Jody Hice

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a heavy heart in the wake of the University of Alabama's win over my beloved Georgia Bulldogs in the National College Football Playoff Championship last week. Despite the loss, which came after an unbelievable game, the Georgia Bulldogs played their hearts out, and I am so very proud of our team. It is an honor to represent the great University of Georgia as the Representative from Georgia's 10th District and have the privilege of wearing the red and black of this outstanding institution and incredible team. Under the leadership of awesome Head Coach Kirby Smart and a special group of young men like Nick Chubb, Sony Michel, and Jake Fromm, the Dawgs won the SEC Championship and had one of the greatest seasons that they have had in years, reaching the national championship for the first time in more than 30 years. At the end of the day, it was a great game on both sides, and while it pains me to admit it, my friend and colleague Congresswoman Terri Sewell represents an outstanding football team. Congratulations to Alabama's Crimson Tide. And true to my word, I will be providing her office and her with barbecue and wearing the Alabama tie after their overtime win. Congratulations to them for another national championship title, but for us: Go Dawgs. Go Dawgs. Go Dawgs.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, what an honor it is to be here with Mr. Smith of New Jersey. I thank the gentleman for leading and managing not only the calls but this Special Order this evening. It is amazing to me that here we come, yet again, on the anniversary of another Roe v. Wade, 45 years, some 60 million children who have gone. Along with that is another anniversary, the March for Life, that has been taking place now itself for over 40 years. I am thrilled that this weekend there will be students, teachers, nuns, pastors, priests, and families from all across this great country marching in the streets right here in Washington, D.C., from the National Mall to the Supreme Court and all across various streets across this country standing up for life. What a powerful thing that is. When we talk about life, it is not an issue between Republicans or Democrats. This is an issue protecting 10 fingers and 10 toes. It is about protecting a precious heartbeat. Yes, we have been able, in this Chamber, to support and pass some significant legislation like the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act. That is a great thing. There should be no taxpayer funds going toward abortion. We have passed the pain- capable bill, another great bill. I wear this little lapel pin, a footprint in a heartbeat. I am hopeful that we will be able to vote on and pass the heartbeat bill. We have all heard abortion stops a beating heart. It is time now that a beating heart stops abortion; that if a heartbeat can be detected, a baby will be protected. I am hopeful that we will be able to get that on the floor here for each of us to have an opportunity to vote for that. I am pleased as well that we made the Make America Secure and Prosperous Appropriations Act. It defunded Planned Parenthood-- something many of us have been fighting for for years, for decades-- and, in particular, ever since the horror of seeing the videos of Planned Parenthood selling baby parts, it is time that we finally accomplish that. I just am so grateful for my colleagues here tonight taking a stand for life; taking a stand for what is the greatest, first, and most important right of all, the right given by Almighty God, the right that President Reagan said himself, ``without which no other right has any meaning.'' So I thank my colleagues for being here tonight for taking a stand. There is obviously more work to be done. The people of America gave us a united government in this past election and sent us here to stand for the platform that we ran on that includes saving lives. I want to encourage each of us to stay in the fight and each one watching to stay in the fight. We have come a long way. There is more to go, and, with God's grace, we will see it happen. I thank the gentleman from New Jersey for allowing me the opportunity.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, this highlights the importance of the issue that we are dealing with and the need for an investigation. Hundreds, even thousands, of lives have been put in danger, not to mention our own Nation's national security interests. Next up is a tremendous leader, not only here in Congress, but in our military. He is a general who has done an outstanding job. I don't know that anyone understands the importance of the issue any more than my good friend. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry). I am honored to have him here addressing this issue.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the subject of my Special Order.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to speak on an issue that is just now beginning to gain momentum and traction. Already, this issue of great importance is bringing great alarm and concern, as well as focus. I speak specifically in regard to the Obama administration's apparent decision to sacrifice the opportunity to take down Hezbollah and bring terrorists to justice. What most Americans know about Hezbollah is that it is an Iran-backed proxy militia based in Lebanon, which was responsible for a string of terrorist attacks against Americans in the 1980s, including the attack in 1983 of the Beirut barracks, which killed 241 American servicemembers. Since that time, Hezbollah has openly attacked Israel. They have propped up regimes supported by Iran, like Bashar al-Assad in Syria. They are defined by their violence and human rights abuses. But what most Americans are not aware of, Mr. Speaker, is that over the last 