Jim Jordan

Mr. JORDAN

Mr. JORDAN. Madam Chair, Mr. Schumer said this, about the President. He said: ``Let me tell you: You take on the intelligence community-- they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.'' That is not how it is supposed to work in this country. That is not how it is supposed to work. The unelected people answer to the elected individual. This is about reforming this program, making sure it respects our fundamental liberties. I respect the gentleman for bringing the amendment forward.

Mr. JORDAN

Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, the Central Ohio Area Agency on Aging will host the 44th annual Central Ohio Senior Citizens Hall of Fame induction ceremony on Wednesday, May 15, in Columbus. I am honored to commend to the House one of this year's outstanding inductees: Donald Werling of Marysville. Don has dedicated countless hours to helping his fellow senior citizens be safer in their homes. After conducting assessments of a senior's house, he draws up plans for basic safety modifications-- everything from wheelchair ramps to hand railings to bathroom grab bars. As needed, he helps acquire any necessary permits and obtains quotes for materials. Refusing to decline help to anyone in need, he often recruits sponsors and volunteers to help him complete projects at no cost to the homeowner. In 2018 alone, Don and his volunteers completed 64 much-needed renovation projects throughout Union County. Madam Speaker, selection for the Central Ohio Senior Citizens Hall of Fame is a high honor accorded to seniors who have devoted their lives to service to others. I am pleased to join in the accolades to Donald Werling on his induction, and thank the Central Ohio Area Agency on Aging for recognizing his many sacrifices and those of all of this year's inductees.

Mr. JORDAN

Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I am honored to commend to the House the life and career of Billy L. Gossard of Harrod, Ohio, who passed away last month at age 84. Bill was born in Hardin County, Ohio, in 1934. Following his service in the Army, he worked for many years as a trucking salesman for a variety of area companies. Bill was a proud resident of the Village of Harrod, where he opened Bill's World Famous Barbershop in 1964. He was soon elected to the Harrod Village Council, on which he served for nearly three decades. For twenty years, starting in 1976, Bill served as mayor of Harrod. He cited his work to fund and install a village-wide sewer system as his biggest accomplishment in office. He also took great pride in acquiring land for Harrod's Railroad Heritage Park, which commemorates the village's history as a major rail town. The village recognized his many achievements with the proclamation and celebration of Bill Gossard Day in 2017. Madam Speaker, Bill is survived by his wife of 63 years, Janet; three children; and numerous grandchildren, great-grandchildren, and many extended family members. On behalf of the people of Ohio's Fourth Congressional District, I offer them my condolences as they remember Bill's life and his many contributions to the Village of Harrod.

Mr. JORDAN

Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I am honored to commend to the House the outstanding service of Pam Hall of Marion, Ohio, President of the Marion Area Chamber of Commerce. Pam is retiring after more than two decades in that role. Pam first got involved with the Chamber during her 27-year career at the engineering firm Floyd Browne Associates, where she was the only woman to date to be offered a partnership. When the Chamber presidency became open, she sold her share in the company to take on this new challenge. The Marion Chamber has remained strong under Pam's selfless leadership and commitment to the success of the local economy. She has been instrumental in helping area businesses connect and find common ways to solve problems. The community at large has benefited from her tireless work on the Leadership Marion program, which helps local entrepreneurs and others develop leadership skills. Pam's work goes far beyond her service with the Chamber. She is a longtime United Way supporter, past president of Marion Noon Kiwanis, and a member of the Rotary Club of Marion. She also serves on the Marion County Foundation Board, the Marion Area Counseling Center Board, the Rushmore Academy Board, the Marion Matters Board, and many others. The Women's Business Council of Marion honored her with its 2017 ATHENA Leadership Award. Several years ago, Pam was diagnosed with colon cancer. While she has continued her good work with the Chamber since her diagnosis, she has decided to step down to focus on her health. Throughout her treatment, she has openly shared the details of her diagnosis and treatment regimen so that others might learn and benefit from her experiences. Madam Speaker, the Marion Area Chamber of Commerce will celebrate Pam's achievements at its annual barbecue on April 27. On behalf of the people of Ohio's Fourth Congressional District, I am proud to join in the accolades to her. She has my very best wishes and my thanks for her decades of service to the people of Marion.

