Jason Lewis

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, on December 21, 2018 I was unable to be present on the floor for recorded votes. As a proud father, I was attending my eldest daughter's college graduation in Minnesota.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 6964) to reauthorize and improve the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendment thereto, and concur in the Senate amendment.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I have an amendment to the preamble at the desk.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. I have an amendment to the text at the desk.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Education and the Workforce and the Committee on Energy and Commerce be discharged from further consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 35) expressing the sense of the House of Representatives relating to automated external defibrillator (AED) training in the Nation's schools, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight a longstanding issue facing the Prairie Island Indian Community, a tribe in my district. The Prairie Island Indian Community has long lived in the lower half of Minnesota and along the banks of the Mississippi River, and currently occupies a Reservation that is located on an island along the Mississippi River in Goodhue County, Minnesota. In 1938, less than three miles downstream from the Prairie Island Reservation, the Army Corps of Engineers placed Lock and Dam No. 3 on the Upper Mississippi River. The operation of Lock and Dam No. 3 regularly overflows and floods portions of the Prairie Island Reservation, much of which lies within the Mississippi River 100-year flood plain. Moreover, concerns have been raised that the flooding of a significant portion of Prairie Island Reservation land may have occurred without express Congressional authorization. In 1973, The Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant went into operation on the same island about 600 yards from the Prairie Island Reservation. The Plant is now home to over forty dry casks of spent nuclear fuel, in close proximity to tribal homes, churches, schools, the Tribe's Community Center, and tribal businesses. What's more, additional casks of spent nuclear fuel are expected to be added in the coming years. Complicating matters further, there is only one reliable road leading on and off the island shared by the Prairie Island Reservation and the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant. This road is often blocked by railroad traffic carrying a variety of freight. The operation of Lock and Dam No. 3, in combination with the close proximity of the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant and spent nuclear fuel to the Prairie Island Reservation, is rightfully a concern of the Community. In order to protect the Tribe and its members and to support the Tribe's long-term health and self-sufficiency, I believe that it is necessary to work towards identifying additional reservation land for the Tribe that is located at a safe distance from Lock and Dam No. 3 and the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant. I call upon the next Congress to work with the Community to address these issues to ensure a safe and secure future for the Community and its members.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Education and the Workforce be discharged from further consideration of the bill (H.R. 6964) to reauthorize and improve the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, we currently have over $1.4 trillion in student debt, a burden that too many carry with them well after their time on campus, delaying critical milestones, such as buying a house or starting a family. At the core of this problem is insufficient financial literacy at the time of borrowing, things like understanding that the amount you will have to pay back is going to be greater than the loan you took out, the magic of compound interest; learning how to budget for typical educational expenses and recognizing that paying loans back faster, not just hitting the minimum amount due, will make the loan less expensive. When borrowers do not receive this critical information up front, they are prone to over-borrowing and inefficient repayment, costing our students, families, and taxpayers far more than it should for access to a great higher education. So I applaud Representative Guthrie and Representative Bonamici for their hard work as this underlying legislation is an essential step towards enhancing financial awareness and empowering smart decisions. While right now only about half of all students even remember receiving the limited counseling they did receive, this bill ensures students will receive comprehensive counseling each year and before they agree to take out the loans. For the first time, low-income students receiving Pell grants will be included in the counseling, allowing them to maximize this opportunity for education vouchers. My amendment builds on the power of this legislation and is specifically aimed at parents who want to provide the best education for their child and must navigate the confusing maze of student aid options currently on the books. With my amendment, parents will be notified that their child may qualify for and should consider scholarships, grants, and Federal workstudy jobs prior to taking out any PLUS loans. These debt-free alternatives to borrowing exist, yet lack of awareness can lead to a costly missed opportunity. A workstudy program provides not only a source of income to cover the costs of college, but it can be a powerful educational experience and a complement to learning that takes place in the classroom. Additionally, my amendment ensures parent borrowers are aware that