30 years, Hezbollah has evolved beyond its origins as Iran's attack dog in the Middle East and they now run one of the world's most expansive and dangerous multinational criminal networks in the world. Hezbollah works directly with corrupt governments, like Venezuela and others, to create criminal networks across Latin America, Africa, Europe, and the Middle East. They have literally moved tons--metric tons--of cocaine across the world, laundered money, and trafficked weapons and individuals. They are a critical part of a network responsible for the use of IEDs in the Middle East, which have killed literally thousands of American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. Hezbollah, Mr. Speaker, is a scourge not only in the Middle East, but throughout the entire world. The reason we know this--which has just, in recent days, started to become public--is because, in 2008, the DEA launched a campaign known as Project Cassandra, which amassed evidence over 8 years of investigation regarding Hezbollah's criminal activities. They used wiretaps, undercover operations, informants, and so forth to map Hezbollah's illicit networks with the help of some 30 different U.S. and foreign security agencies. These DEA agents traced the activities all the way to the inner circles of Hezbollah and its state sponsors in Iran. But--and here is where all of this starts coming into play--when the time came to extradite and prosecute these terrorists, the Obama administration's Department of Justice and Department of State refused to move forward. That is unthinkable to me. It is unthinkable to many people in our country. The Justice Department refused to file criminal charges against suspects that were already in custody in Europe. The State Department refused to put meaningful pressure on allied countries to extradite Hezbollah leaders to the United States. Why? Why did they refuse to get involved? According to an Obama administration Treasury official, in her written testimony to the House Foreign Affairs Committee, investigations to Hezbollah were tapped down for fear of rocking the boat with Iran and jeopardizing the nuclear deal. The nuclear deal is already deeply, deeply flawed in so many ways. The Iran nuclear deal apparently took precedence over crippling a foreign terrorist organization directly responsible for the deaths of American citizens and one of the world's largest drug and weapons trafficking networks. Hezbollah is responsible for procuring parts for Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile program, the very program that the nuclear deal was supposed to curtail. Hezbollah is supplying parts to them. Instead of prosecuting the leadership of Hezbollah and shutting down Iran's weapons pipeline, the Obama administration legitimized Iran's nuclear program and let Hezbollah leadership slip through the cracks and let them totally off the hook. After the conclusion of the Iran nuclear deal, the Obama administration shut down Project Cassandra. We lost all that we had gained in 8 years of investigations--all the information. We had them in our grasp, Mr. Speaker, after 8 years of investigation. We lost unprecedented insight into these global criminal networks. Mr. Speaker, this is morally reprehensible. It is stunning that we had our previous administration and that administration's Justice Department and State Department evidently involved, engaged, and deliberately letting these criminals off the hook. How in the world can our allies in the global war on terror trust us when we won't prosecute terrorists when we have the chance to do so? How can our allies in Latin America trust us when we refuse to prosecute leaders of one of the world's largest drug trafficking networks? I have a few colleagues here tonight who are going to address this issue as well. Before I introduce the first one, I want to bring up one more point. Ali Fayad is a suspected leader in Hezbollah. He is an operative and a major weapons supplier. He has been indicted on charges of planning the murders of U.S. citizens, attempting to provide materiel support to a terrorist organization and attempting to acquire, transfer, and use antiaircraft missiles. For nearly 2 years, this terrorist was held in custody in the Czech Republic. For 2 years, the Obama administration failed to provide enough pressure to the Czech Republic, our NATO ally. The Obama administration refused to put pressure to extradite that terrorist to the United States. Ali Fayad now, as we speak here tonight, is a free man and alleged to be back in the business of arming militants in Syria. This is inexcusable. Mr. Speaker, I want to personally thank those who served on Project Cassandra for their service to our Nation and for the work they did. I want them to know that what they did mattered. I am appalled that the Obama administration did virtually nothing to stop Hezbollah's criminal activities. I think this warrants an investigation by the U.S. House of Representatives, and that is what this Special Order tonight is all about: getting to the bottom of what is yet another example of a swamp that stinks to high heaven that needs to be cleaned up and drained out. We need an investigation into what happened in the Obama administration, the Department of Justice, and the Department of State in allowing these terrorists and this terrorist network to get off the hook. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs), a good friend. He has been a leader in issues such as this, bringing to our attention both the highlighting of dangerous, harmful activity such as this tonight. He has been a great champion.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman so much. I just think it is critically important that in a Special Order such as this we have someone who has been there, on the front line, who knows exactly from the perspective of a soldier defending our country what has been taking place. I appreciate his expertise and his willingness to talk about it here this evening. Another colleague who is going to address the seriousness of the issue this evening is Ken Buck from Colorado, a good friend and another leader on this issue and many others like this. The American people deserve to know what happened. The dots are coming into play. The dots are being connected. We need to finish connecting those dots to find out what went on and let the American people know. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Buck).

