Jody Hice

Mr. HICE of Georgia

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, the Constitution can change by amendment only. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Brooks).

Mr. HICE of Georgia

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, the Federal Government has a responsibility to help both individuals and businesses through this crisis because, as the government, they shut down the economy. But I do have deep concerns with the way in which we are attempting to go about this. We have already spent an unprecedented amount of money, $3.6 trillion, at an unprecedented rate. Now, we have a monstrosity, and we have yet to have a serious discussion as to how we are going to pay for this massive debt. In this bill--$3 trillion, 1,800 pages, zero input from the minority, from the Senate or the White House, drafted behind closed doors, and just very little time to review it. As ranking member of the Government Operations Subcommittee, I want to focus on the Postal Service. The Postal Service does not need a bailout; they need reform. It needs reform. We have 12 consecutive years of losing money in the Postal Service, and it was not caused by this pandemic. It is a deeper pandemic within the Postal Service.

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, this is an issue that we have to resolve, not with just a bailout of $25 billion. They have $9 billion sitting in the bank over there. This is our time to be responsible with the people's money, and I urge my colleagues not to support this bill?

Mr. HICE of Georgia

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Madam Speaker, in a very short period of time, this body has moved an unprecedented amount of money at an unprecedented speed, and rather than taking a step back now and looking at the effectiveness of what we have implemented so far, here we are today rushing forward, not only with additional funds, but also to rig up an unnecessary and duplicative select subcommittee for the purpose of investigating the President of the United States. Make no mistake. That is the purpose of this subcommittee. It is entirely political in nature, designed to influence the 2020 elections. From the moment it is gaveled into life, there is no question that the mission will be to prevent the reelection of President Donald Trump. There are already eight real oversight and watchdog processes in this body. Eight. The Oversight and Reform Committee, of which I am a member, has the broadest jurisdiction in this body, and we have the power and the experience needed to oversee any Federal coronavirus response. So why does the Speaker want a ninth? Why are we here looking at a ninth oversight subcommittee, especially when the Democrats are already in charge of the eight that we already have? Why would the appointment of this new select subcommittee be a member of her own leadership team who has already publicly stated that this virus creates for the Democrats a tremendous opportunity to restructure things to fit their vision? That makes it clear what the purpose of this is all about: it is because this is an election year, it is because they hate the President of the United States, and because of that, I strongly encourage my colleagues to reject this resolution, which is intended to create an un-needed and duplicative committee. Madam Chair, I again thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. HICE of Georgia

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, the Federal Government has the responsibility to help individuals and businesses through this crisis because it is the government that shut down the economy--not American workers. Americans and their employers are not responsible for the economic damage being wrought by coronavirus, and I am pleased that the CARES Act will provide an unprecedented amount of immediate relief. However, I have deep concerns about this legislation, and I will be voting in opposition. First, there has been absolutely no discussion on how we will ultimately pay for the trillions of dollars of new federal spending in this bill. As we incur this massive debt, we should be at least considering how we will one day pay it. The House has failed in its duty to take up consideration of this legislation by regular order. There has been no due diligence to review the language in detail within our committees, no opportunity to hear from expert witnesses regarding its effectiveness, and no option for our Members to address concerns or provide thoughtful solutions through the amendment process. Moreover, language within the bill willfully shirks our oversight authority and responsibility by waiving the open meetings requirement. Furthermore, I fear this legislation is still just the tip of the iceberg. In a short period of time, we have moved from a few billion in phase one to over a hundred billion in phase two, and we now are considering $2.2 trillion in phase three. There is already talk of a fourth and fifth package to allow Democrats to advance many of their liberal partisan policies that did not make it into this bill during a time when no funding that is not directly related to crisis assistance should be considered. We must also weigh what precedents we are establishing. The CARES Act brings with it a massive expansion of the size and role of the Federal Government outside the scope of what our Founders intended. What we are doing here today is unsustainable and cannot be repeated for subsequent future emergencies that will undoubtedly and unfortunately occur. Maximum freedom exists within a context of limited government, and we have seen on countless occasions that once the Federal Government institutes new programs or spending that it is almost impossible to reverse the trajectory of its new footprint on our lives. Secondly, while I am supportive of providing Americans a bridge of assistance through the coronavirus, I am concerned that this legislation will cause some to obtain significantly more in unemployment benefits than they would normally earn through their jobs, inadvertently incentivizing unemployment. We must strike a balance between smart health policy and smart economic policy, and that means Americans should be allowed to go back to work as soon as it's safe to do so. Unfortunately, the language in the bill creates a disincentive for many to return to the workforce over the next four months. Third, it is unacceptable that Democrats have stuffed this bill with funding for agencies and causes completely unrelated to the coronavirus outbreak. Just to name a few, the bill contains within it $1 billion for Amtrak, $37 million to the Forest Service, $25 million for the Kennedy Center for Performing Arts, $75 million to the National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities and a combined $10.8 billion for several international development organizations. Many of these are fine institutions that do good work for our Nation, but they have no place in an emergency package aimed at rescuing American families and stimulating our economy during a time of crisis. President Donald Trump has done an incredible job leading America through this crisis. We are blessed to have his leadership, and while I am unable to support this particular legislation, I look forward to continuing to support him and working with his Administration in combatting the coronavirus. May God pour out his mercy and grace on our Nation during this time and heal our Land. God bless the great State of Georgia, and God bless America.

