J. Hill

Mr. HILL

Mr. HILL. Mr. Speaker, at a time when our Nation is currently over $18 trillion in debt, we must carefully scrutinize our government programs to ensure that we are funding essential programs, policies, and projects while eliminating frivolous and wasteful spending. Every day in the news, Americans hear of government waste, fraud, abuse, and regulations that are hindering our small businesses and costing American taxpayers billions of dollars that could be better spent in creating jobs and boosting our economy. Today, I rise to establish the Golden Fleece Award to once again uncover and bring public attention to the wasteful spending across our Federal Government. The Golden Fleece Award will highlight some of the most egregious examples of government waste of hard-working taxpayers' dollars and will shed new light on some of the rampant, unnecessary spending by our Federal agencies. The inspiration behind the Golden Fleece Award was pioneered by the Democratic U.S. Senator from Wisconsin, Bill Proxmire, in March 1975. For the next 13 years, Senator Proxmire went on to issue bulletins announcing a monthly Golden Fleece Award. The Golden Fleece Award became a staple in the U.S. Senate during this time. Senator Robert Byrd once stated that the awards were ``as much a part of the Senate as quorum calls and filibusters.'' Mr. Speaker, the Golden Fleece Award will once again serve as an important reminder that taxpayers need to watch, control, and provide the necessary reforms, through this Congress, about Federal spending and regulations. I will utilize social media and the Internet to provide a unique platform for my constituents to share with me examples that they spot, that they see, of waste of our Federal Government resources by using, #goldenfleeceoversight on Twitter, or emailing me at goldenfleece@mail.house.gov. I have also established a Web site that allows users to submit their recommendations for future Golden Fleece Awards at hill.house.gov/ goldenfleece. Americans are crying out for accountability from our leaders, and I look forward to working with them and my colleagues to spot waste and find ways to effectively eliminate that kind of spending and regulatory overreach in Washington.

Mr. HILL

Mr. HILL. Mr. Speaker, this past Monday, April 27, marked the 1-year anniversary of the devastation that occurred when a tornado struck the Mayflower, Vilonia, and Paron communities in Arkansas, destroying more than 400 homes and costing 16 people their lives. The theme of this year's anniversary is, ``Remember our loss, celebrate our recovery.'' I have had the opportunity to visit with folks in these communities and to hear their stories of courage and resilience. While I mourn those that are lost, I am thankful for the health and safety of Martin and Kristin Patton and the miraculous survival of their family. Their home literally disintegrated around them. I am thankful for the leadership of Vilonia Mayor James Firestone and Mayflower Mayor Randy Holland who, along with county and local leaders, are charting a course toward the future. In the face of this tragedy, they furnish us with an inspirational model of solidarity and hope. I applaud the recovery efforts and dedication of these great Arkansas communities. Mr. Speaker, the Paron Community in Pulaski County and the Faulkner County towns of Vilonia and Mayflower, Arkansas have experienced tragedy and disaster over these past years, but their resilience and determination to rebuild and recover has never been more prevalent. Four years ago, on April 25, 2011, an EF2 tornado struck Vilonia, killing four of its 4,000 citizens. Not two years after that, on March 29, 2013, the residents of Mayflower were left reeling after being flooded with 5,000 barrels of heavy crude oil that erupted from the burst Pegasus Pipeline. The ability to bounce back after such misfortune is a testament to the great determination and toughness of the townspeople of Vilonia and Mayflower. And that ability was put to yet another test when, on April 27, 2014, the Mayflower, Vilonia, and Paron communities were struck by a monster of a tornado. That tornado was classified as an EF4 with reported winds approaching 200 miles per hour. The half-mile wide twister left a swath of destruction that stretched for over forty miles. In fifty-six minutes, more than 400 homes were destroyed and sixteen people lost their lives. The National Weather Service stated that this was the single deadliest tornado to hit the state of Arkansas since 1968--nearly fifty years earlier. This past Monday, April 27, marked the one-year anniversary of the devastation wrecked during this horrific storm. The theme of this year's anniversary is, ``Remember our loss; celebrate our recovery.'' Over the past few weeks, I have had the opportunity to visit with folks from Mayflower and Vilonia and to hear their stories of courage and resilience. While I mourn those lost in the April 2014 tornados, I am thankful for the health and safety of Martin and Kristin Patton and the miraculous survival of their family. Their home literally completely disintegrated around them and I certainly join them in counting their blessings of moving into their new home last weekend, 364 days after that frightening evening. I am thankful of the leadership of Vilonia Mayor James Firestone on the job for six and one half years; four of them in a ``recovery mode.'' I am grateful for his leadership with that of the city council in carefully charting a course toward the future. I am thankful for Mayflower Mayor Randy Holland, who, with county and local leaders, is crafting new economic development directions for this growing community. In the face of tragedy, they, along with all those who selflessly provided financial support and thousands of volunteer hours, furnish us with an inspirational model of solidarity and hope. As these brave communities continue to recover and rebuild, I applaud them for their dedication to their neighbors, economy, and community.