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Buck in his leadership on this, as well. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say, not only to Mr. Buck, but to all of the participants in our discussion this evening, a big thank you for coming and being a part of this. As more information is beginning to come to light, I am convinced that we are just at the tip of the iceberg of gaining information as to what has taken place here that has jeopardized our national security. I believe it is incumbent upon Congress at this time to fulfill the obligation that we have to exercise oversight over the executive branch and follow through with a thorough investigation of the Obama administration's refusal--absolute refusal--to follow through on the work that was done by the DEA. We had these terrorists in our grasp, Mr. Speaker, and we let them go. How could this happen? The American people deserve to know why, and we need to get to the bottom of this. That is why tonight we are calling for an investigation into all aspects of this Hezbollah scandal, regardless of where it leads us: to the very top of the Obama administration, the Secretary of State, the previous Department of Justice, wherever it may lead. We need to get to the bottom of this, and we are calling for an investigation. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Gaetz) for yielding. I am greatly honored to be here to participate in this important discussion. We all want transparency, and for that to be in our government is critical to all of us. I am honored to be on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee where this is part of the responsibilities entrusted to us. But after repeated scandals and misconduct, it is patently obvious to me that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton plays by her own rules, and simply does so because of her own status, her own positions of power and influence in the government, and has been in those roles for decades. She has been getting a free pass to follow or ignore the law as she chooses, whereas it seems, on the other hand, as has already been discussed this evening, President Trump and his administration seems to get a special counsel just for sneezing. It is insane what is going on, and we, as Americans, must prioritize equal justice under the law. Lady Justice must remain blind, and her scales must remain balanced. This is a fundamental principle for all of us as Americans--something we cherish and something we hold on to--and we are watching it change right before our eyes. It seems as though Lady Justice is peeking underneath that blindfold, and that is simply unacceptable. Mr. Speaker, I am honored that we are coming to draw attention to this horror and this change that is taking place. The principle of blind justice is one of the most basic fundamental principles that we have in this country, and without it we are watching individuals like Mrs. Clinton and her allies act above the law and get away with things they simply ought not be getting away with. And the truth is, a breach of justice for one is a breach of justice for all of us. Let me give you a quick example. Back in August of 2016, The New York Times reported on generous foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation, and this was done while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State. That, in itself, ought to raise some red flags, shouldn't it? Foreign countries. And then we find out that many of these foreign countries had already tremendous human rights violations: Kuwait, for example, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and several others, just to name a few, yet they are giving tons of money to the Clinton Foundation, while she is Secretary of State. And then the Clintons say: Well, we were open; we disclosed all of the information about who was giving what. They tried to convince us that they went above and beyond to disclose their donors, but they did not do so. For example, we found they failed to disclose $2.35 million in donations from a family foundation that was linked to the mining company, Uranium One, which we happen to be talking about tonight. Well, who is Uranium One? Of course, we know by now that this is a company that was taken over by Russia's state-owned nuclear energy firm, Rosatom, another decision that was signed off by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The dots are pretty easy to start connecting. We, at least, have some red flags here. Furthermore, there was a whopping $145 million given to the Clinton Foundation by Uranium One's owners. I don't know about everyone else here, but I would certainly know it if I received over $100 million from Russian donors. Talk about Russian collusion. Shall we talk about it? Let's have this discussion. That is the whole point of what we are talking about here this evening. I would also be very concerned that someone receiving this kind of money was free of bias or coercion when they are getting this type of money. But let me land the plane here. There is a full-fledged investigation going on here into President Trump's interactions with Russia, but where is the investigation on Hillary Clinton's activities with the Russians? The Obama administration attempted to sweep this situation under the rug. They let her off the hook. That is a disgrace. It is in complete disregard for our Nation's laws. And, perhaps, that in itself ought to be something else that is looked into: the Obama administration's role in all of this. I am grateful that Attorney General Sessions is taking these allegations seriously. I am hopeful that we can get to the bottom of this and ensure that justice is served. The FBI must investigate this thoroughly. We must have transparency to make sure that Hillary Clinton is held accountable and reaffirm that no one is above the law. Enough is enough. We have got to go into this further. Mr. Speaker, I thank the good gentleman from Florida (Mr. Gaetz) for his leadership on this.