Kevin McCarthy

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Chairman, I rise for the purpose of a scheduling announcement. Mr. Chairman, as we continue to track Hurricane Irma, I know many of our Members in southeastern United States are anxious to get home to their families and constituents. So, in order to ensure these Members can get home safely, the last votes for the week will now occur tomorrow afternoon on the Harvey disaster relief package at approximately 12:30 p.m. The House will complete consideration of H.R. 3354 next week.

Mr. McCARTHY. The quick overview, as you know, we will complete this appropriations package next week. We have a couple of other items that we will list for you tomorrow, but we will continue to monitor this storm. I know it is going to hit a couple of States, so we will keep you posted about the schedule for next week as well. As soon as we know, we will keep you updated.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman, and I yield back the balance of my time. Amendment No. 92 Offered by Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia

Mr. McCARTHY. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. And just to clarify, I get no royalties. The Wounded Veterans get the money, and I am thankful that you buy it. But if I may finish with this, the Rules Committee will act. The American public expects us to act. We utilize technology. We utilize levees. We utilize dams. And I will tell you, many of those ideas come from your side of the aisle. It is requested not just from Members on your side of the aisle, but Democrats and city councils and others that are along the border. So, yes, we are taking action, just as we said we would do. The Rules Committee will find the right place to apply it, and we will be able to have the discussion on the floor.

Mr. McCARTHY. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time, and I thank him for his note that sometimes we have more Republican ideas usually that come to the floor, and I think ideas are good. Madam Speaker, I do intend to bring the rest of the appropriations bills through this floor and get them done to send them to the Senate.

Mr. McCARTHY. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Madam Speaker, as the gentleman knows, the President campaigned across America to the American public about making sure our borders are secure. Many Members on both sides of the aisle know the challenges we have along the border. The President requested and this fully funds the President's request. As I look back in history along this line about border security, there are many times in history it shows, just a short history ago, of those who have voted for it. Hillary Clinton has voted for border security as well on the wall, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and Chuck Schumer. This will be an amendment made in Rules for the bill.

Mr. McCARTHY. Madam Speaker, as the gentleman knows, I do not speak for the Rules Committee. It will be their process and their determination. It is a committee. They will decide as a committee.

Mr. McCARTHY. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. He brings up a point about the security of our border. It was a debate nationally, but it wasn't a new debate. It is a debate that actually happened on this floor a short amount of time ago. We all remember the Secure Fence Act. It was actually debated right before I was elected. We got veto-proof majorities in both the House and Senate. Sixty-four Democrats voted for that bill on this floor, 80 of 100 Senators. I would like to note once again, who were those Senators who voted for this? It was Hillary Clinton; at the time, Senator Barack Obama; Senator Joe Biden; and Senator Chuck Schumer. So it is not a new challenge. But the gentleman will be thankful that we have taken the new technology and also applied it within this bill for border security. We have levees. We have dams as well. We have taken the ideas on all sides. The American public has requested this. I can't promise what the Rules Committee will do, just as I would never ask you to promise what one of the committees is going to do. Just as you quote my book--and I don't get upset with you quoting my book. You should buy it and read it more. Buy more books. The whole staff should be reading my book.