Mr. HILL

Mr. HILL. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 1, rule I, I demand a vote on agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the Journal.

Mr. HILL. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HILL

Mr. HILL. I thank the chairman for his comments. I appreciate his consideration. I would be happy to work with the gentleman to revise my amendment. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.

Mr. HILL. Mr. Chairman, in 2012, an award of $8 million was provided to design and build a 1.8-megawatt solar system at the John L. McClellan VA Medical Center in Little Rock, Arkansas. It has been almost 2 years since that planned activation was to begin operating. However, reports in our local media have indicated that there is additional engineering and that it is not functioning and not operational. Further, sections of the solar panels for this system are now being torn down in order to be relocated to make way for a parking deck that was planned before the installation had begun of the solar panels. Many questions remain unanswered about this project and when the VA plans to fully implement this supposed cost-saving system to provide energy for the facility. Further, I found from the VA's own Web site a list of 40 key energy projects that are designated as ``works in progress'' by the VA under its key renewable energy program. Some of these date back to 2010; yet they have not been completed and have not been made operational. There are over 90 solar projects that have been funded under this program and 198 projects that have been funded under the VA's Green Management Program. Some of these projects individually have cost the taxpayers up to $20 million. The Little Rock project is only projected to save $150,000 annually in energy costs, which would make the payback on that $8 million investment some 50 years. On April 8, I sent a letter to Secretary McDonald, asking for answers about these solar systems, in Little Rock particularly, about the relocation of the panels at the facility, and about the activation date. Senator John Boozman and I have called for an IG investigation into this project and into other aspects of the key renewable energy program to ensure that the taxpayers' hard-earned dollars are safeguarded. This amendment would simply prevent any new funding for these projects this fiscal year, allowing Congress the additional time to conduct oversight and allowing the VA to ensure that this program is effective. It is essential that we demand accountability and transparency when utilizing taxpayer dollars for these kinds of government projects. I urge the passage of this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HILL. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. HILL

Mr. HILL. Madam Speaker, I rise tonight to honor the life and legacy of one of Arkansas' great leaders--and my friend--former Congressman John Paul Hammerschmidt. For the past three decades, I have known and admired Congressman Hammerschmidt, and I have long respected his commitment to public service. One of his most important actions was his legislation that made the Buffalo River the country's first National River, ensuring the preservation and protection of that extraordinary treasure designed by God's own hand. Before John Paul's engagement, the Buffalo had been slated for a Corps of Engineers dam project, which would have destroyed the natural majesty that generations of Arkansans continue to enjoy. Arkansas' wilderness advocate and poet, Bill Coleman, captures the area's mystique: Giant bluffs rise like medieval castles above this ancient river, sending us back to a time when all our land was wild. Congressman Hammerschmidt also served as a freshman Congressman with my former boss, President George Herbert Walker Bush, and these two great men became fast friends from their time in the Air Force through being freshmen in this great body together. They were close political allies, and Congressman Hammerschmidt was quick to support President Bush in all of his Presidential runs. The two men shared victories, defeats, joys, and sorrows throughout their great decades of personal friendship. President Bush once said of John Paul: He did something I could never do; he beat Bill Clinton. I am humbled to have had the opportunity to know and learn so much from Congressman Hammerschmidt. He will be greatly missed.

Mr. HILL

Mr. HILL. Mr. Speaker, following the December 7, 1941, attack of the U.S. Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor on Oahu, President Roosevelt sought and received from Congress authorization to declare war on Japan. In January 1942, Lieutenant Colonel James H. ``Jimmy'' Doolittle was selected to lead a top-secret retaliation attack on Japan. With just three weeks of special ``short field takeoff'' training, Doolittle's men set sail toward Japan aboard the USS Hornet. On April 18, 1942, the Hornet was sighted by a Japanese ship and the Doolittle Raiders, as they would come to be known, set off on their mission--twelve hours early and some 150 miles from their planned launch position. Within one hour, these 80 volunteers, aboard 16 B-25 bombers, took off in the first U.S. air raid on Japan in World War II. The air raid resulted in the bombing of multiple military and industrial targets in Tokyo and other Japanese cities. Their mission a success, the crews headed for their rendezvous point in China. Flying on fumes and facing poor weather, one plane diverted to Russia, and the fifteen others were forced to crash land. With the aid of Chinese civilians, most of these brave men reached safety, but not all of our famous flyers made it home. Three of the raiders were killed in action; and, of the eight that were captured, three were executed and one died in captivity. Their sacrifice and the success of this mission served as an essential boost to American morale, and the exploits of the Doolittle Raiders marked a critical turning point in the war in the Pacific. Following their daring drama over Japan, the Doolittle Raiders spread out across the nation and globe. Some continued in the military, enjoying long careers into retirement. Others gave their lives in later service to their country, while still others rejoined civilian life as doctors, teachers, businessmen--serving their communities in every capacity. Earlier this year, we lost two of the surviving Raiders, LTC Edward Saylor, and LTC Robert Hite. LTC Hite was one of the brave souls who escaped Japanese captivity, and he also was a resident of my home state of Arkansas. Now, from the band of 80 young flyers 73 Aprils ago, only two living Raiders remain: Staff Sergeant David Thatcher and LTC Richard Cole. Retired LTC Cole served as copilot to LTC Doolittle aboard aircraft number one, and he, along with the other Raiders, was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross. Retired Staff Sergeant David J. Thatcher served as the engineer-gunner to crew number seven, whose plane the ``Ruptured Duck,'' crashed just off the shores of the Chinese mainland. Sergeant Thatcher was awarded the Silver Star in 1942 for his bravery in caring for his injured crew members. Earlier today, Congress conferred the Congressional Gold Medal on the Doolittle Raiders for their undeniable valor and sacrifice. These airmen and their extraordinary ``30 Seconds over Tokyo'' will never be forgotten. I am humbled to rise today to recognize these ordinary Americans that stepped up to attempt an exceptional mission. Col. Doolittle and his Raiders will fly forever in our hearts and minds as the best of American values of Duty, Honor, and Country. May God bless their memory and example to us all.