Mr. HICE of Georgia

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, Chris Smith, for leading this Special Order as we memorialize countless lives that have been lost in the last 47 years to the Roe v. Wade decision. The gentleman and all of my colleagues here are champions for life, and I want to thank them for their commitment and their resolve to address this issue. The March for Life is a unique event in American culture. It is the only march where 100 percent of the participants are marching on behalf of someone else; marching on behalf of the most vulnerable among us, as has already been mentioned, those who have not yet had the opportunity to take their first breath of life. This Special Order annually commemorating the March for Life stands as a memorial to those lives who have been lost to abortion. And it is time for this Chamber to mark that dreadful decision of the Supreme Court and to mourn the results of that decision. This is a time for us to carefully consider the choices of our Nation and the realization that those choices have dire consequences. This is our time to learn from those past decisions and to, with fresh determination, do all we can to make sure that we don't repeat the mistakes of the past. It is for that reason that I introduced H. Res. 50, which would memorialize the unborn by lowering the flag of the United States to half-staff on the 22nd of every January. It would be known as a day of tears, memorializing the ocean of tears that have been lost and shed for the millions, countless children who have never had a chance to live. Mr. Speaker, I believe every human life is sacred. I believe that life begins at conception, and if we don't stand on behalf of the unborn, who will? That is the question. So it is on their behalf that each of us here, we will never waiver, we will never quit. We will continue fighting with everything we have for life. No matter how long the battle is, no matter how intense it may become, we will not cease our effort until every child is given the gift of life that only God gives.

Mr. HICE of Georgia

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I rise in great frustration in opposition to this politically- motivated resolution. It is nothing but a blatant attempt to handcuff the President's ability to defend our citizens and our allies. Just this morning, U.S. intelligence officials reported that they are now confident that Ukraine Airlines 752 was shot down by Iranian surface-to-air missiles, another 176 innocent lives lost. The Islamic Republic of Iran has been hostile to our Nation for decades, and yet it has certainly escalated in the last several months with a campaign of antagonistic military action. Have my Democratic colleagues forgotten about the shipping vessel sabotaged by naval mines last May and June, or the American drone shot down over international waters, or the British oil tanker seized by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, or the Saudi oil facilities that were attacked? And then when an American citizen was killed in an attack on Kirkuk Air Base in December and our Embassy in Iraq subsequently overrun, our President drew a line in the sand. Yet, after months of tremendous restraint, the President was determined that not one more American life would be lost by this hostile Iranian regime, and I fully support the President in his actions. I do agree with many of my colleagues that it is time for this body to have a serious conversation and to address the many issues inherent with operating under a 20-plus-year-old authorization for military force, but that should not be confused with the process that is taking place here with this resolution.