they can start paying off the loan while their child is still in school and can pay interest on the loan while it is in deferment. Student loan programs should encourage a quick and responsible path towards becoming debt-free and not incentivize borrowers to pay back as slowly as possible. My amendment in this legislation will equip students and families with greater financial awareness around the true cost of paying back their loans, protecting them from over-borrowing and improving loan repayment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague as well for supporting this amendment. As students return to their classrooms this fall, parents across the country are wondering how they can provide the best opportunities to their children. Financing a higher education is one of the biggest financial decisions a family will make. It is essential they are equipped with the right information and meaningful counseling before they make this decision. My amendment ensures parents are able to consider all the options to pay for their student's education before they decide to take out a PLUS loan. With the right information, a great workstudy job, scholarship, or grant program will not be left on the table when parents make certain those decisions to go into debt are responsible ones. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and the underlying legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Thompson for his leadership on this legislation, as well as Chairman Foxx, Ranking Member Scott, and my colleagues on the Education and the Workforce Committee. This great bipartisan effort could not come at a more critical time. As our economy continues to boom, employers across the Nation are struggling to find the skilled workers needed to fill well-paying jobs and grow their businesses. The legislation here strengthens the Perkins Act to ensure students gain the necessary skills to compete in the modern economy. I am particularly pleased that the final legislation includes my provisions to encourage and expand dual enrollment opportunities, putting more students on the fast track to a great career. Minnesota's Second District is home to some great technical colleges, and dual enrollment allows high school students to access these programs and to begin working toward an in-demand credential or degree. I am proud to support this bill to close the skills gap and help our students succeed.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, on June 20, 2018, during roll call vote No. 276 and No. 278 on the passage of H.R. 5797, the IMD CARE Act, and H.R. 6082, the Overdose Prevention and Patient Safety Act, I was not present on the floor to cast my vote. I fully intended to vote ``yes'' on both pieces of legislation which will help address the opioid crisis facing our nation.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I am here today to bring good news. Good news that often in this 24/7 media cycle goes unnoticed, unremarked. It is the good news of legislation that works. It is the good news that creates a growing and rising tide of economic prosperity for all families, including, most importantly, the children of families who rely on their parents' income in a growing economy. I am here tonight to talk about the unheralded success of something called the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Rarely has one piece of legislation been so successful so quickly, and rarely have so many, at least on one side of the aisle, predicted its success with so much accuracy. We are now, according to a number of analysts, including the Atlanta Federal Reserve, set to grow at over 4 percent the next quarter. Consider that over the last decade, if not longer, we have barely been able to scratch the surface at 2 percent GDP growth. Now, after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, after more investment in America, after more repatriation of profits coming home to invest, after labor and capital coming together because our Tax Code now incentivizes labor and capital to come together, we are seeing wages going up. We are seeing more capital investment. We are seeing bigger paychecks. We are seeing economic growth over 4 percent. We are seeing utility companies offer rebates under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act because they have to pass through the savings they got from tax reform to customers. It is remarkable how so many of our friends in the fourth estate seem to have forgotten all the warnings about tax reform and tax relief. Oh, I remember it well, Mr. Speaker. Last fall, last winter: This is going to be crumbs. It is going to be Armageddon. It is going to be a disaster if we pass the greatest tax reform in over 3 decades. Now, some of us on the other side of the aisle, the Republican side of the aisle, said: ``Wait a minute.'' Secretary of the Treasury Andrew Mellon under Calvin Coolidge in the 1920s first embarked on increasing the return for labor for capital investment, for economic growth. What happened in the Roaring Twenties? It led to a balanced budget. Then, of course, in the 1960s--and this is what my colleagues on the other side of the aisle seem to forget--old-school Democrats like John F. Kennedy went to The Economic Club of New York in 1962 and said: What this economy needs in 1962 to break out of the doldrums is a tax cut. JFK said in that famous speech: ``Our practical choice is not between a tax-cut deficit and a budgetary surplus. It is between two kinds of deficits: a chronic deficit of inertia, as the unwanted result of inadequate revenues and a restricted economy, or a temporary deficit of transition, resulting from a tax cut designed to boost the economy, increase tax revenues, and achieve, I believe--and I believe this can be done--a budget