Mr. HILL

Mr. HILL. Regarding consumer protection, I agree with my colleagues that this bill does not weaken any current laws. It protects consumer access to affordable credit; it preserves the consumer's choice; it helps Americans achieve financial independence; and it prevents the CFPB rules from overprotecting low-income consumers out of the option of a manufactured home. H.R. 650 is about protecting the American Dream of homeownership. I am proud to support this bipartisan bill. I think it is common sense.

Mr. HILL. Thank you, Mr. Fincher, for yielding on this important measure, and thank you for your leadership. Mr. Speaker, it pains me to stand in opposition to my friend, the ranking member of the committee, and in support of H.R. 650, but I believe that H.R. 650 is a commonsense bill that actually preserves financing options for manufactured homes while preserving and maintaining consumer protections. I want to add too that my friend from Missouri noted the health of the industry, and I would like to provide a countercomment on that. In the last decade alone--this very tough economic decade that we have had--there has been an 80 percent decline in the production of manufactured housing in the country. Some 160 plants have closed, and there has been a loss of some 200,000 jobs. Therefore, this industry is important to our Nation. As a percentage of total housing units, in my home State of Arkansas, we have 170,000 units, which is some 13 percent of housing units in our State--one of the largest percentages in the country. For many years, I was a community banker with offices in the Mississippi Delta region of Arkansas. For many of our families, especially in rural areas, manufactured housing is not only the best option for housing, but it is the best option for clean, safe, modern, and affordable housing. Often, due to low volumes in these kinds of towns, it is the only option, as many of my colleagues have noted. However, under the new mortgage rules issued by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, many of these manufactured housing loans are now automatically considered high cost and, therefore, would subject both the consumers to higher costs and the lenders to greater liability. Therefore, many of my old colleagues in community banking offer fewer loans, and that impacts hard-working, low- to moderate- income families across Arkansas and particularly in rural America, families whose only objective is to own a home, to have the dream of homeownership. The Director of the CFPB has acknowledged that its rules may, in fact, have this issue of constraining credit, but as the executive director of Arkansas Manufactured Housing Association said in a recent letter: Most low-income Arkansas families don't have the luxury when it comes to their mortgage options, and many of our member businesses won't last through a few more years of decline in sales. Mr. Speaker, I submit this letter for the Record. Arkansas Manufactured Housing Association, Hon. French Hill, House of Representatives, Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Congressman Hill: Congratulations on your election to Congress representing Arkansas' 2nd District and on your selection to the House Financial Services Committee. During the campaign, we visited briefly about how the implementation of `The Dodd-Frank Act' (and the avalanche of additional regulation created by the Act) hinders job creation and increases the cost of financial services for Arkansas consumers and businesses. More specifically, we discussed how `Dodd-Frank' has adversely impacted the members of the Arkansas Manufactured Housing Association (AMHA) and their customers--low-to-moderate income homebuyers throughout the state. Over the past year, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has implemented a number of final rules, issued interpretations of those rules, and clarifications of the interpretations of those rules--all in defense of practices that continue to disrupt consumer lending for low-to-moderate income homebuyers, particularly to purchasers in predominantly rural markets like Arkansas. At Congressional hearing about the Dodd-Frank's `Ability to Repay' (ATR) and `Qualified Mortgage' (QM) rules, one of the CFPB's key witnesses testified that the Bureau recognizes ``. . . that concerns about liability under the Dodd-Frank Act's `Ability-To-Repay' requirement might cause creditors to constrain their lending--particularly in the first few YEARS after the rule takes effect.'' In response to that statement--on behalf of an industry which over the past decade has experienced an 80 percent decline in new home production; the closure of more than 160 manufacturing facilities; and the loss of more than 200,000 American jobs--I would say that most low-to-moderate income Arkansas families don't have the luxury of taking a `wait and see approach' when it comes to their mortgage options and that many of our member businesses won't last through another `few YEARS' of decline in production and sales. Throughout its continued rulemaking, the CFPB has demonstrated a fundamental lack of understanding about manufactured home lending. And, through the implementation of rules like ATR and QM, the Bureau has created additional challenges for manufactured home purchasers and lenders wishing to offer mortgage loans on manufactured homes. As you are undoubtedly aware, lenders which provide specific mortgage products for the manufactured home industry (particularly personal property type `home only' [chattel] loans), community banks and other financial institutions will likely offer fewer manufactured home loan options if such loans are not able to be classified as `qualified mortgages'. The liability created by Dodd-Frank on such loans (classified as `high cost' or `high priced') will prevent most institutions from offering these loans to hard-working Arkansas families. You also know that manufactured home loans tend to be lower balance loans. And, while the cost of origination for a $50,000 manufactured home loan may be the same as the cost of origination for a $250,000 `site-built' home loan in `real dollars'--that origination cost (when considered against the lower-balance loan total) will more readily cause that lower- balance loan to fall outside the parameters of a `qualified mortgage'. The loss of mortgage options for paycheck-to-paycheck wage earners seeking to attain `The American Dream of Home Ownership'--particularly in a state where the median annual household income is around $40,000--will keep many Arkansas families living in rental units or dependent upon government assistance programs for their housing needs. The manufactured home industry is asking for your immediate assistance with industry-specific legislation to amend the provisions of Dodd-Frank which are restricting the availability of credit needed by those seeking to purchase manufactured housing. H.R. 650--The Preserving Access to Manufactured Housing Act--would revise the high-cost mortgage triggers for manufactured home loans and make clarifications to the loan originator definition as it applies to manufactured home retailers and their salespeople. On behalf of the members of the Arkansas Manufactured Housing Association (AMHA) and the customers that we serve, I would respectfully request that you become a co-sponsor of