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, we all know that the United States Secret Service is one of the Federal Government's premier law enforcement agencies. The agency's critical mission is to protect the President, his family, and other senior government officials. Agency personnel may also provide protection at high-profile events. It has a zero-fail mission; therefore, it is vital that the Secret Service is fully staffed with nothing but the best. Unfortunately, the agency has faced tremendous staffing problems. The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform released a bipartisan report in 2015, finding the Secret Service has faced challenges related to hiring and retaining personnel. The report states that the staffing crisis threatens to jeopardize its critical mission. Staffing issues have persisted, although the agency has implemented a series of reforms to help get its hiring and attrition problems under control. The consequence of these hiring and attrition problems is that the agency does not have enough personnel to fulfill its zero fail protective mission. This means existing personnel are working excessive overtime. With all the overtime, many Secret Service personnel have reached the cap on premium pay set in law. As a result, agents are not paid for overtime hours if doing so would result in compensation above the cap during any biweekly pay period. These max-outs, as they are known, contribute to the agency's low morale and unsurprisingly cause the rate of attrition to spike. Congress first lifted the pay cap for the Secret Service in 2016 to help the agency handle the demands of staffing the Presidential campaign. However, nearly 1,300 employees are at risk of exceeding the pay cap in 2017. Due to the extraordinary staffing problems facing the agency, this bill extends the pay cap waiver provided last year until the end of 2018. Employees will receive compensation up to the basic pay currently given to members of the Executive Schedule, Level II. Every Secret Service employee who has exceeded the cap or who is at risk of doing so because of excessive overtime will receive additional compensation under this bill. I want to be clear. This bill is narrowly targeted to fix a problem currently facing the agency and does so in a timely manner. The Secret Service cannot continue to rely on expensive overtime, and Congress fully expects the agency to get its hiring attrition problems under control. To this end, the bill also requires a report by the Government Accountability Office focused on the Secret Service's implementation of recommendations found in the 2014 Protective Mission Panel report.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, the recommendations, which include reforming the recruiting and hiring process, hiring additional personnel, and implementing a zero tolerance disciplinary system, are instructive and will help the Secret Service develop a world class human resource system. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to thank the House Judiciary Committee, the Homeland Security Committee, along with the Oversight and Government Reform Committee on putting forth this important legislation and bringing it to the floor in a timely manner. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the extra time and I urge all Members to support this bill.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the bravery of one of my constituents and an American hero, Staff Sergeant Richard Hunter. Staff Sergeant Hunter was recently awarded the Air Force Cross in recognition of his outstanding courage in the line of duty. Staff Sergeant Hunter was deployed to Kunduz province, Afghanistan, as part of the U.S. Army Special Forces team. On November 2, 2016, his team found themselves under heavy machine-gun fire from insurgents. Despite the barrage of enemy fire, Hunter charged forward to shield the wounded and, ultimately, repelled the enemy's encroachment. He initiated the launch of the quick reaction force and casualty airlift for wounded members in his group. After discovering an injured fellow Special Force soldier, Hunter dragged him 30 meters to safety with one hand, while he directed radio airstrikes with his other. When they fell under fire once again, Hunter eliminated the threat, and helped load the wounded into a helicopter to be evacuated. In total, Staff Sergeant Hunter's actions that day eliminated 27 enemy forces and saved his team. For these measures of extraordinary bravery in the most dire of circumstances, Staff Sergeant Richard Hunter earned the Air Force Cross award. Without his help, many American servicemembers surely would have been lost that day. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the heroic actions of Staff Sergeant Richard Hunter, a true American hero.