Mike Kelly

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I have a chart that I am going to put up here in a minute, but there is something that I think we all need to realize: Our positions here not only are as representatives but also stewards of taxpayer money. Now, a lot of people sometimes become confused as to whose money it is that we are talking about, and what we are talking about is hardworking American taxpayers. The definition of a steward is pretty simple: It is someone who manages another's property or financial affairs; one who administers anything as the agent of another or others. The oath we take makes us responsible for every single penny that we spend or allocate because it came out of the pocket of a hardworking American taxpayer. So it just seems to me that Mr. Barletta's idea makes sense: this idea that somehow actually making sure that people qualify for a subsidy is somehow being mean-hearted and not being actually a steward of these dollars. I just wanted to point this out. This is H.R. 3590, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. It was the final vote on March 21, 2010. And I would just tell some of my colleagues: Take a look because some of your names are very prominent there--and you can see it. The piece that we are talking about is the piece that was included in the Affordable Care Act. This isn't something that we dreamed up overnight; this is something that was actually part of the Affordable Care Act. And now we are saying: My goodness, we are allowing these subsidies to be out there. And then what we are saying is: Well, we are going to presume that whoever it is who applied for these subsidies actually is entitled to them. Now, that only works in Washington, D.C. In the private sector, you usually have to verify before you do anything, as opposed to saying: Well, do you know what, somebody said that they were entitled to this, so we ought to just go ahead and pass this on. I have got to tell you: It is a lot easier when it doesn't come out of your pocket. But, when it comes out of hardworking American taxpayers' pockets, I think it is incumbent upon us, as elected representatives, to say that there is something that doesn't make sense here. When over half a million people receive over $750 million in subsidies, somebody, somewhere, should be saying: How did this happen? I think it is interesting that neither HHS or the IRS has any method in place to actually go out and recoup these dollars that were wrongfully awarded. This just doesn't make sense. Mr. Barletta is doing something that is common sense. And I know that when the act was passed, the most famous quote of all is: We have to pass it to find out what is in it. Well, we did pass it. I wasn't here. I was in the private sector. But these are all of the folks who passed it. This is actually your policy. This is Lou Barletta's policy. This isn't a Republican policy. This is a policy that was part of the Affordable Care Act. Why in the world would we ever, as taxpayers, expect people to verify this type of activity? We should just say: Listen, they seem like pretty good folks, and they are going to eventually get back to us. We have no way of recouping this money. Now, we can rail about people not having hearts; we can rail about people who don't like immigrants; and we can rail about taking this out on hardworking families and making it difficult for them to get by. I would just say this: We are trying to protect taxpayer money. We are trying to protect something that is so basic. We are trying to protect something that is actually part of the law that was passed as part of the Affordable Care Act. This isn't a foreign idea. This just makes sense. So I would just ask my friends: Listen, please go to H.R. 3590, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and go to section 1411-- this is your language, by the way. As I said, I wasn't here at the time. I did read it, and I am still scratching my head to say: Do you know what, this is probably a good policy; you should probably read it before you pass it. But it says exactly what it is that you expect people receiving these subsidies to go through. It is amazing me today that, all of a sudden, this is Potomac amnesia: I don't remember that part of the law. So, look, there could be nothing more sensible--commonsensical--than making sure that before we issue subsidies, that are funded by hardworking American taxpayers, that we actually verify who it is that is getting them; rather than going ahead and putting it out there and then saying: Do you know what, maybe they don't qualify. Well, how do you get the money back? This pay-and-chase idea, to me, would never work in the private sector because we actually have to be responsible for what we do. Now, I don't want you to get all wrapped around the axle and think that somehow we are coming after people in a way that doesn't make sense. Here is what I want you to think about: I want you to think about the people who actually pay the tab, the people who actually pick up the check, the people who actually pay taxes, the people to who we are the most responsible. And to somehow come up with an idea that it is mean-hearted to verify who is getting these subsidies, to me, is tomfoolery. If you want to do something, and you want to make it hard for people to understand what we are doing, do this: I would love to go back home and tell people what you folks just don't understand. You sent the money to us, we decided how we are going to spend it, we decided that we can give it to anybody we want, and, by the way, if they don't qualify, that shouldn't bother you. Now, let's just do something that makes sense.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Well, you know what? I really don't need a full minute to talk about something that is common sense, but I have been here now a little bit over 6 years, and it is hard for me to believe that this act was passed back on March 21, 2010, and the language we are talking about today is the actual language that was in the bill that we had to pass before we could find out what was in it. Maybe at that time somebody should have read this, and it was a good idea to actually verify these things. That would have saved a whole lot of time, a whole lot of money, and a whole lot of irresponsible spending. Again, whether you want to agree with the study or not agree with the study, when half a million people receive over $750 million in hardworking American taxpayer money, and then we are told: Geez, I can't believe you are that mean that you want to go back and recoup money from people who didn't deserve it--no. What we are saying is let's verify first. Let's make sure of every single penny that goes out of this House--the people's House, by the way--and let's do what is the responsible thing to do as stewards of every single taxpayer penny.