Mr. HILL

Mr. HILL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the fourth annual Arkansas Run for the Fallen. Congratulations too to run organizer Chief Master Sergeant Bubba Beason. Several years ago, to honor Arkansas' fallen heroes, the Arkansas Run for the Fallen was created. This year's run started in Ozark, Arkansas, last Friday and concluded at the State capitol in Little Rock on Sunday afternoon. A team of Active Duty and Reserve airmen, soldiers, marines, and Arkansas State Police embarked on a 146-mile memorial run to honor every Arkansan who has died since the attacks on September 11, 2001. I had the honor of attending the final ceremony on Sunday afternoon and was deeply moved to be in the presence of approximately 30 Gold Star families that were in attendance. These men have served their country bravely, and their example and sacrifice are ones all Americans and Arkansans can admire.

Mr. HILL

Mr. HILL. Mr. Speaker, last month, President Obama released his budget proposal. It, as expected, increases taxes and spending without balancing the budget and allows Social Security and Medicare to go bankrupt. The President's refusal to address the compounding national debt emphasizes his disinterest in being a leader. Fortunately, we in the House are leading. Our budget offers a stark contrast. We implement commonsense reforms, balance the budget, eliminate wasteful government spending, repeal ObamaCare in full, and preserve Social Security and Medicare for current beneficiaries and future generations. Our budget restores the principle of federalism--the foundation of our Constitution--empowering States, local communities, and the real drivers of opportunity and prosperity, the American people. I look forward to the debate this week in the House and working to ensure the proper balance between our national security interests and our long-term deficit reduction.