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, this is nothing but an attempt by the majority in a 3-year-long process by their party to take any and every opportunity to undermine or embarrass this President. But be assured that this politically-motivated resolution nor any evil that comes our way will cause our President to hesitate when called upon to defend American lives. I just say, God bless the President; God bless America.

Mr. HICE of Georgia

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, the Democrats' new definition for evidence is allegations. Allegations based on hearsay, I might add. They hurl allegations against the President and then say to him it's not their responsibility to prove guilty but it's the President's responsibility to prove his innocence. This has been a sham and an act of injustice against the President and against 63 million Americans who voted for him. Although this process was rigged from the beginning, Democrats never produced a single true piece of evidence. It's time for us to stop this hoax and vote against these articles of impeachment.

Mr. HICE of Georgia

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. The majority has thrown almost every allegation imaginable against this President, and yet these Articles of Impeachment that have been submitted cannot name a single actual crime. After all the drama, the majority has not found a single shred of evidence, only second-, third-, fourth-hand information, but the facts have remained the same. The transcript speaks for itself. There was no quid pro quo. The Ukrainian Government said multiple times they felt no pressure whatsoever. The aid ultimately came. And even Speaker Pelosi said that this whole thing would have compelling, overwhelming, bipartisan support. None of those things exist. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to stand against the rule and the forthcoming Articles of Impeachment. This is a disgrace and dangerous to America, and I urge a ``no'' vote.

Mr. HICE of Georgia

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, the Democrats' new definition for evidence is allegations, allegations based on hearsay, I might add. So, they hurl allegations against the President, and then they say to him that it is not their responsibility to prove guilt but the President's responsibility to prove his innocence. This impeachment has been a sham and an act of injustice against the President and against 63 million Americans who voted for him. Although this process was rigged from the beginning, Democrats never produced a single true piece of evidence. It is time for us to stop this hoax and vote against these Articles of Impeachment.

Mr. HICE of Georgia

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I thank my good friend for yielding a quick moment. There are few people in Washington, D.C., and in America who have had the impact of Senator Johnny Isakson. And when we think of Senator Isakson, no question, there are so many things that come to our mind. Senator, you are and you have been an incredible statesman, a phenomenal leader, in Georgia, here in the United States Senate, and in our country, and we just want to say thank you for all that you have done for us. I think, personally, when I first came to Congress, you were one of the first individuals to reach out to me and to give advice and encouragement. And to this day, every time I see you, you do that, and you will never know how much that means. I just want to publicly state that Johnny Isakson, Senator Isakson, is a hero for people all across this country. Your brilliant mind and your leadership will always be here, and we say thank you from the bottom of our heart. May God bless you and your family as you go into this next chapter.

Mr. HICE of Georgia

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I was not present for the following votes due to the passing of my father. Had I been present, I would have voted NAY on Roll Call No. 585; YEA on Roll Call No. 586; NAY on Roll Call No. 587; NAY on Roll Call No. 588; NAY on Roll Call No. 589; NAY on Roll Call No. 590; YEA on Roll Call No. 591; YEA on Roll Call No. 592; YEA on Roll Call No. 593; YEA on Roll Call No. 594; YEA on Roll Call No. 595; YEA on Roll Call No. 596; NAY on Roll Call No. 597; YEA on Roll Call No. 598; YEA on Roll Call No. 599; YEA on Roll Call No. 600; YEA on Roll Call No. 601; and NAY on Roll Call No. 602.

Mr. HICE of Georgia

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Madam Speaker. I was not present for the following votes due to the passing of my father. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 603, ``nay'' on rollcall No. 604, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 605, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 606, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 607, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 608, and ``nay'' on rollcall No. 609.