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize one of my constituents from Western Pennsylvania, Mr. Ralph Pontillo. Following nearly 30 years of service, Ralph recently retired as president of the Manufacturer & Business Association (MBA), a professional trade organization that represents more than 3,000 member companies in the tri-state region. Ralph is a veteran of the United States Air Force and a native of Erie County, where he graduated from Strong Vincent High School and Gannon University, earning a baccalaureate degree in political science. Ralph joined the MBA in 1987 and served as manager of member services until he was named president on April 1, 1990. Ralph maintained his role as president for the following three decades, creating a legacy built on advocating for the business community. Throughout his tenure, Ralph was instrumental in much of the MBA's success, including the facility relocation to its present headquarters and the construction of the MBA's Conference Center. These two projects allowed the MBA to expand and offer additional programs and services, enabling the MBA to become one of the largest regional employer associations of its kind. Ralph is credited with spearheading one of the MBA's most visible community outreach programs, the annual Roar on the Shore  charitable motorcycle rally. Roar on the Shore  is one of the fastest-growing charitable motorcycle rallies in the United States, attracting approximately 165,000 visitors to the Erie area annually, creating an economic boost of more than $25 million. Over the past ten years, the rally has raised more than $800,000 for local charities. Ralph has actively participated in a number of local, state and national boards, voluntarily dedicating his time and effort in order to support various initiatives. Ralph is a member of the American Society of Association Executives and for more than 20 years has maintained the status of a Certified Association Executive, a professional designation that recognizes the highest level of achievement and excellence in the profession. Ralph's expertise has been an absolute asset to the various boards and organizations with which he has been involved. Ralph is an admirable professional who has created a praiseworthy legacy built on advocacy and service. He took advantage of his role as President of the MBA, continuously striving for greatness in all that he did. Ralph has made lasting contributions and the Erie community will reap the benefits of his efforts long after his retirement. Ralph will be remembered as a catalyst for improvement and a longtime champion for the business community

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, today I recognize the United States Merchant Mariners and their vital contributions to the victory of the Allies in World War II. This year, 72 years after our victory in that war, is a fitting time to recognize the contributions of our merchant mariners to the war effort. There were more than 250,000 men serving in the Merchant Marine during WWII, all volunteers. They had the distinction of being the only non-segregated service. The Merchant Marine was critical to the mission of our military service members around the world during the war. Many of the important contributions of the Merchant Marine are not well known, including the fact that they had the highest rate of casualties in the Armed Services. More than 700 merchant ships were sunk and more than 8,000 U.S. merchant mariners were killed during the war. The losses suffered are even more remarkable given that the U.S. Merchant Marine was not considered a military branch and was composed of volunteers classified by the government as civilians. Every invasion during the war involved the Merchant Marine. They suffered tremendous casualties during the Battle of the Atlantic, the Murmansk Run, D-Day, and as an integral part of every island invasion in the Pacific Theater. As we come close to Memorial Day, it is fitting to pause and remember their heroism and sacrifice. The United States built nearly 6,000 merchant vessels and naval auxiliaries in 16 shipyards with over 650,000 workers. This was an economic and military feat of enormous scale. As part of a government effort to encourage more American participation in the war effort, ships were named after famous American counties and cities. 150 colleges and universities also had victory class merchant ships named for them. Many of these institutions of higher education supported important military training programs on their campuses. I am proud that 13 of these victory class ships were named for institutions in Pennsylvania, including three in the third district: Allegheny College, Grove City College, and Westminster College. I am sure all my colleagues join me in taking great pride in the history of the United States Merchant Marine and the special place in our nation's history associated with their ships and the men who sailed them. They have helped preserve our freedom and they deserve our gratitude.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to stand today in support of this bill. I have been told that this is a rookie mistake. I understand that. We have been working 7 years to undo that rookie's mistake. That is why we are here today. A rookie who didn't know what he was doing, but lectured to us, told us: This is what you have to do; and if you do this, you can keep your doctor, you can keep your health plan, you can just stay on board, and we are going to insure millions of you. Nothing could be further from the truth. The big thing was you are going to save $2,300 on your premiums. He forgot to tell everybody but the people who were actually in that business. Incredible. Incredible. Now, this isn't about me, and it is not about you. This is about people. We are in the people's House. Let me just read to you a couple letters from the people who I represent back home. By the way, out of the seven counties I represent, five have one insurer, and the rest of them got out because they couldn't stand to try and work under this onerous law. Let me tell you what Amanda says: I am very happy to hear that you are working to repeal the Affordable Care Act. I just got an up-close- and-personal look at how dysfunctional it is while trying to shop for my own plan. It is hard enough to start a business in this country due to so many rules, regulations, and confounding taxes. This law makes it even harder. And I don't think the government should make me buy coverages I simply don't need. I know my situation, and I should be able to buy whatever I want without incurring four-figure tax penalties. Jason says to me: Dear Mike, I am a self-employed father of four feeling the hurtful effects of ObamaCare. For years there has been so much talk from Republicans about repealing ObamaCare. I am paying yet more money for less coverage. We are really feeling the effects of this in my family in our budget. My kids are going to bed hungry after dinner. We desperately need relief and now, not next year. I enthusiastically pulled the lever for Donald Trump and for you, and we are counting on you to make some real change in D.C. Please keep up the fight, and do it quickly. So this is not about Mike, it is not about John, it is not about any of us. What it is about is taking care of the people that we were sent here to represent. They are Republicans and they are Democrats, who some people could care less about any of us, but they expected us to do something for them. We are sitting here today because this law is so bad. If it was so good, we wouldn't have to worry, but it is bad, with a capital B. Now, I have got to tell you, growing up, as a young kid, as it got toward Christmas--and I say this to my friends, by the way, on our side--I used to make a list right before Christmas. I put on that list everything I wanted. You know what, Mr. Speaker? Come Christmas morning, I never got everything I wanted, but I was so thankful for everything I got. We have to deliver today. We have to keep a promise today to the American people. We have to backtrack on a rookie mistake 7 years ago and make it better for the American people, not just for Republicans, not just for Democrats, not just for those who vote blue or red, but for those who expect us to do what we are supposed to do in the people's House. This is not the Republican House or the Democrat House, this is the people's House. Isn't it time for all of us to come together to get this done? We have a marvelous opportunity, but we could lose it. I ask you all and I urge you all to please vote for this act.