Mr. JORDAN

Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, the Ohio Military Hall of Fame will hold a ceremony at the Statehouse in Columbus on May 3 to mark the induction of its 2019 class. Selection for the Hall of Fame is a high honor that has been accorded to only a few hundred Ohioans since 2000. To be considered for induction, individuals must have been decorated for heroic actions in a combat situation. I am honored to commend to the House this year's 23 inductees: Corporal William J. Archinal (posthumously), recipient of the Congressional Medal of Honor, Army veteran of the Civil War. Corporal Milton A. Blickensderfer (posthumously), recipient of the Congressional Medal of Honor, Army veteran of the Civil War. Corporal William Campbell (posthumously), recipient of the Congressional Medal of Honor, Army veteran of the Civil War. Sergeant Freeman Davis (posthumously), recipient of the Congressional Medal of Honor, Army veteran of the Civil War. Major Thomas R. Butz, currently living in Marietta, Georgia, recipient of the Silver Star, Army veteran of the Vietnam War. E-8 Howard Grady Deel of Delaware, recipient of the Silver Star, Army veteran of the Vietnam War. Corporal Ernest G. Madden (posthumously), recipient of the Silver Star, Marine Corps veteran of the Vietnam War. Colonel Jay M. Strayer of Xenia, recipient of the Silver Star, Air Force veteran of the Vietnam War. Lieutenant Colonel John C. Barber (posthumously), recipient of the Distinguished Flying Cross, Air Force veteran of the Vietnam War. Chief Warrant Officer Second Class David R. Holloway of Cincinnati, recipient of the Distinguished Flying Cross, Army veteran of the Vietnam War. E-5 Allen J. Smolic of Twinsburg, recipient of the Distinguished Flying Cross, Army veteran of the Vietnam War. Sergeant First Class John E. Bateman of Albany, recipient of the Bronze Star with ``V'' Device, Army veteran of the War in Iraq. Lieutenant Colonel Kenneth L. Bonnell of Marysville, recipient of the Bronze Star with ``V'' Device, Army veteran of the Vietnam War. Sergeant Kelly E. Burchett, recipient of the Bronze Star with ``V'' Device, Army veteran of the Vietnam-War. Sergeant Robert J. Gold (posthumously), recipient of the Bronze Star with ``V'' Device, Army veteran of the Vietnam War. Specialist Fourth Class Gary W. Gross (posthumously), recipient of the Bronze Star with ``V'' Device, Army veteran of the Vietnam War. First Lieutenant Michael E. Jackson of Shaker Heights, recipient of the Bronze Star with ``V'' Device, Marine Corps veteran of the Vietnam War. Staff Sergeant Regis W. Kern of Marietta, recipient of the Bronze Star with ``V'' Device, Army veteran of the Vietnam War. Specialist Fourth Class Thomas P. Leetch of East Palestine, recipient of the Bronze Star with ``V'' Device, Army veteran of the Vietnam War. Sergeant William E. Smith of Ashland, recipient of the Bronze Star with ``V'' Device, Army veteran of the Vietnam War. Sergeant John G. Radvansky, currently living in Wellsburg, West Virginia, recipient of the Bronze Star with ``V'' Device, Army veteran of the Vietnam War. Lance Corporal George R. ``Roger'' Bacon of Lisbon, recipient of the Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal, Marine Corps veteran of the Vietnam War. Captain Christopher T. Orr of Pataskala, recipient of the Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal, Marine Corps veteran of the War in Iraq.