Mr. HICE of Georgia

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Arizona for yielding. I rise in support of H.R. 1496, the Presidential Allowance Modernization Act of 2019. As has already been mentioned, in 1958, Congress passed the Former Presidents Act, and that was at a time period where Presidents did not have the same financial opportunities that they have today. Recent former Presidents have earned millions of dollars after leaving office from speaking fees, book deals, and other endeavors. For example, President Clinton earned more than $100 million in speaking fees between 2001 and 2013. President George W. Bush received $10 million for a book deal. President Obama and the former First Lady reportedly signed a joint book deal worth over $65 million. It is just a fact of the modern Presidency that these financial opportunities are now available to former Presidents. Given these financial benefits, it is no longer necessary to provide the level of taxpayer-funded support that was envisioned back in 1958. So, H.R. 1496 is an important step to saving taxpayer dollars by amending the law to reflect the financial realities of the modern Presidency. This bill reforms the pension amount for former Presidents and surviving spouses. This bill also changes the amount and the way that additional benefits to former Presidents are allotted. Currently, former Presidents are eligible for benefits paid through annual appropriations for things like office space and leases, furniture and supplies, staff salaries, and so forth. This bill would cut the allowance for those type of expenses to $200,000 to each former President. This allowance will further be reduced, dollar for dollar, based on the former President's income over $400,000. So, in this era of massive Federal deficits, I believe it is important that our former Presidents lead the Nation by example in cutting unnecessary spending. I want to, again, assure my colleagues that this bill does not affect security in any way. I want to thank Senator Ernst for a companion bill in the Senate and, also, Chairman Cummings and my colleagues on the other side for supporting this bill.

Mr. HICE of Georgia

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, with solemn remembrance and a heavy heart, I rise today to honor the life of my uncle, Colonel Joseph S. Hice. We knew him as Uncle Spurge. He was a great husband, a father, a friend to everyone who knew him, and an amazing American patriot. Colonel Hice was born in 1928 in Cherry Log, Georgia. He attended the University of Georgia, where he graduated with a degree in aeronautical engineering. His passion for flight led him to an amazing career in the United States Air Force, where he served with honor for 21 years. He was among the first jet pilots in our Nation's history who commanded the P-80, F- 84, F-86, F-100, F-104, KC-135, and B-52. During his distinguished career, he earned the World War II Victory Medal, the Armed Forces Reserve Medal, the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award with oak leaf cluster, the Air Force Commendation Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, and the Bronze Star service medal. Colonel Hice served his Nation with great honor during both the Korean and Vietnam wars and led the first squadron of jet aircraft to circumnavigate the globe nonstop. During the October 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, Colonel Hice served at Strategic Air Command headquarters at Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska, where he helped coordinate various branches involved in Operation Looking Glass, and he was responsible for briefing President John Kennedy in real time. Following his career in the Air Force, Colonel Hice celebrated a 20- year career with Eastern Air Lines in Miami, Florida, as a chief flight instructor. Later, he worked in real estate in both south Florida and Atlanta, Georgia, after his retirement from the airline. Colonel Hice was preceded in death by his wife, Mary Phil Blankley Hice. He is survived by his children, Joseph Hice, Jr., Charles N. Hice, Leslie Jane Hice Coleman; his brother, my father, Thomas Hice; 10 grandchildren and great-grandchildren; his many nieces and nephews; and his beloved pup, Louie. Colonel Hice led an illustrious life of great honor and marked dignity in service and commitment to his family, his friends, and his Nation. He will receive full military honors during a ceremony at the Georgia National Cemetery in Canton, Georgia, on Friday, October 4, 2019--10/4/2019. Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring this amazing American hero, Colonel Joseph S. Hice: Fly low and slow, and keep the doors open. 10-4.

Mr. HICE of Georgia

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. The problem is that this is not the way we are supposed to go about the business of oversight. Contempt resolutions are generally something that happens deep inside and deep within an ongoing investigation when the committee has run up against brick walls and has exhausted all possibilities before then. That is certainly not the case here. We are in the middle of an investigation into Federal agencies that are complying with our requests. This is absurd. The Oversight and Reform Committee has held six transcribed interviews with witnesses. Another one is on the way within days. The Commerce Department and the Justice Department have produced over 31,000 pages, documents, combined--14,000 from Commerce and 17,000 from Justice. These are not things that happen when we are talking about Federal agencies that are stonewalling an investigation. That simply is not what is happening here. This investigation has only been going on for a couple of short months. I would like to remind this Chamber that it wasn't too long ago that then-Ranking Member Cummings was cautioned himself against pursuing a resolution of contempt in 2012, and that was after a year of stonewalling by the Obama administration. We are just a couple of months into this one. If these Federal agencies were legitimately stonewalling an investigation, as the Obama administration did, I would certainly feel differently, and I am sure others here would, as well. But they are not stonewalling, and the facts simply don't support this contempt resolution. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues not to support this.