Mr. HILL

Mr. HILL. Mr. Speaker, as we celebrate Black History Month, I rise in honor of an Arkansas son, John Edward Bush, whose entrepreneurial spirit and history of service to his community continue to inspire us to this day. John Edward Bush was born into slavery on November 14, 1856, orphaned at the age of 7, and freed from slavery at the end of the Civil War. When he had no permanent home or means to support himself, he worked odd jobs until, one day, he was taken to Capital Hill City School in Little Rock and forced to attend. He became a dedicated student, working as a brick molder to pay for his education. In 1876, he graduated with honors from Capital Hill City School in Little Rock, where he then served as principal for 2 years. Mr. Bush served as the chairman of the Republican Party in Arkansas, but he is best known in Arkansas as the cofounder of the Mosaic Templars of America in 1883. Together with Chester Keatts, Mr. Bush began the Mosaic Templars to aid African Americans who were being refused insurance coverage for illness, death, and funeral costs by White insurers. The efforts of Mr. Bush and Mr. Keatts, in service to their community, brought economic security and advancement to a group that had been marginalized and neglected. By 1900, the activities of the Mosaic Templars had broadened to include an insurance company, a publishing company, a nursing school, a building and loan association, a business college, and even a hospital. What started as a small enterprise to provide services to former slaves seeking a better life evolved into a thriving business. At its height in the 1920s, the positive influence of the Mosaic Templars was felt by its more than 80,000 members belonging to chapters in 26 States and six foreign countries. While this noble institution fell on hard times during the Great Depression, its impact continued. A pillar in the Little Rock community, Mr. Bush rose to heightened levels of prominence when he was appointed as the Receiver of Public Moneys by President William McKinley. His success in this role and deep-seated sense of integrity brought him to the attention of Booker T. Washington and facilitated his reappointment four times by President Theodore Roosevelt and President Taft. That relationship with Dr. Washington became one of trusted confidence and close friendship. Mr. Bush was invited to give the commencement address at Tuskegee, and Washington, in turn, was the dedication speaker of the Mosaic Templars' new building in 1913. Mr. Bush passed away at the age of 60 in 1916. Today, Mr. Bush's descendants remain pillars of our civic community in Little Rock, and his legacy lives on at the Mosaic Templars Cultural Center, which is an outstanding educational resource for our rich African American traditions in Arkansas. As we celebrate Black History Month, we remember John Bush's legacy that continues to inspire and that remains a major and important part of Arkansas history.

Mr. HILL

Mr. HILL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of U.S. Army Corporal C.G. Bolden, a Clinton, Arkansas, native and veteran of the Korean conflict. In January 1951, Corporal Bolden was taken prisoner of war in Korea; and at that time, his wife, Geraldean, and 3-year-old son, Larry, were notified that he was missing in action. Tragically, that same year, Corporal Bolden died of malnutrition under horrific conditions in a North Korean POW camp. In 1993, his remains were among those returned to the United States, and through innovative DNA testing, scientists at the Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command identified Corporal Bolden's remains and determined his cause of death. On February 21, after decades of unanswered questions, Corporal Bolden will be laid to rest in his hometown of Clinton, Arkansas, and I am honored to join his family to remember him and welcome him home. Corporal Bolden gave the ultimate sacrifice for his country, and his life is an example for all Americans and all Arkansans. I thank him and his family for their service and their sacrifice.