Mr. McCARTHY. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Madam Speaker, on Monday, the House will meet at noon for morning hour and 2 p.m. for legislative business. Votes will be postponed until 6:30. On Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for morning hour and noon for legislative business. On Friday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for legislative business. Madam Speaker, the House will consider a number of suspensions next week, a complete list of which will be announced by close of business tomorrow. Now, one suspension worth highlighting is H.R. 3218, the Forever GI Bill, sponsored by Representative Phil Roe. This bipartisan legislation will remove the 15-year cap for benefits that forces veterans to use it or lose it, while enabling vets to take advantage of innovative new models like nanodegrees and massive open online courses. Education in the 21st century is a process of lifelong learning, and I look forward to the House passing this important reform on behalf of the men and women who bravely serve our Nation. In addition, the House will use the Congressional Review Act to disapprove of the CFPB rule on arbitration agreements. This rule hurts consumers at the expense of class-action trial lawyers, and we will work with our colleagues in the Senate to overturn this misguided regulation. The House will also consider H.R. 3219, the Make America Secure Appropriations Act, sponsored by Representative Rodney Frelinghuysen. Madam Speaker, this is vital that we demonstrate our commitment to America's servicemembers and uphold our constitutional duty to provide for the common defense. This security package includes the committee's marked and reported bills for Defense, Energy and Water, Legislative Branch, and Military Construction and Veterans Affairs. Among many positives, the bill gives a 2.4 percent pay raise for our troops, increases funding for our Capitol Police, ensures greater oversight and accountability at the VA, and fully funds the President's request for a wall along our southern border. As always, Members are advised that late-night votes are likely next week during the consideration of this appropriations package. Finally, Madam Speaker, additional legislative items are possible in the House, and I will be sure to notify Members of any additions to our schedule.

Mr. McCARTHY. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time, and I thank him for his question. Madam Speaker, he is correct that, as of today, all 12 appropriations bills will be done from committee, marked up in subcommittee and full committee, and I want to thank the Appropriations Committee for their work. They achieved something that has not been achieved before in the timeline that they were given, and it is extraordinary the work they were able to do. It is correct in the Make America Secure minibus package that we are bringing, that that package covers over 66 percent of our total discretionary spending. As the Rules Committee has noted, the bill will come under a rule, so it will be a structured rule. We assume that there will be hundreds of amendments, as the gentleman knows, just like in the NDAA, more than 200 amendments. I would like it noted there were more Democratic amendments than there were Republican amendments in the process that we worked through, and that is why I expect there will be late votes next week as well.

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet on Monday, July 24, 2017, when it shall convene at noon for morning-hour debate and 2 p.m. for legislative business.

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time and for his work. Mr. Chair, when you drive up north through and past my district in California, you go through some amazing places--Sequoia National Park, Kings Canyon, then right on over to Yosemite. These are beautiful places. American treasures. You don't have to go far off the road to feel like you are remote and completely surrounded by the peacefulness of nature. I have had my troubles with the EPA--regulatory cap and trade, waters of the U.S. rule. They are a couple that come to mind. But I do think and believe there is a purpose to ozone standards that clean up our air and make our communities healthier. Yet the latest ozone and particulate matter regulations are so severe and divorced from reality that even the national parks like Sequoia, Kings Canyon, and Yosemite may not be clean enough. If such pristine nature isn't clean, nothing can be. The problem is that the EPA sets new standards before we reach the old ones, and even before we have the technology to reach the new standards, the only result will be failure. California's Central Valley faces many disadvantages with air quality. We have prevailing winds from the north to send us pollution from San Francisco, and because of our topography, it traps it all in. But we have made some amazing progress. Good days, when ozone isn't a problem, are up 144 percent since 2002. Unhealthy ones are down over 75 percent in the same period. You see similar trends in particulate matter as well. But no matter how much better we make our air, we cannot catch up to reach the latest unrealistic EPA hurdles. The head of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District said that, to do so, we would have to stop all fossil fuel combustion in the Central Valley. If we don't do that, don't stop all industry, stop building, stop businesses, and even stop driving our cars, you know what will happen? We will be punished, and we will be fined for where we live. Now, something obviously has to change because these regulations are not rooted in reality. In this legislation, Mr. Chair, Congressman Pete Olson's Ozone Standards Implementation Act, we don't get rid of ozone or particulate matter standards, we don't even oppose raising our standards when we use our technology and abilities to improve. What we do is make sure that the standards are set with a specific level for a set time so that the EPA cannot come back and change the goalpost every few years. What we do is make sure that the EPA actually determines whether something is technologically possible when setting new attainment deadlines. What we do is make sure we aren't penalized for all things affecting our air that we can't control. We made sure that this legislation accomplished these goals without rolling back the protections for our communities or without backsliding on meeting current EPA standards in the Central Valley. In the end, we must have clean air, but we have to be smart with this and set achievable and fixed goals our communities can meet. Building on our success, the people of our district and across America can continue to have cleaner air tomorrow than we do today.