Mr. JORDAN

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding and thank him for his service on the important Rules Committee as our ranking member and for his service in Congress and on that particular committee. Much of this grab bag of Democratic party favors in this bill are entirely unrelated to each other. How, for example, does imposing unfunded Federal mandates on State administration of elections relate to mandating the President divest from business holdings? The House Administration Committee is the only committee to mark up this legislation. However, House Administration only marked up the portions of the bill that were in their jurisdiction. The amendment in the nature of the substitute was 447 pages; the Rules print was 622 pages. The Committee on Oversight and Reform had substantial jurisdiction over this legislation. We sent a letter to the chairman asking for a markup. We got a letter back from him saying we would do that after the vote on the bill. Now, how the heck does that work? How the heck does that work? So this needs to slow down. I think the underlying legislation is wrong for the country. The idea that every single taxpayer is now going to have to finance public campaigns, finance election campaigns--just what the voters wanted, just what they need. The very people who are in this swamp, you now have to pay for them to get reelected to stay in this swamp.

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I urge that we oppose the rule. If the rule does pass, I would certainly urge that we oppose the legislation as well.

Mr. JORDAN

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chair, the Office of Government Ethics already consults with legal defense funds when prompted. OGE already published two legal advisories around legal defense funds that define gifts according to current U.S. Code and the ``Standard of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch.'' Any legal defense fund reviewed by OGE bars the trustee from accepting donations from already prohibited sources. Mr. Chair, I urge that Members oppose this bad amendment to an already terrible underlying piece of legislation, and, respectfully, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chair, I oppose the amendment.

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chair, another bad amendment to a bad bill. This amendment suffers from the same defects as the underlying bill. It continues the same regrettable trend by our colleagues on the other side of the aisle of trying to silence speakers they don't like. Portions of this bill are so radical that, as we have said several times already, even the ACLU came out today and asked Members of this body not to vote for it. The ACLU said H.R. 1 would unconstitutionally burden free speech and associational rights. This amendment is more of the same tactics that caused the ACLU to oppose the underlying legislation. As I said, a bad amendment to a bad bill. Put that all together, it makes everything worse. The Lobbying Disclosure Act, which this amendment would seek to change, is about disclosure and increasing public awareness, not preventing people from undertaking a lawful profession. The decision of whether to undertake representation of a client is a personal and professional matter, not one for central government planning. What my friends on the other side of the aisle seem not to understand is the answer to speech that they view as undesirable is more speech. It is called the First Amendment. It is called debate. The Federal Government should not and cannot constitutionally prevent the people it does not like from speaking. And we know it has tried. Just a few years ago, it did it. And I will continue to bring this up as long as the good folks in the Fourth District will have me in Congress. A few years ago, the IRS systematically, for a sustained period of time, went after people for their political beliefs--it happened; they did it--for the most fundamental liberty we have, our right to speak. Think about the First Amendment, freedom to practice your faith the way you want, freedom to assemble, freedom to petition your government, freedom of the press. All those are critically important. But your right to speak is fundamental, and your right to speak in a political fashion is what the Founders had most in mind when they talked about your free speech, First Amendment rights. This amendment goes to restrict it just like the bill does, and that is why the ACLU is against it. That is why I am against it. This is a bad idea to a bad piece of legislation. I mean, think about what is going on, on college campuses today: safe spaces, free speech zones, bias response teams. If you say something politically incorrect today on a college campus, you get harassed. In the last Congress, I asked a question in committee to a professor from one of these universities that are taxpayer subsidized. I said: Can a free speech zone and a safe space on a college campus be at the same location? He kind of chuckled. That is sort of the joke, because where is the free speech zone supposed to be in this country? Everywhere. It is called the First Amendment. I asked this one professor: Professor, in a safe space on a college campus, could I say this sentence: ``Donald Trump is President''? Think about this. Think about this. The professor began his response with this: Well, Congressman, it depends. I interrupted him, which I will do sometimes if I think the witness is saying something stupid. I said: It is a fact. There is no ``it depends'' about it. He got elected on November 8, 2016. He is President of the United States. He lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. It is a fact. The idea that on some college campuses you can't say that because you are in some safe space is crazy. This is the absurd level that some on the left want to take us to when we are talking about the First Amendment. Thank goodness--thank goodness--the ACLU sees it for what it is and says vote ``no'' on this bill. Heck, yes, I am opposed to this amendment, just like I am opposed to the underlying legislation. Mr. Chair, I would urge a ``no'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chairman, as the gentlewoman said, this amendment would require the Office of Government Ethics to promulgate rules to apply ethics laws to unpaid employees of the Executive Office and President of the White House. As she also mentioned, this is clearly to go after Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump. It seems to me that this is not the kind of thing that we should be focused on. Miss Trump has been appointed as an executive branch employee and is now covered by the ethics laws and regulations that apply to all executive branch employees. It seems to me this is congressional overreach and redundant of current ethics rules and practices of other folks who have worked in the executive branch. As I said, I oppose the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition.

