail to do so, or intentionally sabotage the current healthcare system, they will surely be held accountable by the American people. Democrats don't want to see that happen. We reject the premise of some kind of death spiral. By the way, the Congressional Budget Office--an independent bipartisan group, but its director appointed by Republicans--said it was not only not on a death spiral, but it was stable. The yardstick by which we all ought to be judged is not whether the law succeeds just enough, but whether we can work together--work together, work together--to make the law work as best it can, to benefit as many Americans as it can. President Trump, speaking at that rostrum, looked directly into the TV camera of 100 million-plus Americans and said: I want every American to have health insurance that will be cheaper and higher quality than we have today. Mr. President, if you send such a bill to this House, I will vote for it. I haven't seen a bill like that, but if I see it, and if you send it down here, and that is your commitment, I will vote for it. Mr. Speaker, I hope my friends across the aisle will take a lesson from last week that, to paraphrase the President, health insurance is indeed complicated, and that it will truly take both parties working together towards consensus to meet the healthcare challenges we face. Our constituents and our country is counting on us not to fight, not to throw bricks at one another, but to act in their best interest. And what I urge the Trump administration to do, Mr. Speaker: Do no harm until you have a bill that accomplishes what you said to the American people you want to accomplish. Mr. President, do no harm. Ensure that the American people continue to have access to affordable, quality health care.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I rise to honor a dear friend, Maureen ``Mo'' Gilman, who retired on March 17 as the legislative director of the National Treasury Employees Union. Mo served NTEU with great ability for 31 years after working in this House for former Representatives Sam Gejdenson of Connecticut and Chris Dodd, also of Connecticut. NTEU represents approximately 150,000 Federal employees working in 31 Federal agencies. Mo has been tireless in the effort to ensure that Federal civilian employees receive the pay, benefits, and workplace protections they deserve. Mo spent a considerable part of her years at NTEU educating Congress and administrations about the important work Federal servants carry out. At a time when some in Congress and in the current administration are denigrating Federal civil servants, threatening to reduce their pay and benefits and deeply cut the budgets of agencies for which they work, I am more than a little sad to see Mo retire. But as she does, Madam Speaker, I am certain that Mo will keep inspiring us all to continue the fight with the same resolve that she showed every day of her career. I hope my colleagues will join me, Madam Speaker, in wishing Mo Gilman well and thanking her for her extraordinary work on behalf of our country.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I am not going to tell the gentleman, but it was a good fishing trip that the gentleman was on. I thank the gentleman, but my assumption is that Members can be relatively confident, based upon what we are going to do and what you are going to do, to be out of here somewhere before 5 p.m. tomorrow; is that correct? Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's information, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy), my friend, for the purpose of inquiring of the majority leader the schedule for tomorrow.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. May I ask, do you know when the Rules Committee will meet, Mr. Majority Leader? I yield to the gentleman.