surplus. The first type of deficit,'' Kennedy warned, ``is the sign of waste and weakness. The second reflects an investment in the future.'' Well, Mr. Speaker, if there ever was an investment in the future, it is the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. So JFK got his tax cut enacted after his tragic death, and what happened in the 1960s? We had lower rates, but we had more revenue. Now, how is that possible? Our critics of our tax reform say: Oh, you can't cut rates and have more revenue. It is amazing how many people know so little about modern business. If you are sitting in your local hardware store, if you have unwanted inventory, what is the first thing you do to move product? You lower the price. Why? Because you lower the price to sell more goods and services, albeit at a lower price, but a volume increase for more revenue. It happened during the 1978 capital gains tax cut, the Steiger amendment, when we cut capital gains rates and, actually, revenue went up. Every single time we have cut tax rates in the modern era, the ``revenue loss'' has been nowhere near the predictions. So in the 1960s, what happened? We had lower rates, and we had a balanced budget by 1969. Higher revenues grew. Fast forward to the 1980s. We had the doldrums of the Carter-malaise era when we were told that the era of prosperity was over. We had to put on our cardigan sweaters, button them up, and turn down the thermostat because the good times were not coming back. Get used to it. Ronald Reagan comes on board. He is pushed by the supply side movement of 1970s and 1980s, and the Kemp-Roth tax cut. And he enacts in 1981--in those days, a Democratic Congress when Democrats realized that economic growth was actually a good thing and you want to celebrate it, they enact Kemp-Roth, bringing the top rate down from 70 to 50 percent. Now, there was a delay in 1982, you might recall, but then the tax cuts finally kicked in, in 1983. By 1984, it was morning in America again. Revenues when Ronald Reagan took office were about $580 billion. By the time the 1980s were over, Federal revenues were almost $1 trillion. How could it be? How could it be that you cut tax rates and you almost double revenue? This is an amazing phenomenon that our critics of tax reform just won't heed. They won't understand. They don't want to see it. They don't want to hear it. But it is ironic. What is the first thing that folks who say they want to reduce teenage smoking advocate? Mr. Speaker, they advocate raising the taxes on cigarettes. Why? Because when you raise taxes on something, you get less of it. You get less activity. Why is it that if you buy a bond, a 30-year bond or a bond in the open market that is taxable, you demand a higher interest rate, but if you buy a tax-exempt bond you will take a lower rate? Because people do not work for pretax income. They work for after-tax income. And when you lower the marginal tax rates and you increase after-tax income, more people work. More people invest. It happened in the 1920s. It happened in the 1960s. It happened in the 1980s. And guess what? It is happening right now. We have a 4.8 percent growth, 4.5 percent growth. Who knows, it may just be 4 percent growth, but considering that we have been at 1.9 percent growth for so long, this is the miracle that keeps on giving and yet won't be acknowledged. Mr. Speaker, I will tell you why it won't be acknowledged by the other side, because not one of them voted for it. Imagine, a tax bill that doubles the childcare tax credit; a tax bill that lowers the tax rates for mom-and-pop pass-through businesses by letting them deduct the first 20 percent of income; a tax bill that says you don't have to itemize any more to get a bigger deduction, and we are going to double your standard deduction; a tax bill that puts America's corporations in line with the rest of the world, not penalizing America's corporations compared to the rest of the world. Now we have foreign profits coming back. We have more mom-and-pop businesses expanding. And we have a rising tide of economic growth, a rising tide that lifts all boats. I thought that is what this body was here to do. We are not here to pick out groups, pick out winners and losers, to have some sort of industrial policy where a command-and-control central government decides who wins and who doesn't. You only gain if you are a political entrepreneur. The folks out in the real world, businesses and capitalists, they invest for an economic return. But government all too often invests for a political return. We have seen that form of crony capitalism, and it gave us 1.9 percent economic growth. Now, instead of carve-outs and loopholes, instead of favoring some States that like to tax their citizens over States that don't, we have lower rates, broader but lower rates for everyone, and loopholes for fewer, which means economic growth is going to be determined by an economic return. I don't know how else to describe this. It is an amazing success story in the 115th Congress. Yet you would never know it listening to the other side, listening to our friends in the fourth estate. It is the story they don't want you to know. But I am here to give you good news. The economic growth that is occurring will keep occurring because people now have confidence. The green shoots are back. The animal spirits are back. People are excited to be in America. They feel good about their country. They feel this is a place where they can fly as high as their wings can take them without being hindered by the strong arm of the state. That is what the American Dream is about. That is what the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is about. And that is what believing in America is about. I am proud to have played a part in it, however small, and I am proud of Congress for passing the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5892) to establish an Advisory Committee on Opioids and the Workplace to advise the Secretary of Labor on actions the Department of Labor can take to address the impact of opioid abuse on the workplace.