Mr. HILL

Mr. HILL. I thank my colleague for yielding. I am pleased to have this time on the floor to talk about this important issue that faces our Congress. On more than 22 occasions, President Obama has told audiences that, on the advice of his counsel, his attorneys, he could in fact not do what he has just proposed to do last November of 2014. He stated that he did not have the statutory authority to defer deportation of over 5 million people who are in our country illegally, thereby granting them rights to drivers' licenses, work permits, Social Security, and health benefits. For example, in 2013, the President stated that implementing immigration ``reform'' through executive action was ``difficult to defend legally'' and ``not an option.'' He has repeatedly told the American people that he is a President, not a king, not a emperor. Mr. Speaker, I will place in the Record the 22 times that the President has uttered these words that say that he does not have the authority to take executive action on immigration. President Obama's Twenty-Two Statements on His Lack of Authority to Handle Immigration Policy by Executive Action With the White House poised to grant executive amnesty any day now despite the American people's staunch opposition, on Sunday President Obama was asked about the many, many statements he made in the past about his inability to unilaterally change or ignore immigration law. His response was astonishingly brazen: ``Actually, my position hasn't changed. When I was talking to the advocates, their interest was in me, through executive action, duplicating the legislation that was stalled in Congress.'' This is a flagrant untruth: ``In fact, most of the questions that were posed to the president over the past several years were about the very thing that he is expected to announce within a matter of days,'' reported The New York Times. ``[T]he questions actually specifically addressed the sorts of actions that he is contemplating now,'' The Washington Post's Fact Checker agreed, awarding President Obama the rare ``Upside-Down Pinocchio,'' which signifies ``a major-league flip-flop.'' Even FactCheck.org piled on. President Obama is once again trying to mislead Americans, but he can't run from what he's said over and over (and over) again. Not only are Americans not stupid--they can read: 1. ``I take the Constitution very seriously. The biggest problems that we're facing right now have to do with [the president] trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all. And that's what I intend to reverse when I'm President of the United States of America.'' (3/31/08) 2. ``We've got a government designed by the Founders so that there'd be checks and balances. You don't want a president who's too powerful or a Congress that's too powerful or a court that's too powerful. Everybody's got their own role. Congress's job is to pass legislation. The president can veto it or he can sign it. . . . I believe in the Constitution and I will obey the Constitution of the United States. We're not going to use signing statements as a way of doing an end-run around Congress.'' (5/19/08) 3. ``Comprehensive reform, that's how we're going to solve this problem. . . . Anybody who tells you it's going to be easy or that I can wave a magic wand and make it happen hasn't been paying attention to how this town works.'' (5/5/ 10) 4. ``[T]here are those in the immigrants' rights community who have argued passionately that we should simply provide those who are [here] illegally with legal status, or at least ignore the laws on the books and put an end to deportation until we have better laws. . . . I believe such an indiscriminate approach would be both unwise and unfair. It would suggest to those thinking about coming here illegally that there will be no repercussions for such a decision. And this could lead to a surge in more illegal immigration. And it would also ignore the millions of people around the world who are waiting in line to come here legally. Ultimately, our nation, like all nations, has the right and obligation to control its borders and set laws for residency and citizenship. And no matter how decent they are, no matter their reasons, the 11 million who broke these laws should be held accountable.'' (7/1/10) 5. ``I do have an obligation to make sure that I am following some of the rules. I can't simply ignore laws that are out there. I've got to work to make sure that they are changed.'' (10/14/10) 6. ``I am president, I am not king. I can't do these things just by myself. We have a system of government that requires the Congress to work with the Executive Branch to make it happen. I'm committed to making it happen, but I've got to have some partners to do it. . . . The main thing we have to do to stop deportations is to change the laws. . . . [T]he most important thing that we can do is to change the law because the way the system works--again, I just want to repeat, I'm president, I'm not king. If Congress has laws on the books that says that people who are here who are not documented have to be deported, then I can exercise some flexibility in terms of where we deploy our resources, to focus on people who are really causing problems as a opposed to families who are just trying to work and support themselves. But there's a limit to the discretion that I can show because I am obliged to execute the law. That's what the Executive Branch means. I can't just make the laws up by myself. So the most important thing that we can do is focus on changing the underlying laws.'' (10/25/10) 7. ``America is a nation of laws, which means I, as the President, am obligated to enforce the law. I don't have a choice about that. That's part of my job. But I can advocate for changes in the law so that we have a country that is both respectful of the law but also continues to be a great nation of immigrants. . . . With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that's just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed. . . [W]e've got three branches of government. Congress passes the law. The executive branch's job is to enforce and implement those laws. And then the judiciary has to interpret the laws. There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as President.'' (3/28/11) 8. ``I can't solve this problem by myself. . . . [W]e're going to have to have bipartisan support in order to make it happen. . . . I can't do it by myself. We're going to have to change the laws in Congress, but I'm confident we can make it happen.'' (4/20/11) 9. ``I know some here wish that I could just bypass Congress and change the law myself But that's not how democracy works. See, democracy is hard. But it's right. Changing our laws means doing the hard work of changing minds and changing votes, one by one.'' (4/29/11) 10. ``Sometimes when I talk to immigration advocates, they wish I could just bypass Congress and change the law myself. But that's not how a democracy works. What we really need to do is to keep up the fight to pass genuine, comprehensive reform. That is the ultimate solution to this problem. That's what I'm committed to doing.'' (5/10/11) 11. ``I swore an oath to uphold the laws on the books . . . Now, I know some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own. Believe me, the idea of doing things on my own is very tempting. I promise you. Not just on immigration reform. But that's not how our system works. That's not how our democracy functions. That's not how our Constitution is written.'' (7/25/11) 12. ``So what we've tried to do is within the constraints of the laws on the books, we've tried to be as fair, humane, just as we can, recognizing, though, that the laws themselves need to be changed. . . . The most important thing for your viewers and listeners and readers to understand is that in order to change our laws, we've got to get it through the House of Representatives, which is currently controlled by Republicans, and we've got to get 60 votes in the Senate. . . . Administratively, we can't ignore the law. . . . I just have to continue to say this notion that somehow I can just change the laws unilaterally is just not true. We are doing everything we can administratively. But the fact of the matter is there are laws on the books that I have to enforce. And I think there's been a great disservice done to the cause of getting the DREAM Act passed and getting comprehensive immigration passed by perpetrating the notion that somehow, by myself, I can go and do these things. It's just not true. . . . We live in a democracy. You have to pass bills through the legislature, and then I can sign it. And if all the attention is focused away from the legislative process, then that is going to lead to a constant dead- end. We have to recognize how the system works, and then apply pressure to those places where votes can be gotten and, ultimately, we can get this thing solved.'' (9/28/11) In June 2012, President Obama unilaterally granted deferred action for childhood arrivals (DACA), allowing ``eligible individuals who do not present a risk to national security or public safety . . . to request temporary relief from deportation proceedings and apply for work authorization.'' He then argued that he had already done everything he could legally do on his own: 13. ``Now, what I've always said is, as the head of the executive branch, there's a limit to what I can do. Part of the reason that deportations went up was Congress put a whole lot of money into it, and when you have a lot of resources and a lot more agents involved, then there are going to be higher numbers. What we've said is, let's make sure that you're not misdirecting those resources. But we're still