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet on Monday, July 17, 2017, when it shall convene at noon for morning-hour debate and 2 p.m. for legislative business.

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding. As of now, I have no scheduled changes to what has been announced. I do want to notify the Members, though, when the Senate sends us a healthcare bill, if we are still in session, we will move to the healthcare bill. If we are out, back in our districts, I would give them a notified time appropriate to come back and begin our work. We would not wait until the recess is over. We would begin work.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I have two good pieces of information I would take from there. The Budget Committee will be marking up in committee next week. Appropriations, as you know, because you were a member of it, I have never seen appropriations work like they have this year, knowing that we have a new administration, knowing that you get the budget late, but they have every single bill, all 12, out of subcommittee already. As of the end of the day, they will have seven out of full committee, and at the end of next week, they will have all 12 done through subcommittee and full committee. So I knew you would be excited. Those are concerns of yours.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the House will meet at noon for morning hour and 2 p.m. for legislative business. Votes will be postponed until 6:30. On Tuesday and Wednesday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for morning hour and noon for legislative business. On Thursday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for legislative business. Mr. Speaker, the House will consider a number of suspensions next week, a complete list of which will be announced by close of business today. In addition, the House will consider three bills that help modernize our energy infrastructure and fully utilize America's natural resources. First will be H.R. 2910, the Promoting Interagency Coordination for Review of Natural Gas Pipelines Act, sponsored by Representative Bill Flores. This bill would ensure better coordination between FERC and other agencies in the permitting of new pipelines, while improving accountability by requiring more public disclosures. Next would be H.R. 2883, the Promoting Cross-Border Energy Infrastructure Act, sponsored by Representative Markwayne Mullin. This important bill establishes a uniform and transparent process for constructing electric transmission facilities and cross-border pipelines. And third, H.R. 806, the Ozone Standards Implementation Act, sponsored by Representative Pete Olson, which streamlines the compliance process and ensures reasonable implementation of the 2015 air quality standards. Lastly, Mr. Speaker, the House will consider H.R. 218, the King Cove Land Exchange Act, sponsored by Representative Don Young. This land exchange will provide the residents of King Cove a safe and reliable transportation route to necessary medical care. I look forward to passing these critical bills in the House. Finally, Mr. Speaker, additional legislative items are possible in the House. Mr. Speaker, if I could take a moment and wish Chairman Thornberry a happy birthday tomorrow. I think passing his bill today was that birthday gift from all. I will notify Members of any changes to our schedule. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, no decision has been made yet. Knowing that we are in a different situation with a new administration, there is an opportunity to do it differently but be able to make sure we take up all the bills. I will keep the gentleman notified of when decisions are made.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding and for the question. Mr. Speaker, I do agree with the gentleman on the premise that it is responsible fiscal policy and it is important to our country's ability to succeed, that includes honoring the full faith and credit of the United States. The last information I was given, I believe this is public, is that the debt ceiling will not run out until October. There was conversation that that could have been earlier, but we will continue to work with you and Secretary Mnuchin to make sure we pass an extension.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, as the gentleman knows, unfortunately, in the Senate, we had a constitutional challenge on a blue slip on the way they passed their bill. There is concern on this side that we want to make sure we move that bill in a very quick manner and do it correctly. I do believe that there is a bill that moved out of here that there is an addition that should be added, North Korea. That came out of here 419-1, but I believe Iran, the work that Russia has done, and what North Korea has done, it would be a very strong statement for all of America to get that sanction bill completed and done and to the President's desk as soon as possible.