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a remarkable individual from my home district, Mr. Ernest Walls of Monroe, a 93-year-old World War II veteran who was recently inducted into the Georgia Military Veterans Hall of Fame. Private First Class Walls joined the U.S. Army in the midst of World War II at the age of 18. In a display of incredible valor, under the 22nd Infantry Unit, he was part of the wave of troops to storm Utah Beach, the westernmost beach of the five landing areas of the Normandy invasion, where they fought their way across a killing zone without hesitation. He was later wounded and captured by the Germans. He spent a year as a prisoner of war. When asked about his heroic action, he said: ``Only the grace of God helped us win the war, and America came back as the most blessed and most powerful Nation on Earth.'' Due to an unfortunate clerical error, it took Mr. Wells nearly 55 years to receive his POW status and full benefits. Thankfully, since then, he has been rightfully awarded the Bronze Star Medal, Purple Heart, French Legion of Honor, and Prisoner of War Medal. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating Private Wells and to extend our personal and sincere appreciation to him, as well as all our men and women in uniform. We, as a nation, are forever grateful.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today in support of H.R. 3739, a bill I introduced to limit the allowances paid to former Presidents. Congress passed the Former Presidents Act of 1958 to maintain the dignity of the Office of the President and assist former Presidents who did not have sufficient financial resources. It is a noble purpose, but times have changed. When the Former Presidents Act was passed, Herbert Hoover and Harry Truman were the only two former living Presidents. Unlike the more recent former Presidents, they did not earn millions of dollars from speaking fees and book deals after leaving office. For example, President Clinton earned more than $100 million in speaking fees between 2001 and 2013. President George W. Bush received $10 million for his book deal. In April 2017, President Obama spoke at a Wall Street firm for a fee of $400,000, and he and the former First Lady also reportedly signed a joint book deal worth over $65 million. It is a fact of the modern Presidency that these lucrative financial opportunities are available now as they were not to former Presidents. Because of these opportunities, it is no longer necessary to provide taxpayer-funded support to former Presidents in the same way as envisioned in 1958. H.R. 3739 presents a fair way to reduce taxpayer support to those former Presidents who no longer need such assistance. Furthermore, with our Nation facing $20 trillion in debt, we must find ways to save taxpayer money, and our former Presidents will lead by example in cutting costs under this bill. The Presidential Allowance Modernization Act reforms pensions and allowances provided to former Presidents and surviving spouses and reduces unnecessary costs to the taxpayer. This bill sets a former President's pension at $200,000, compared to current law where the pension is linked to the Cabinet Secretary's pay level, currently at $204,700. Surviving spouses of former Presidents will be eligible for a pension of $100,000, a more realistic amount than the $20,000 pension available under current law. Currently, former Presidents are also eligible for other benefits paid through annual appropriations. These include office space and leases, furniture and supplies, and staff salaries. Such additional benefits provided to former Presidents totaled $2.84 million in fiscal year 2017 and $2.43 million the year before. Instead, this bill will provide a $500,000 lump sum allowance for each eligible former President to cover such expenses. This allowance will be reduced dollar-for-dollar for any earned income in excess of $400,000. For example, a former President making $900,000 in earned income would not be eligible for the allowance. For former Presidents eligible for the allowance, the allowance will decrease over time. Five years after the former President has left office, the allowance is reduced to $350,000, and then 10 years later, the allowance is reduced to $250,000. In the 114th Congress, the Presidential Allowance Modernization Act of 2016 was passed, but it was not signed into law. Senator Joni Ernst and I have worked with other stakeholders to improve the bill in 2017. This 2017 bill advances the same principles of accountability and modernization as the 2016 legislation but makes some key changes. First, the bill provides a 6-month period after the date of enactment before the bill takes effect to ensure current former Presidents have time to plan for the changes. Second, the bill increases the allowance amount from $200,000 in the previous bill language to $500,000. However, as described earlier, this allowance decreases over time, but it is not entirely eliminated should a former President be eligible for the allowance. The office of the former President is an important institution to support in a nominal way. We were all recently reminded of the importance of this institution by the joint effort of former Presidents to raise hurricane relief funds. The third change made in this version of the bill is the pension and allowance are terminated 30 days after the death of a former President--instead of immediately upon death. This change was made to accommodate the work that must be done to wrap up the affairs of a former President. Finally, I want to assure my colleagues that this bill does not impact funding for the security or protection of a former President. Again, I want to thank Senator Ernst for her work on this bill in the previous years and this particular bill in 2017. It has been a real pleasure to work with her and her staff. I want to acknowledge Members such as Mr. Cummings, Mr. Grothman, and the former chairman, Mr. Chaffetz, whose work on this bill last year positioned