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman. I brought with me today a picture of Master Sergeant Abraham. Now, I never knew him when he looked like this. I knew him when he was much older. I have got to tell you that to know Master Sergeant Abraham, you would never have known what he had gone through in his life because all of these folks from that time period just did what they had to do. When you ask them, ``Why did you do it?'' they said, ``It wasn't an option. It wasn't an option. We had to do it.'' There is just certain times in our history that people rise up and they do things that are incredible, ordinary people doing extraordinary things. Just being around Mr. Abraham for a long time--I never called him Abie, by the way. I did not call him Abie. I always called him sergeant or Mr. Abraham--I was just always so impressed with him. It is such an honor and a privilege to be able to stand here in the people's House to talk about a true American hero, somebody who was not just a patriot, but was compassionate, somebody who never stopped serving his country in so many different ways. When I first read ``The Ghost of Bataan,'' I went back and I talked to Mr. Abraham. I said: You never told me about these things. He said: Oh, don't worry about that. Those were just things we had to do. I said: No, but what you did was incredible: to survive the Bataan Death March, to be in a Japanese prison camp for 3\1/2\ years, to be stabbed, to be shot, to be beaten, to survive malaria and starvation. Did you ever think of trying to get away? He said: Yeah, Mike, I did, but here was the thing: if one of us were to escape, the Japanese soldiers would shoot 10 of the prisoners who were still in the camp; so we didn't want to do that to any of our colleagues. I watched them die. I held them as they died. We tried to get them through the darkest times that we could. I said: How did you endure? He said: My faith. My faith. That is how we all get through the darkest time, on both knees, believing that God is there for us no matter what. But when you read his books and you understand who this man was--and I think the second book was the one that was incredible. Let me read this because I just thought if there was anything that somebody did out of love, it was Mr. Abraham. His second book was ``Oh, God, Where Are You?'' I want you to think of this as a prisoner of war who survived the Bataan Death March, who watched his colleagues killed along the way, and if they fell down, they got shot. Toward the end, when they fell down and they couldn't move anymore, they were put into open graves, and they were told to go ahead and cover the graves. He refused to do it. He said: They are still moving. So we come to today and we think about what it is that we as Americans can do. What is it we can do? What is in our hearts? What is in our memory? What about all those who came before us and what they went through? Mr. Abraham, as a child, went to school barefoot. His family didn't have money to even buy him shoes, but he had a love for our Nation. He had a love for his fellow man. He had a love for veterans that was just incredible. But imagine the despair of being in that prison camp and not knowing what was going on in the outside war. I asked him: What did you do? How did you keep people's spirits up? He said: I made up stories. I would tell them that I just heard there was a rumor going through camp that our armies are close and they are going to rescue us. Think about that. They were clinging to a made-up story from this man because he knew that is how he could keep their spirits up in the darkest of times. He kind of smiled about it. I said: That is incredible. He said: Well, sometimes you have to do things a little different just to get people's spirits up. I want you to fast forward to who this man was. I watched him walk with a cane as he got into his later years, in his eighties and nineties, going to VA Butler Healthcare Center every single day to help fellow veterans. His sole purpose in life was to help other American citizens, to help other veterans, to bring a little light into their life, to bring a little happiness into their life; 40,000 hours of service in a VA center. He could have spent his time doing other things, but he didn't. He chose to stay with those he loved. He chose to serve those he loved. He chose to continue to serve even in his retirement this Nation that he loved so much. I can't tell you how much it means to be able to look at that new health center going up and knowing that Mr. Abraham, from his new post, is looking down and is so thankful to a grateful nation that we are taking time to take care of those who have given everything they can to make sure our Nation remains free. This is an incredible time in our history. This has nothing to do with parties. It has nothing to do with who you vote for. It has to do with who we are, the fact that every single one of us has a role. I would just ask people to please look into Abie Abraham. Go online and see about Mr. Abraham. Go and see what Master Sergeant Abraham did, and say: If I could just be a little bit like Abie Abraham, the world would be a better place. For all those who have died in the service of our country, they will rest easier.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5, and let's get back to what we are talking about. We are talking about overregulation right now. We are not talking about the Red army or any other type of a red threat that is coming in here. The real threat is red tape. We are not talking about scotch tape or duct tape, we are talking about red tape. There is $2 trillion worth of red tape that the American consumers have to pay for every year. That is trillion with a ``T.'' Every single regulation that goes into effect, not by elected officials but by unelected bureaucrats, I am not saying they are not well intended, I am just saying they are not well thought out. And we really don't know who is going to pay for all of these. The burden is on the American consumers, the American taxpayers. So if we are talking about creating jobs and if we are talking about getting our economy back on track, let's get the heavy regulatory boot of the American government off of the throat of American job creators. Why don't we make it easier for people to be profitable. Why don't we make it easier for people to start a new business. Why don't we make the prices cheaper on the shelves, and all of the services that are out there cheaper for the American people to buy and purchase. We get caught up in debate about things that don't make sense to everyday Americans. They elect us to come and represent them. They don't elect us to preach to them. They don't elect us to say: You, poor, stupid people, you don't understand, we are trying to help you. The Congress has oversight of this. This is our job. Why would we turn it over to unelected bureaucrats. How about this: In 2015, we passed 114 laws. Meanwhile, there were 3,410 rules that were put into effect. Is there a little bit of a problem with the balance there? Is there a little bit of a problem with the people who sent us to represent them telling them: you don't understand, that rule, that regulation, I never had a chance to weigh in on it? They are asking: Then why the heck did we send you? And I appreciate the fact that Federal employees need to be appreciated. Being one of those employees, I do appreciate that. When I go home, I love when people tell me: you know what, we really appreciate that you are standing up for us. We really appreciate that you are watching where our tax dollars are going. We really appreciate the fact that you are trying to make it easier for us to breathe, make it easier for us to succeed, make it easier for us to supply all this revenue. Every single penny that this government needs to run on is not supplied by the Congress, it is supplied by hardworking American taxpayers. And you know what, we can't even collect enough money from them to cover our bills. We have to go out and borrow more. But they are responsible for it. We sign their name on every single debt that we make. It is time to wake up and smell the coffee. This is not about some other debate. This is about what we are doing to hardworking American taxpayers and hardworking Americans every single day. Then some say: you don't understand, you poor, stupid people, we are trying to make the air clean and the water drinkable. Yes, I understand that. That is what we are doing. Why do you try to change it into something that doesn't even make sense? Please go back into your communities and talk to these folks that are saddled with these expenses and look them in the eye and tell them you are just not smart enough to know how government works. The one thing they know is we are $20 trillion in the red.