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chairman, this is duplicative of current rules. Political appointees are government employees who are held to specific travel and ethics standards already. Restrictions are there and have been there, but the Democrats seem to want more bureaucrats involved in the review. Political appointees follow these fundamentals, among others, related to Federal travel: travel must be conducted in the most efficient and effective manner and only when necessary to accomplish the purposes of the government, and employees traveling on official business are expected to exercise the same care when incurring expenses as a prudent person would on personal business. Current Federal travel guidelines for political appointees already limit travel flight expenses to common carrier commercial fares. The only time private company aircraft can be accepted is if no other travel arrangements are practically available or when they are offered to your spouse, but explicitly not because of the political appointee's position. Either way, all of this would be required to be run through the White House Counsel's office. Mr. Chairman, I urge that we oppose the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition.

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chair, H.R. 1 as currently drafted requires the Office of Government Ethics to make ethics waivers issued to executive branch employees publicly available. The bill goes even further to mandate ethics waivers issued prior to the enactment of this legislation must also be made publicly available. This amendment requires OGE to submit a report to Congress within 45 days of enactment regarding the implications of the retroactive applications of the ethics waiver process. H.R. 1 already gives the Office of Government Ethics vast new authorities and vast new responsibilities. This amendment would just place an additional burden on OGE, and I would urge, Mr. Chairman, that all Members oppose the amendment from the gentlewoman from Florida. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman, it is bad enough that this bill is going to tell States how to run elections, bad enough this bill is going to require taxpayers to finance the elections of politicians who created the swamp so they can get back to the swamp, but what is most egregious about this legislation is the attack on free speech. As the whip mentioned, the ACLU has said we should vote no on this bill because it unconstitutionally burdens free speech and association rights. Let me tell you how it does it. It uses our old friend the IRS. Remember just a few years ago the IRS systematically targeted people for their political beliefs. They went after conservatives. Now think about your First Amendment liberties, your right to practice your faith the way you want to, the right to assemble, the right to petition your government, freedom of the press. What is the most fundamental liberty we have under the First Amendment? Your right to speak and particularly to speak in a political fashion, a political nature. That is what the IRS went after. This bill does this. It gets rid of the schedule B protections that are currently in law. It says the reason the protection of schedule B information is important has nothing to do with vast conspiracies on the right or left related to so-called dark money. Rather, it dates back to the Supreme Court's 1958 decision NAACP v. Alabama. The Supreme Court formally recognized First Amendment protection of the freedom of association that prevented the NAACP from being compelled to turn over information about its members. What this bill will do today is, when this information has been leaked, as it has already, everyday Americans will continue to receive death threats, mail containing white powder, all because someone disagrees with what they believe. This bill should be defeated for one simple reason: It attacks our First Amendment liberties, our most sacred rights. This bill goes after it. That is why we should vote it down, and that is why I urge a ``no'' vote.

Mr. JORDAN

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chairman, I am not painting with a broad brush. Look, I know there are lots of good employees there. All I am saying is an agency that did what the IRS did, that rehired people who had been fired, some of them had been fired for not paying their taxes, an agency that went after people for their political beliefs, I just--call me crazy, but you can go ask your average taxpayer: Do you think that agency that did those things, do you think those people need a pay raise? My guess is most of the constituents I get the privilege of representing in the Fourth District of Ohio would say: Nope, I am not for that. That is all I am saying, not painting with a broad brush. All I know is what this agency did. And it is not a conspiracy theory, and the gentleman from Virginia knows it. The inspector general did a report and said targeting occurred at the Internal Revenue Service. They went after conservative Tea Party conservative groups, and it happened just as sure I am standing here speaking on the House floor, and the gentleman from Virginia knows that to be the case.