Mr. HICE of Georgia

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 962, the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I urge the Speaker to immediately schedule this important bill.

Mr. HICE of Georgia

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chair, it is true that on June 21, 2018, President Trump's Office of Management and Budget released a plan to reorganize the executive branch. In that plan, they identified numerous ways to eliminate duplicative programs, to combat waste, fraud, and abuse in the government. One of the recommendations would merge the Office of Personnel Management with the General Services Administration. I think it is important that we highlight the word ``merge.'' This is not an elimination of OPM. It is a merger of the two. OPM's employees work hard to serve retiring Federal employees. Unfortunately, they are working with outdated 20th-century technology. It is extremely difficult for them to be able to attract IT talent necessary to operate this outdated IT system. The intent of OPM's proposed merger is to fix this problem by creating one agency focused on delivering efficient, effective employee services governmentwide. Admittedly, OPM has not shown that this is an effective way to address the many problems that are facing OPM. Further, it is true that despite repeated requests for legal analysis on the administrative authorities and cost-benefit analysis, the Oversight and Reform Committee continues to wait for supporting information. The gentleman from Virginia knows that we have supported that effort to try to get that information so that we can do our job. The whole challenge that we are facing is, indeed, ongoing. And while I share the gentleman's frustration with the lack of information to inform our committee, this amendment is not the answer. We have the same goal. We want to find ways to improve services for Federal employees and get retirement benefits for Federal retirees. But while we search for a solution, we need to keep all solutions and all options on the table. Maybe a merger could gain considerable operational efficiencies, including providing support to OPM's beleaguered IT operation. If we see any evidence to support that, we should give this proposal serious consideration. We should also give serious consideration to other proposals. If the chairman of the Oversight and Reform Committee's Government Operations Subcommittee is aware of any other proposals, I would certainly hope and encourage him to incorporate those proposals into bipartisan oversight efforts. But in the meantime, this amendment does nothing to help OPM's mission, and actively closes options to help OPM. For that reason, I stand in opposition to this amendment, but look forward to working with the gentleman as we move forward.

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Madam Chair, I would just again reiterate that we need to keep all options on the table, and this amendment takes a possible solution off the table. I think we just need to do further research and consider this. I just encourage my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Madam Chair, this amendment is nothing other than, once again, an attack on President Trump and his family. We have seen this time and time and time again from the Democrat majority. They are simply obsessed with President Trump. Instead of doing the hard work of governing, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are continuing to waste our time here in Congress with their never-ending attempts to go after the President. And as it relates to this specific amendment, we have already seen this amendment. It was in H.R. 1, the so-called For the People Act, which passed the House here on a party-line vote. It was a bad idea then in March, and it is still a bad idea. If an incoming President, Vice President, or Cabinet member took office while owning a business that held a previously existing contract with the Federal Government, this amendment would criminally fine that individual after taking office. And since the President has not committed a crime under existing laws, this majority is considering making new crimes, again, in order to go after the President. How far will they go in their attempt to go after the President? But even if we ignore the reprehensible aspects of this bill, this amendment has real implications that go far beyond this administration. For example, we have seen, with this President, talented individuals with backgrounds in business, not politics, that can bring a refreshing change to the swamp here in Washington. But this amendment would drive qualified people away from public service by imposing more and more disincentives on individuals with actual, real-world experience. This amendment is nothing more than a weakly veiled attempt at harming this administration by trying to make new crimes out of business decisions that occurred long before the President took office. Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.