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize two of my constituents from Western Pennsylvania, Martin and Martha Johnson. The Johnson's are the founders and directors of Downtown Ministries INC. as well as several other groups serving under its umbrella including Fresh Grounds Coffeehouse, Sans MOCO Gallery, His Work--His Way, Keystone Bibles and Community Health Ministry. Created in 1994, Downtown Ministries is a charitable organization that serves as an avenue for Christians to connect, socialize and minister. Downtown Ministries strives to provide opportunity and vision to meet the physical and spiritual needs of our community. In April 2010, Downtown Ministries established the Fresh Grounds Coffeehouse to connect with even more people in our community and positively impact our community. Fresh Grounds Coffeehouse is the face of Downtown Ministries and has been designated as Greenville, Pennsylvania's latest landmark. Fresh Grounds Coffeehouse is not just a meeting place but, more importantly, it is a ministry. The main objective of Fresh Grounds Coffeehouse is to honor and glorify God and create a special place where God's presence is felt and embraced. While it's not a traditional church ministry, Fresh Grounds Coffeehouse creates countless opportunities for Christian growth and allows customers to engage one another in nurturing relationships, which Martin and Martha Johnson have strived for over the years. Martin Johnson had a vision, which ultimately became a reality, with the help of countless friends, volunteers, local businesses and churches. The unwavering dedication exhibited by Martin and Martha Johnson, as well as all volunteers involved, is heartwarming and speaks volumes about the giving spirit of the Greenville community. As a unique ministry, the main focus of Downtown Ministries, and all groups that fall under its organizational umbrella, is to bring individuals to come to believe in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. In serving God, the community, and all those in need of God's Grace, Martin and Martha Johnson are inspirations to us all. Their compassion and generosity have clearly influenced the lives of so many and will continue to do so for years to come. Therefore, on behalf of the Third Congressional District of Pennsylvania, I want to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation of Martin and Martha Johnson, they are true Community Champions.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I come from the private sector; so when I come to the House and I listen to the debate going back and forth, I almost feel like I am somebody not from a different planet, but from a different galaxy. When we talk about overregulation, when we talk about the effects of unelected bureaucrats leveling on the American people $2 trillion and an impact to the economy, then somebody ought to sit up and listen. All we are talking about is scrutiny, scrutiny of any piece of legislation, any executive order that comes out that is going to have an impact of $100 million or more on the economy. Around here, $100 million sounds like nothing. From where I am from, it is unbelievable that we would even think that $100 million should be the point that we look at. What could be more common sense than to look at the heavy burden we are putting on everyday Americans and saying that, somehow, unelected bureaucrats who have never walked in their shoes, who have never done their job, who have never worried about meeting a payroll, who have never had to worry about regulation and taxation that make it impossible for them to compete, these poor, stupid folks just don't get it? 705,687 people in your districts are who you represent. Whether they voted for you or not is not the point. The point is we represent them. Why in the world would Congress cede its power to the executive branch and to unelected bureaucrats to determine what the American people are going to be burdened with? It is just common sense. Why can't we not see what is right in front of us right now? I invite you to please go home to your districts, walk in those shops, walk in those little towns, talk to those people and find out the two things that really inhibit them from being successful are overtaxation and overregulation. We can handle both those things right here in the people's House. This is not a Democratic House. This is not a Republican House. This is America's House. We should be looking at things that benefit the American people. If we truly want to act in a bipartisan way, then let's stop this back-and-forth debate about what Republicans want, what Democrats want, and let's talk about what is good for the American people. That is who sent us. That is whose responsibility we have on our shoulders. If we can't do that, we ought to go home.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, if laws already enacted in the religious liberty protections enshrined in our Constitution were actually being protected, we wouldn't be here. We wouldn't be needing to vote on the Conscience Protection Act in the House of Representatives today. Is it an attempt to prevent something? Yes. It is an attempt to protect all Americans' rights under our First Amendment. It is just that simple. Unfortunately, the right to exercise one's own conscience is under attack in the United States at the Federal and State level. Let's be very clear on this. Conscience, as defined, is the ``inner sense of what is right or wrong in one's conduct or motives, impelling one towards right action.'' It is the feeling that one has done something morally right or wrong. You cannot deny people rights that were enshrined in our Constitution and in our Bill of Rights just because it doesn't happen to fit a popular narrative right now. If we cannot come together as the people's House and protect what we have been given by our forefathers and has been enshrined in our Bill of Rights and try to make it into something different, then we have totally missed the mark, and America should be greatly disappointed in whom they have sent to represent them. None of us can turn our back on the Constitution. None of us can say that somehow this is something different than what it is. It is the protection of one's freedoms and liberties under our Bill of Rights and in our First Amendment. It is that simple. Conscience--conscience--why should somebody have to sacrifice their religious conscience because somebody says let's redefine it into something else? It is nothing more than doing the right thing because it is the right thing to do, and I am talking about religious conscience. Why would we limit our schools and our hospitals of religious founding? Why would we say to them, no, you don't have the right to do this; we are going to supersede that? It is protection for the rights of the First Amendment. That is something we all took an oath to do, and that is what we need to do.