going to, ultimately, have to change the laws in order to avoid some of the heartbreaking stories that you see coming up occasionally. And that's why this continues to be a top priority of mine. . . . And we will continue to make sure that how we enforce is done as fairly and justly as possible. But until we have a law in place that provides a pathway for legalization and/or citizenship for the folks in question, we're going to continue to be bound by the law. . . . And so part of the challenge as President is constantly saying, `what authorities do I have?' '' (9/20/12) 14. ``We are a nation of immigrants. . . . But we're also a nation of laws. So what I've said is, we need to fix a broken immigration system. And I've done everything that I can on my own[.]'' (10/16/12) 15. ``I'm not a king. I am the head of the executive branch of government. I'm required to follow the law. And that's what we've done. But what I've also said is, let's make sure that we're applying the law in a way that takes into account people's humanity. That's the reason that we moved forward on deferred action. Within the confines of the law we said, we have some discretion in terms of how we apply this law.'' (1/ 30/13) 16. ``I'm not a king. You know, my job as the head of the executive branch ultimately is to carry out the law. And, you know, when it comes to enforcement of our immigration laws, we've got some discretion. We can prioritize what we do. But we can't simply ignore the law. When it comes to the dreamers, we were able to identify that group and say, `These folks are generally not a risk. They're not involved in crime. . . . And so let's prioritize our enforcement resources.' But to sort through all the possible cases of everybody who might have a sympathetic story to tell is very difficult to do. This is why we need comprehensive immigration reform. To make sure that once and for all, in a way that is, you know, ratified by Congress, we can say that there is a pathway to citizenship for people who are staying out of trouble, who are trying to do the right thing, who've put down roots here. . . . My job is to carry out the law. And so Congress gives us a whole bunch of resources. They give us an order that we've got to go out there and enforce the laws that are on the books. . . . If this was an issue that I could do unilaterally I would have done it a long time ago. . . . The way our system works is Congress has to pass legislation. I then get an opportunity to sign it and implement it.'' (1/30/13) 17. ``This is something I've struggled with throughout my presidency. The problem is that I'm the president of the United States, I'm not the emperor of the United States. My job is to execute laws that are passed. And Congress right now has not changed what I consider to be a broken immigration system. And what that means is that we have certain obligations to enforce the laws that are in place even if we think that in many cases the results may be tragic. . . . [W]e've kind of stretched our administrative flexibility as much as we can[.]'' (2/14/13) 18. ``I think that it is very important for us to recognize that the way to solve this problem has to be legislative. I can do some things and have done some things that make a difference in the lives of people by determining how our enforcement should focus. . . . And we've been able to provide help through deferred action for young people . . . But this is a problem that needs to be fixed legislatively.'' (7/16/13) 19. ``My job in the executive branch is supposed to be to carry out the laws that are passed. Congress has said `here is the law' when it comes to those who are undocumented, and they've allocated a whole bunch of money for enforcement. And, what I have been able to do is to make a legal argument that I think is absolutely right, which is that given the resources that we have, we can't do everything that Congress has asked us to do. What we can do is then carve out the DREAM Act folks, saying young people who have basically grown up here are Americans that we should welcome. . . . But if we start broadening that, then essentially I would be ignoring the law in a way that I think would be very difficult to defend legally. So that's not an option. . . . What I've said is there is a there's a path to get this done, and that's through Congress.'' (9/17/13) 20. ``[I]f, in fact, I could solve all these problems without passing laws in Congress, then I would do so. But we're also a nation of laws. That's part of our tradition. And so the easy way out is to try to yell and pretend like I can do something by violating our laws. And what I'm proposing is the harder path, which is to use our democratic processes to achieve the same goal that you want to achieve. . . . It is not simply a matter of us just saying we're going to violate the law. That's not our tradition. The great thing about this country is we have this wonderful process of democracy, and sometimes it is messy, and sometimes it is hard, but ultimately, justice and truth win out.'' (11/25/13) 21. ``I am the Champion-in-Chief of comprehensive immigration reform. But what I've said in the past remains true, which is until Congress passes a new law, then I am constrained in terms of what I am able to do. What I've done is to use my prosecutorial discretion, because you can't enforce the laws across the board for 11 or 12 million people, there aren't the resources there. What we've said is focus on folks who are engaged in criminal activity, focus on people who are engaged in gang activity. Do not focus on young people, who we're calling DREAMers . . . That already stretched my administrative capacity very far. But I was confident that that was the right thing to do. But at a certain point the reason that these deportations are taking place is, Congress said, `you have to enforce these laws.' They fund the hiring of officials at the department that's charged with enforcing. And I cannot ignore those laws any more than I could ignore, you know, any of the other laws that are on the books. That's why it's so important for us to get comprehensive immigration reform done this year.'' (3/6/ 14) 22. ``I think that I never have a green light [to push the limits of executive power]. I'm bound by the Constitution; I'm bound by separation of powers. There are some things we can't do. Congress has the power of the purse, for example. . . . Congress has to pass a budget and authorize spending. So I don't have a green light. . . . My preference in all these instances is to work with Congress, because not only can Congress do more, but it's going to be longer-lasting.'' (8/ 6/14) Further, notwithstanding the President's own legal argument to the contrary, Mr. Obama's supporters argue that he simply is doing what Presidents Reagan and Bush 41 did. This statement is simply not true. Instead, President Reagan and Bush responded in a statutorily acceptable matter to an ambiguity in a specific law and did not seek to circumvent or prevent enforcement of the law as it was written. I supported recent House legislative action to defund the President's executive actions based on the facts above, as well as my view that Congress must in fact fix our broken immigration system by legislation. The separation of powers argument here is clear. In article I of the U.S. Constitution, Congress is granted the enumerated power of setting uniform law for naturalizing our citizens. Mr. Obama's approach violates this provision by both exceeding his constitutional authority as well as his sworn obligation to faithfully execute the laws as passed by Congress. While we are all familiar with the Executive's obligation to faithfully execute, we must focus on the cynical distrust that doing the opposite causes among our citizens. James Madison in Federalist 51 discussed the need for each branch of government to guard against overreach by another. ``When such an overreach occurs,'' Madison stated, ``ambition must be counteracted by ambition.'' And clearly, our government works best when each branch stays within its prescribed boundaries. Supreme Court Justice Kennedy argued this in a recent separation of powers case before the court when he said: Liberty is always at stake when one or more of the branches seek to transgress the separation of powers. As a matter of principle, as a matter of our role in Congress, I urge my colleagues in the Senate to stand up for the proper separation of powers and assert that Congress alone can debate and enact such sweeping changes to our immigration system. Mr. Speaker, Members seeking to reform our broken immigration system should support our efforts to rein in this tyranny of the Executive. Only then can Congress work together to craft the proper solutions to fix our broken system. Only then will Congress come together and insist on a border that is secure and fully functioning as a cornerstone of our homeland security. With a land, sea, and air border that knows who and why people are entering our beloved Nation, we can then turn our attention to those many connecting facets of our system: visa overstays; lack of a balanced, well-staffed, and functioning guest worker program; adequate welcome and legal openings for those facing persecution; speedy adjudication for those aliens who are detained; opportunities for needed workers, professors, and students in our universities; and finally, a process for handling those among us who remain outside our legal tax and societal systems. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues in the Senate to stand up for the first branch and our constitutional prerogative. Take action on our Homeland Security bill and send it back to the House.