us to be successful this year. I also want to express my gratitude to the professional staff on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, who have put in so many hours of work on this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2331) to require a new or updated Federal website that is intended for use by the public to be mobile friendly, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2331, introduced by the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Kelly). The bill requires all Federal agencies to ensure any Federal Government website intended for use by the public is mobile friendly. Services offered by the Federal Government should be effective but also accessible to the public. Agency websites are one of the most important tools for taxpayers to observe services and information from the government. The U.S. Government runs more than 6,000 websites on over 400 domains. One recent study estimated that approximately 40 percent of government websites either are not accessible or are difficult to access on a phone, yet nearly 80 percent of Americans own a smartphone, and at least 1 in 10 American adults rely exclusively on a smartphone for access to the internet, according to a Pew survey. The data clearly points to the utility of making all government websites mobile friendly. Another study found that more people accessed the internet on their mobile devices than a desktop computer for the first time last year. It is clear that Federal agencies must emphasize mobile accessibility to effectively serve the American people. The Connected Government Act will require agencies to do just that. This bill requires Federal agencies to ensure their websites are mobile friendly during the course of creating new websites or updating existing ones. A mobile-friendly government is a necessary step in the modernization of the government's IT infrastructure. Mr. Speaker, I applaud my colleague, the gentlewoman from Illinois, for her work in sponsoring this bill. I am proud also to support this bipartisan legislation, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her great work on this bill, I urge adoption of it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3071) to require executive agencies to consider equipment rental in any cost-effectiveness analysis for equipment acquisition, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3071, introduced by my colleague from Georgia (Mr. Carter), and which I have cosponsored. The Federal Acquisition Savings Act of 2017 would require the government to consider renting equipment over buying or leasing that equipment. The Government Accountability Office reported that agencies annually spend an average of more than $200 billion on purchasing or leasing equipment, with purchasing accounting for almost all of that spending. The Federal Acquisition Savings Act of 2017 provides an opportunity to save money when obtaining equipment. The current rules encourage agencies to consider the most cost-effective way to obtain equipment, but only between purchasing or leasing. Renting is not an option. H.R. 3071 requires agencies to consider renting equipment as a cost- saving measure over purchasing or leasing. The bill also directs that the Federal Acquisition Regulation be revised to implement this policy. Renting equipment can provide a more cost-effective and flexible alternative to buying or leasing. When purchasing equipment, the purchaser makes a long-term investment and assumes the total cost of ownership for that equipment. However, some short-term needs can be met without assuming the cost of purchasing and maintaining equipment. Leasing or renting are options in such cases. Leasing should be considered, but, depending on an agency's needs, leasing may not be the best low-cost option. Typically, leases involve defined leasing periods and are specific to a single piece of equipment. In addition, leasing may require a large upfront outlay of capital, and, under a lease, the government is generally responsible for the cost of maintenance, insurance, and storage of the equipment. Alternatively, rental for a temporary period with no fixed duration may fit the need and provide a more flexible option. Renting equipment may be cost-effective because rental agreements typically cover costs such as storage, maintenance, insurance, transport, and licensing. Other State and local governments have used the equipment rental option with great success, but the Federal Government has not widely adopted this low-cost option. For example, the Texas Department of Transportation reported saving $10.8 million due to a rental program. They reported renting more than 1,200 pieces of equipment at a cost of $18.9 million and purchasing 931 assets costing more than $40 million. The Mississippi Department of Transportation commissioned a study on their equipment management processes and systems, and that study found that renting equipment, such as bulldozers and motor graders, to supplement their fleet was the most cost-effective option. In fact, that study found that Mississippi could realize over $13,000 in annual cost savings and $180,000 in lifecycle cost savings per bulldozer unit. H.R. 3071 presents an opportunity to realize cost savings in obtaining equipment by directing agencies to consider the rental option. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Representative Buddy Carter for his leadership on this bill. I urge my colleagues to support it, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor and privilege to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter), the sponsor of the bill.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I am grateful for this bill, and I urge its adoption. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on that, I demand the yeas and nays.