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of my bill, H.R. 5317. This is the designation of the Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare center in Center Township, Butler County, Pennsylvania, as the Abie Abraham VA Clinic, as amended, and I urge its adoption. I never called him ``Abie.'' I always called him ``Sergeant'' or ``Mr. Abraham.'' I knew him, and he was not a very big man. If you were to see him, his stature, he was, probably, 5 feet, 5 inches or 5 feet, 6 inches. When I met him, it was a little bit later in life, and he never, ever bragged about his service. He never talked about it. I just knew him as a guy who lived in my hometown, as a guy who was a veteran, as a guy who was a prisoner of war; but then things started to unfold about what Mr. Abraham had endured. Now, I want you to think about this. Once the Japanese attacked the Philippines and were able to take the peninsula at Bataan, Mr. Abraham survived the Bataan Death March. That was 6 days and 7 nights of endless marching without food, without water, without any type of medical care. He had been 3\1/2\ years interned in a Japanese prison camp. You heard what the doctor said and what Ms. Brown said. This guy went through incredible pain and suffering to get there, but for as long as I knew him, he never bragged about it. He never said, ``This is what I did.'' I never knew until he wrote the book about the ghost of Bataan. I sat down with him one night, and I said: Mr. Abraham, you never told me about this. He said: Well, you didn't need to know about this. It is just something we all did. Every American came forward and did what he could do during World War II and continued to do it. There are 1.4 million Americans in uniform who have given their lives so that this county could survive, so that our country could survive. If you knew Abie Abraham the way I knew Abie Abraham and the way the people in my town knew Abie Abraham, he was totally selfless. His whole mission in life was to serve veterans. In 1988, he visited somebody in the VA hospital, and he decided, after that, to stay. He stayed and he stayed and he stayed--almost 37,000 hours of volunteer service. When you look at his gravestone--and I was there when he was interred in Arlington--it reads: ``Born July 31, 1913. Died March 22, 2011.'' Yet they don't talk about the days in between. They don't talk about the minutes in between or about the hours in between or about the years in between--those 98 years he spent in service and, especially, the last years of his life. If you were to have gone to the VA center in Butler, you would have seen he was there every morning at a quarter to 7. He was there to help people--to greet veterans, to let them know that they were appreciated. He used to tell people all the time, especially young people: When you meet a veteran, grab his or her hand and thank him for his service to America. This is the type of America that I grew up in. I don't think it was unlike any other towns in America, and I don't think Mr. Abraham was different than any other citizen of America. They were just those types of people. So now, for that veteran center to be named after Sergeant Abraham, I can't tell you the sense of pride it brings not only to the Abraham family and to my community in Butler, Pennsylvania, but to all of us, and to know that there are people out there who were willing to do these things, who were willing to sacrifice themselves. After being rescued--12,000 Americans were captured; he was 1 of 513 who survived. There were 12,000 who were captured, and 513 survived. The loss of life, the loss of future, the loss of enjoying a family--everything that life has to offer was taken from those people. General MacArthur asked him: Abie, would you please stay and find those remains and dig them up so that you can bring some peace and comfort to those who died? Mrs. Abraham said Mr. Abraham would pray every night that the Lord would give him the strength to go out the next day because it was so horrible. He was digging up the remains, not of some people he didn't know, but of people who had actually been captured, of people he had marched with, of people he had tried to help get through this horrible time who had passed. His whole purpose in life was to bring peace to families, to bring peace to veterans, and to let them know how much he cared for them. As a grateful country, we now have the opportunity to name a healthcare center after Sergeant Abie Abraham. He is truly somebody who befits the often said statement that there is only one office higher in our country than President, and that is that of patriot--not Republican, not Democrat, not Libertarian--patriot, American patriot. He was a man who loved peace and deplored the horrors of war but who never, ever tired in his service to his fellow servicemen, and he never, ever gave up. I can tell you, to his last day, Mr. Abraham thought about one thing every day, and that was about our men and women in uniform who gave their lives that this country--our country--could survive. Do you know what? I know Mr. Abraham is looking down right now, and he is so happy that this facility is being named after him so that, for all time, he will be remembered.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize one of my constituents from Western Pennsylvania, Mr. J. Gary DeComo. Since 1994, Gary has honorably served as Magisterial District Judge for the 33rd District in Armstrong County. However, his dedication to the community goes far beyond the judicial system. Also in 1994, after seeing and sentencing countless drug offenders, Judge DeComo began his crusade against drug use and established the Drugs Kill Dreams program, in order to educate and distribute his drug prevention messages. The mission of the Drugs Kill Dreams program is to make our youth and community aware of the dangers and destruction of drug usage. Driven by the belief that if we increase prevention we will decrease addiction and crime, Judge DeComo strives to reach as many individuals as possible. Remarkably, the Drugs Kill Dreams program has become a collective effort throughout the entire community. This success can be attributed to Judge DeComo's dedication to creating partnerships that promote the Drugs Kill Dreams mission and contribute to its overall success. Drugs Kill Dreams has flourished due to collaborations with various schools, churches, treatment centers, law enforcement agencies and hospitals--including the Armstrong County Memorial Hospital (ACMH), which has been the program's most significant and influential relationship. Throughout the years, Judge DeComo has adapted and updated the Drugs Kill Dreams program, to ensure the content is relevant and that the needs of the community are addressed. Although the program continues to be modified and altered appropriately, Judge DeComo's sincere passion for this initiative remains the same. In serving the judicial system, the community, and all of those in need, Judge DeComo is an absolute inspiration. His compassion and generosity has positively influenced the lives of so many, and will continue to do so for years to come. Therefore, on behalf of the Third Congressional District of Pennsylvania, I would like to express sincere gratitude and appreciation to the Honorable J. Gary DeComo, an admirable professional, a selfless individual, and a true Community Champion.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Black). We see eye to eye on almost everything in our lives, and it is really good to be able to stand here today and speak so strongly in favor of H. Con. Res. 89. I really do appreciate the passion and sincerity of my colleagues across the aisle. What we are talking today is about policy. What we are talking about today is the all-important, unintended consequences that so often are put to blame for bad things that happen to American people. They are well intended, yes, at their conception, but very harmful. We are talking about a carbon tax, $10 a barrel on oil. And we are saying: Well, don't worry about that because that is going to be charged upstream. That is going to be charged when it is taken out of the ground. But we all know that every single tax, every single cost is paid downstream. What do I mean by that? Every day hardworking Americans get up in the morning and want to put a roof over the heads of their families, food on the table, clothes on their back, and a little bit of money put away for their future. But every day we continue to come up with policies that somehow, although well intended, make it harder for them to make a living, make it harder for them to live the American Dream, make it harder for them to get ready for the future. Now, I know there are always going to be existential threats. I get that. My grandson is afraid to get out of bed at night because he thinks there is a monster under it. He thinks that if you get up in the middle of the night, maybe there is somebody in the closet or maybe there is something else. Now, I am not a climate change denier. Of course, the climate changes. I have seen it happen in my life. I have seen it where people say it is getting