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 5892.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 5892. The effects of the opioid public health emergency can be seen throughout our local communities, and maybe most acutely in our workplaces. According to the National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence, 70 percent of the almost 15 million Americans misusing drugs, including opioids, are currently employed. Furthermore, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the number of overdose fatalities on the job has increased by at least 25 percent annually since 2012. These statistics serve as a reminder that workplaces are not immune from the worsening epidemic and that workplaces can often serve as crucial places to provide outreach and assistance to those who are struggling with opioid addiction. The Committee on Education and the Workforce has been examining this critical issue. In February of this year, the Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions and the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections held a joint hearing to examine how the epidemic is affecting workplaces, and to hear from business owners who have taken steps to address problems of substance abuse and addiction in the workplace. Some of the initiatives these businesses have taken are not only inspiring, but they also show promising results. The U.S. Department of Labor could benefit greatly from more information about the solutions originating from the private sector to address the challenges of maintaining a healthy workforce in the face of the opioid epidemic. H.R. 5892 will create an advisory committee to make recommendations to the Secretary of Labor on what specific actions the Department of Labor can take to provide informational resources that will help mitigate some of the most harmful effects of opioid abuse in the workplace. The advisory committee will convene twice a year to discuss successful employer initiatives and report best practices, and will sunset after 3 years. Madam Speaker, this bipartisan bill will be an instrumental part of the greater solution to fight the opioid epidemic and support employers who are working to promote workplace safety and assist with employee recovery. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I, again, reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the remainder of my time. Madam Speaker, I also thank my Democratic colleagues for their efforts on behalf of this bill as well. At a time when businesses, large and small, are noticing the effects of this crisis, opioid abuse, on employee health and economic productivity, the active coordination between the Department of Labor and private stakeholders, prompted by this bill, is vital to securing the continued safety of the American workplace. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 5892, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 1091) to establish a Federal Task Force to Support Grandparents Raising Grandchildren, as amended.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on S. 1091, as amended.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the amendment to S. 1091, the Supporting Grandparents Raising Grandchildren Act. As the opioid public health emergency continues to unfold, it has become clear that the epidemic is not contained to a single generation. Rather, it affects everyone, from infants who have been left behind by an addicted parent or a guardian, to seniors who have stepped into the role of primary caregiver to take care of their grandchildren. At present, there are more than 2.5 million grandparents in the United States who are the primary caretaker of their grandchildren. Experts believe this number is increasing in large part due to the rise of the opioid epidemic. A child going to live with his or her grandparent is often the best outcome in a difficult situation, as it allows for important family connections to remain intact and can reduce the trauma a child feels. However, it can present certain challenges to grandparents who lack the necessary information and tools to provide their grandchildren with loving attention and proper care. The House amendment to S. 1091, the Supporting Grandparents Raising Grandchildren Act, will help to support these grandparents in their caregiving responsibilities. The bill directs the creation of an advisory council, led by the Department of Health and Human Services, to identify and disseminate useful information to grandparents who are primary caretakers of their grandchildren, placing a special emphasis on those families who have been impacted by the opioid epidemic. The advisory council will focus on disseminating information to help grandparents meet the health, educational, nutritional, and other needs of the children they are caring for. The House amendment ensures the council will solicit input from State and local entities and grandparents themselves to inform the best practices, and ensure the most useful information is in circulation. It also terminates the council after 3 years, to ensure the information is disseminated in a timely manner. Madam Speaker, with so many parents struggling with addiction, grandparents are increasingly coming to the rescue. It is important that we provide these grandparents with the information they need to care for their grandchildren. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close if the gentlewoman is, and I reserve the balance of my time.