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chairman, I have the utmost respect for the majority leader. In his comments he said that the shutdown is painful and stupid. No one wants a shutdown, Mr. Chairman, but I will tell you what is stupid. What is stupid is a southern border that is not secure. I feel for the Federal employees who missed a paycheck. We don't want any family to have to go through that, and I understand that. But I also understand the pain that some families across this country have suffered, particularly when they lose a loved one because an illegal immigrant is here and took the life of someone they cared deeply about. This shutdown would have never happened if the Democrats would have voted for what they were for before, what they had already supported. But no, no, no, they are so focused on stopping the President that they can't get focused on helping the country. Everybody knows we need a border security wall. All you have to do, Mr. Chairman, is watch the caravan phenomena over the last several months. There is another one forming. Until we understand this and are willing to deal with the problem, we can keep having these debates, but I just wish Democrats would support what they did previously, support money for the border security wall that everybody knows needs to happen. That is the real problem here. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chairman, this is one of the most ridiculous amendments I have ever seen. Just a few years ago, the IRS targeted people for their political beliefs, systematically, for a sustained period of time, went after conservatives because they didn't like their political beliefs and what they were doing. Now we are saying to those same people across this country--we had constituents. Congressman Meadows had constituents. The gentlewoman from Massachusetts may have constituents. We are now saying to them: Mr. and Mrs. Taxpayer, you may have been targeted by the IRS, but now we are going to take some of your hard-earned tax money and pay them, give them a pay raise? Giving people a pay raise who went after people's most fundamental right, your right to speak out against--your First Amendment liberties, that is what this amendment would do. Also, the chairman knows this. We did an investigation in the Oversight Committee. The IRS had fired people who they then rehired-- now think about this--and some of the people they rehired, who had been fired, some of the very people they rehired were people who didn't pay their taxes, and we are now going to give them a pay raise. You have got to be kidding me. The very agency that systematically went after people, went after our most fundamental right, our right, under the First Amendment, to speak out against our government, went after people for doing that because they didn't like their political beliefs, set up this elaborate system, this ``Be on the Lookout'' list, Lois Lerner, and the whole 9 yards, did that, also the same agency that fired people for not paying their taxes and then rehired them, and now the taxpayers have to give them a pay raise. That is what the Democrats want in this amendment. This is ridiculous. We should reject this, and we should reject, as we talked about before, the whole darn bill.

Mr. JORDAN

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, what is stupid is not securing the border. Mr. Speaker, let's just cut to the chase. If Democrats would support now what they supported then, there never would have been a shutdown. Ten years ago, all kinds of Senators--Senators Biden, Feinstein, Schumer, Obama, and Clinton--all supported money for a barrier on the border. Senator Obama said this: ``We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, and unchecked. Americans are right to demand better border security and better enforcement of our immigration laws.'' Secretary Clinton said this: ``I voted numerous times as a Senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in.'' Oh, how times have changed. Where are the Democrats today? What is the position of the left today? Congressman Blumenauer: Abolish ICE. Candidate Clinton: We need a borderless hemisphere. The Speaker of the United States House of Representatives said: Walls are immoral. And the person they selected to give the State of the Union response, a gubernatorial candidate in Georgia, said she is okay with noncitizens voting. Oh, how times have changed. All we are asking for is, do what you said before, be for what you were for before, and let's build a border security wall. Let's focus on one simple thing here. Let's do what is best for the country. Everyone knows a sovereign Nation should control its borders. Everyone knows that a border security wall will help with this caravan phenomena we have watched over the last several months. Let's build a border security wall. If we can agree on that--and Democrats were all for it just a couple of years ago--there never would have been a shutdown and we would be serving the American people.