too cold and now it is getting too warm. Well, you know what? It just changes. I get that. What doesn't change is the assault on the American people to pick up the tab on all of these costs. There is nothing that makes less sense to me than what we are doing. And back home where I come from, there is an old saying that goes something like this: Measure twice and cut once. Why? Because once you do that cut, it is permanent. That is why you want to measure twice to make sure that the cut you make is the right cut. That is why you need to take the policies that affect everyday American people and make sure that you are not hurting them. Well intended, I get it. I know it is well intended. I just don't think the American people have to pay the brunt of this. I am very aware of the Prime Minister of India being here Wednesday. And I also know that between India and China, that is where the greatest pollution comes from. I get it. I get it. Putting $10 a barrel on oil coming out of the ground just doesn't make sense. I would just like my friends on both sides of the aisle to think about somebody named Steven Jobs. Steven Jobs did not invent the PC because we taxed typewriters too high and caused the cost of that. Innovation, of course, is the answer. And we have seen great innovation. I know where I am from in western Pennsylvania, that clean coal is real. But the President promised, when he was running as a candidate, that he would put those who chose to make electricity by burning coal out of business. So we regulate them to the point where it is no longer cost efficient to do that, but we keep moving that way. The fact that 40,000 Pennsylvanians make a living that way, well, don't worry about that, they will have to find something else to do. You can go down to West Virginia and you can hear where candidates told them: Listen, you are going to be out of business, but we will find something else for you to do and we will just get to that later. Look, we have an opportunity today. This is a sense of Congress to tell the American people what it is that we think goes on with this policy. For far too long we have turned a deaf ear and a blind eye to the people who sent us here to represent them. We talk very loftily about what it is that we would like to see, how it is that we would like it to go, our dream for the future. But we forget that every day, hardworking American taxpayers get up, throw their feet out over the side of the bed, and go to work for a very particular reason: their families, their churches, their schools, their communities and, more importantly, all of America. Well intended, yes. But the results would be devastating. And who would pay this carbon tax? Who would pay this $10 a barrel? It would be any man or woman who has to go out and buy anything for his or her family. It would be reflected in the cost of everything we put on our backs and everything we put in our mouths. It would affect everything we do when we travel from one point to another, but we say it is necessary. It is necessary because we have to tax this so high that we drive people away from it. I would hope that we could come together in America's House and do what is right for America's people, to do what is right for the people who sent us here to represent them because they are working so hard to make sure that there is a future for their children. In the last month when we created one job for every 8,000 Americans-- one job for every 8,000 Americans, are you kidding me?--in the greatest country the world has ever known, in a Nation that leads the world in defending freedom and liberty, in a Nation that knows that the best way to help others is through American participation----

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I do want to make sure that this final point comes across: We can work together for solutions. We can work together to do the same things for the same people that we all came here to represent. I do not think that there are ill-intended ideas on the other side. I think they are well-intended. I just think they are wrong. I think they are wrong for the times, and I think they are wrong for the American people. As I said earlier, where I am from, there are a lot of old adages. And one of them is: don't worry about the mule, just load the wagon. I will tell you right now that the mule is trying to find a way to unhook itself from the wagon because that load has gotten too heavy to pay. I know that the people who are loading the wagon think it is okay because at some point, that is going to have to be delivered somewhere. The truth of the matter is it is not. We have put too heavy a burden on American taxpayers, hardworking American taxpayers, hardworking Americans. 1.4 million American lives have been sacrificed for the freedom and liberty not just of this country--our country and our Nation--but for the whole world. So I say let's be careful before we do these well-intended but careless things. Let's be careful before we turn our backs on the people who we actually represent here, and that is hardworking American people.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. I thank my colleague, Dr. Boustany. Mr. Speaker, again, before we came on to the floor, we were in the Cloakroom talking about what the debate was going to be. And I thought the debate was going to be about what was actually happening today, and not a scientific debate, not a debate about what people believe or what they don't believe, but on the reality that the President proposed a $10 tax on a barrel of oil. That comes out to 25 cents per gallon at the pump. Now, what do I mean by that? What I am talking about is, when hardworking American taxpayers go to fill up their car or their truck, it is going to cost them 25 cents more per gallon. It also translates into everything that they put on their backs, that they put in their mouths. Every aspect of life is going to be increased. Now, keep in mind that, while there may be some kind of science that we want to turn this debate into, here are the facts: middle-income Americans and lower-income Americans have seen a drop in their wages--a significant drop in their wages. Last month, we saw that we have created one job for every 8,000 Americans. So we talk about today how we need to talk about climate change. No. Here is what we need to talk about: we need to talk about real change in the marketplace. We need to talk about how we are hurting the American economy. We need to talk about how we are eliminating the ability of America to compete in a global economy--an economy that I just don't want to participate in but I think America should dominate. America is so blessed with so many assets. And while we worry about all the energy above, let's not forget all the energy below. Let's not forget what America's strongest card is to play, and that is energy self-sustainability. We are able to do that. Why in the world would anybody think that by adding $10 on a barrel of oil, somehow that is going to help the climate worldwide, when we know that we are the only ones proposing this? Other people around the world are looking and saying: I can't agree more with the President's ideas because we compete against the United States, and I would love to be on the shelf with a product that costs more than the one we are putting on the shelf. So America is hurting America. America's policies are hurting everyday Americans. And if we truly want to make America great again, let's make America great again for every single American. That is not a political aspiration; that is a responsibility in America's House, and that is the House of Representatives. Our sense that somehow this would be positive is absolutely wrongheaded and wrong thinking. It just doesn't work that way. Why would we sit here and debate this today? Because we know it is going to hurt every single hard-working American taxpayer. It is going to add to our cost of living. It is going to increase the cost of everything we consume. We are going to do it with the idea that somehow, the rest of the world will