Mr. HILL

Mr. HILL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of approving the Keystone XL pipeline. The pipeline is widely supported by Americans and by a bipartisan majority in this House and in the Senate. In the more than 6 years since the application to build the pipeline, the President has refused to authorize it, citing two reasons. Number one, environmental challenges. But, Mr. Speaker, the pipeline has undergone numerous environmental assessments, and the U.S. State Department's Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement confirms the minimal impact of the pipeline on the environment. Number two, legal challenges. But, Mr. Speaker, on January 9, 2015, the Nebraska Supreme Court approved the pathway of the pipeline. The President has no more excuses to deny the completion of the Keystone XL, and I urge him to rescind his veto threat of this critical energy and infrastructure bill. Americans want a true all-of-the-above energy policy that boosts our goal of North American energy independence, benefits consumers, creates jobs, protects our environment, and preserves our natural resources. This bill accomplishes all of those goals. However, Mr. Speaker, the President continues to block this essential energy and infrastructure project and the jobs it would provide to our hardworking American families. Further, due to the bureaucratic delays of the past 6 years, this project is now costing 50 percent more than its original announcement. In my district alone, the pipeline has supported over 600 jobs at Welspun Tubular, headquartered in Little Rock, Arkansas, where 700 miles of this pipe are stacked up at the rail head ready to put in the ground. Mr. Speaker, if approved, this project will provide thousands more jobs and over $3.4 billion for our Nation's economy. The President is out of excuses. It is time to approve this project.

Mr. HILL

Mr. HILL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 596 which repeals the President's flawed health care law in its entirety and provides the Congress with a clean slate to implement the real, patient-centered health care reform that this Nation needs and deserves. The majority of Americans are opposed to ObamaCare and its harmful intended or unintended side effects which have increased costs, decreased health care access, and lost jobs, work hours, and wages for many of our hardworking families. This is an opportunity to recognize the flaws of mandates and a top- down approach to health care and allows us to finally consider ideas that will result in a health care system that empowers and encourages individuals to take control of and responsibility for their health care through the use of tools like health savings accounts and incentives that reward healthy behaviors. We need targeted, transparent, well thought out reforms that acknowledge the complexity of our health care system, and with the right kind of reforms, we can get the right kind of health care that is affordable and accessible.

Mr. HILL

Mr. HILL. ``But in all such cases the votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and nays, and the names of the persons voting for and against the bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively.''