follow suit, and we know that they won't. What they will do is look at us and say: You know what? Let's take advantage of America's wrong-headedness. Let's make sure that we are able to buy up more of the market, the global market, because America continues to hurt itself and hurt its everyday citizens. My goodness. This is America's House of Representatives. We do not come here representing ourselves--we come here representing 705,687 Americans who live back in our districts. We do not come here just representing Republican policy and Republican agenda. We do not just come here representing Democrat policy and Democrat agenda. We come here representing America. And if we cannot get it through our heads that, at the end of the day, the policy that comes out of this town--a town that is a awash in prosperity, good jobs, great restaurants. I have never seen a town with more cranes in it. I am talking about industrial cranes. I would love some of my colleagues to walk back home with me and go into the cities, the towns, and the little villages that I represent. And you tell those people: things are really getting good; we are on the right stage; we are on the right trajectory; that we are going to become good again. But the question is: When? I would just suggest that--and I said this earlier--you cannot continue to put the burden of these policies--well-intended, though they may be--on the backs of hardworking American taxpayers, men and women who get up every day with one resolve and one resolve only, and that is to take care of their families, to build a better community, and to build a better life. Why in the world do we have to waste time debating something today that could be debated elsewhere? But we come here today with a resolution expressing the sense of Congress that the President's ideas in his budget are absolutely wrong for every single American. We can debate these things later. But we have to come to agreement at some point here, that we just don't represent our parties--we represent people. That is far more important than any party that we represent.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. I thank the gentleman. Look, I have only been here 5 years. But I come out of the private sector. I never, ever thought I would be serving in Congress because I never, ever thought I would have to. I thought people would come here representing me and my family; my community, my State, and my Nation; and that they would do the right thing. And I don't say that they don't think they are doing the right thing. But at the end of the day, the final results don't look very good. In a Nation that is quickly approaching $20 trillion in debt and burdening every single American taxpayer with more and more cost of being here while not increasing their opportunity, I think we need to take a hard look, take a look in the mirror and understand that it all changes, it all starts with each of us. We can change this. We can make it better. But we can't make it better by putting a heavy burden on our taxpayers. It just doesn't make sense. As I said earlier, America can dominate a global economy. Just participating isn't enough. I would just suggest that that is all possible in a land that has been so graced by gifts from God that make it possible for us to do that. The only thing that can keep it from happening are policies coming out of Washington, D.C.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of the amendment to renew the 1-year ban on the Obama administration or any other administration from using any Department of Defense funds to implement the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, a treaty which, by the way, has never been ratified by our Senate. Specifically, the amendment bans the use of Department of Defense funds for the ATT Secretariat, a body that was created for effectively implementing the ATT according to the treaty's supporters. Last August, ATT member nations organized the Conference of States Parties to the ATT, a conference in which we did not have a vote and which decided that American taxpayers are now on the hook to pay 22 percent of the expenses of this annual meeting. This taxpayer money would go directly to the ATT Secretariat and become part of its core budget. My amendment prevents these hardworking American taxpayer dollars from flowing into the coffers of those who are working to implement the ATT. I thank the chairman and the ranking member for including this in the en bloc amendment, and I urge all my colleagues to stand in support of our Second Amendment and of our Nation's sovereignty and vote in support of this amendment to renew the annual ban on the funding of the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of amendment No. 16, to prohibit the use of funds to dismantle the U.S. stockpile of anti-personnel landmines, APLs, unless the Secretary of Defense submits a report to Congress on the operational alternatives to APLs. Further, my amendment contains an exception for the destruction of APLs that would be unsafe to store. This amendment would effectively renew the ban that was passed by the full Congress and signed into law by the President in Public Law No. 114-92, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016. Mr. Chair, our military commanders have spoken clearly regarding the value and the need for APLs. On March 6, 2014, the United States' highest ranking military officer, Martin Dempsey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called anti-personnel landmines an important tool in the arsenal of the United States. When he was head of the U.S. European Command, General Wesley Clark agreed, saying that ``our field commanders count on APLs to protect the force, influence, maneuver, and shape the battle space, and mass combat power for decisive engagement.'' He also added that the need for APLs was increasing. Furthermore, two major studies, one conducted by the National Research Council and the other by NATO, have concluded that APLs provide crucial tactical advantages on the battlefield. Yet on September 29, 2014, President Obama announced that outside of the Korean Peninsula, the U.S. would not use APLs in order to ``underscore its commitment to the spirit and humanitarian aims of the Ottawa Convention.'' The President's actions were, by his own admission, taken to move the U.S. towards full compliance with a treaty, commonly known as the Ottawa Convention, to which the Senate has not given its advice and consent. Moreover, this was created by an NGO-led process that openly sought to ``push aside the central feature of state sovereignty.'' The process that created the treaty was bad. The treaty has not been approved by the Senate, not signed by the President, and our senior military officials state that it would deprive us of an important weapon. Yet the Obama administration seeks to move us forward in compliance with it. The U.S. has taken action on APLs. We give more funding for APL clearance than any other nation in the world. We are party to amended Protocol II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, the CCW, which requires U.S. APLs to be designed to deactivate or self-destruct. Our APLs meet those standards. U.S. APLs are not killing civilians. Like all weapons, APLs can be used rightly or wrongly. When used responsibly, as U.S. APLs are, they protect our forces, the forces of our allies, and civilians alike. Landmine opponents, like the administration, state that the Ottawa Convention ``shows our leadership'' and that it is reducing the threat of landmines around the world. That is simply not true. Many IEDs, legally speaking, are APLs. From February 2015 to January 2016, the Pentagon's own Joint Improvised-Threat Defeat Agency recorded over 50,000 worldwide casualties as a result of IED attacks. The Ottawa Convention isn't solving the landmine problem; it is simply disarming the good guys. In this environment, we need weapons that can protect camps, cities, roads, and bases from insurgent attack. Today, one of those weapons is the APL. Unless we have an alternative to APLs that is equal to or better than APLs at keeping our troops safe, we should not, and dare not, get rid of our stockpile of APLs. The safety of our sons and daughters in uniform is of the utmost importance. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Chairman Thornberry and his staff for working with my office on this important issue. I urge adoption of this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, I respect the gentleman's opinion. I understand the President is the Commander in Chief, but I also understand that the APLs, the ones that we use, protect our forces, our friends, and our allies. As far as the danger of them, we lead on landmine clearance, and we have lived up to all the international obligations we have accepted. The landmine ban treaty disarms us, not our enemies. Dismantling our APLs is not showing leadership. Instead, it would be the height of irresponsibility. I know that sometimes in this House we get to the point where politics takes precedence over policy. If, at the end of the day, this House can't do everything possible to protect our daughters and sons in uniform and our allies and friends around the world--we are the most responsible user of APLs. We are doing more than anybody else to disarm IEDs. The problem comes down to where does the United States stand. We need to stand, and we need to be resolute behind our Armed Forces. That is why I stand strong on this amendment. Make sure the APLs stay in place. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support H.R. 3832. Mr. Renacci and I are very good friends, as I am with Mr. Lewis, and it is good to see Mr. Pascrell here today. The gentleman is right in that it is nice to see us working together to do something about people. This is about people. This is policy that concerns people, and it works in the right direction. I don't think there is anything quite as unnerving as finding out that somebody has stolen your identity. I think Shakespeare sums it up right in Othello by putting it really succinctly when he says: ``But he that filches from me my good name, robs me of that which not enriches him, and makes me poor indeed.'' Now, Pennsylvania is sixth in population but second when it comes to fraud, tax fraud. This is incredible that this could happen. As we sit here today--and as Mr. Pascrell so clearly pointed out, and Mr. Renacci--this is about protecting people from people who wish to do them harm. They not only wish to take their tax returns, but it robs them of their identity. There is nothing that could be more chilling than losing your identity. As we look at how this goes forward--and I think that this phone fraud is the one that is particularly interesting. When the IRS calls on you, it is not on the phone. It is in writing. And I tell constituents all the time, I also have received those calls saying that: Hey, you know what? You need to get in touch with us right now. We can handle this over the phone with you. I said: Fine. You know what? Leave your name and number, and I will get back to you because I am really busy right now. That is followed by a very quick click. There is so much going on in our world today. We are so vulnerable at every single turn. We put so much information out there on ourselves. This is a piece of legislation that protects people. It protects not only their returns, but protects their identity. So I am glad that Mr. Renacci has done this with Mr. Lewis and my good friend Mr. Pascrell. We stand here today with the same purpose, and that is to protect the people who sent us here to represent them. It is the least we can do.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 182, I was at a hearing and not able to vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.J. Res. 88. I have been here now for 5 years, and it always seems to be the same theme: You poor, poor, stupid people. Only the government can help you decide how you should get ready for your retirement. I don't think there are any more 10 chilling words than: ``I'm from the government, and I'm here to help you.'' We are looking at the dismantling of people who help everyday people decide on retirement decisions. It is a very difficult thing to navigate, but, yet, we think we can do it better here because we do such a fantastic job. My gosh, we are only $20 trillion in the red. Why wouldn't we advise hardworking American taxpayers how they should prepare for their retirement? We have already ruined their retirement for them. It gets to the point of being a little bit stupefying to stand here in the people's House and think that somehow the administration and the Department of Labor came up with an 1,100-page definition of what the fiduciary responsibility should be. Stunning. Stunning. The real fiduciary responsibility remains with the House. It is our responsibility to protect our hardworking American taxpayers. It is our responsibility to make sure that hardworking American taxpayers who advise people on their retirement should be allowed to exist. This is going to put them out of business. Why? Because we know so much better than they do. This is misguided. This is misthought. This is about a bigger government, a more intrusive government, a government that taxes you more and serves you less. It is that simple.

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania

Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3724. I would think as we look around the country right now, the integrity of what our government is and how our voters are represented and our citizens are represented, is really the case here. I thank the gentlewoman for bringing such a commonsense piece of legislation forward because we know in this town there is nothing less common than common sense. The faith and trust of the American people is based on their belief that the people who work for them are acting in their best interest, always acting in their best interest--the interest of the American people. Not in their personal interest, but in the interest of the American people. We find out that there are folks who are working on behalf of the American people, but they have somehow betrayed that faith and that trust. And folks have lost confidence in their government. They have lost confidence because of things that happened, not things that were imagined, not some whimsical idea that somehow we can get at somebody for doing this. There is no agency that is feared more in this country than the IRS. The question is: Why would they be so feared? Because they can completely shut you down, they can freeze your bank account, they can make you stay up late at night worrying about what is going to happen. When you get that letter from the IRS, the next thing you do is contact an attorney to represent you because you don't want to make a mistake, you just don't want to do it. But then you find out that within the IRS, people working for that agency, but, more importantly, working for the people of the United States, have violated that trust. These are substantiated results. This is not somebody's idea or way of getting back at somebody. This is removing bad apples and saying: you have violated, you have betrayed the trust of the American people, you are going to leave the agency, but, more importantly, you are never coming back in. This isn't any way to somehow get back at a political party or get back at anybody. This is a fact that if we cannot restore the confidence the American people have in us--their faith and their trust--why are we here? Why do we go through elections? I don't come here to represent my ideas and my beliefs. I come here to represent the values and beliefs of Pennsylvania's Third Congressional District. That is 705,687 Americans, not Republicans, not Democrats, not Libertarians, not Independents, but Americans. This piece of legislation takes into account that these are wrongdoers. These are not people who we want to associate ourselves with. These are people who have used the power of their office or of their position to somehow work against the very people who employ them.