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank him for his work when it comes to water in California. Mr. Chairman, water is not optional, not in my district, not in California, not anywhere. But over the past 5 years, my constituents have struggled to survive without life-giving water in the face of a catastrophic drought. This past winter, heavy rains and snowfall have brought much-needed relief. In fact, there was so much water this past winter we ran out of room to store it. But we cannot always expect a year to bring monsoon-level rains and record snow. What happens if next year's rain and snowfall is average, or below average, or we have another drought? The Federal and State regulations that keep us from pumping and storing water will come back to haunt us. The water bill passed by this body and signed into law last year was a downpayment on California's future. Today's legislation is another major investment in our State's future. So let's look at pumping. There is no reason--absolutely no reason-- we should prioritize potential benefit to fish over real benefits to families. This legislation increases delta pumping and will bring immediate relief to two-thirds of California south of the delta. But a long-term solution demands more pumping. While California's population has doubled since the 1970s, we haven't completed a single major storage project in that time. Now, that is worth restating. While California's population has doubled since the 1970s, we have not completed a single major storage project in that time. How can California grow and thrive in the future if we depend on inadequate infrastructure from nearly 50 years ago? Currently, five reservoir projects have been stalled in regulatory and red tape for decades. If these reservoirs alone are built, we could store between 1 to 1.5 million acre-feet of additional water in our State. So we need to build more storage as soon as possible. Last year's water bill jumpstarted the process for building new reservoirs in California and the West. It was a bipartisan bill, with the vote being hundreds of votes out of the House, more than 70 in the Senate. Today's legislation builds on that by requiring the Federal Government to finally finish the feasibility studies for the five storage projects in California. Then we reform the permitting process so other projects aren't held up for years trying to get approval from a dozen different agencies. So I want to thank Congressman David Valadao for his hard work, his persistence on this issue. Ultimately, American citizens haven't gotten the water they need because their government was failing them. Last year's bill was the start to change all that. Today, we take another major step to bring our communities the water they contract and pay for. Now, Mr. Chairman, you are going to hear a lot of people on this side of the aisle talk about the need from California. Unfortunately, on the other side of the aisle, it looks like you will just hear from one. That should show you the need and desire of why this bill is so important.

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I am from California, but I happen to be from Bakersfield, California. I thank the gentleman for his creative use of the lyrics. Merle would be proud. Mr. Speaker, when you take a look back at American history, you can see figures standing tall who spoke for the everyday working man. Following the long tradition of Whitman and Twain, Merle Haggard was a man who knew America instinctively because he lived an American life. It wasn't a life of the movies, but it was all the more compelling because it was all the more real. That is the reason they called him ``The Poet of the Common Man.'' Merle Haggard didn't have it easy. At the height of the Depression, his family searched for opportunity out West. Merle grew up with little means and lived with a past of mistakes and regrets. So he sang. He sang in ``Branded Man'' of the stigma of prison, crooning ``I held my head up high, determined I would rise above the shame.'' He sang in ``Working Man Blues'' of the grind of doing his duty to his family, ``working as long as my two hands are fit to use.'' And he sang of his roots, not of power or wealth or status, but of pride in being ``an Okie from Muskogee,'' a place of leather boots, football, and Old Glory. He found success and, more importantly, redemption in the music he shared with his country. Now, the Bakersfield Sound changed country music, and it is a testament to Merle Haggard's talent that when you listen to his hits, from ``Branded Man'' to ``Mama Tried,'' to ``Big City,'' to ``Working Man Blues,'' or even to ``Okie from Muskogee,'' you not only hear the hardship and wisdom of a well-lived life, but you can hear the roots of so much of the music we still listen to today. From a man who went from Bakersfield High School to San Quentin prison, to the Country Music Hall of Fame, a building doesn't seem like much. But I hope that when people pass by the Merle Haggard Post Office Building in downtown Bakersfield, they will remember an icon of our community, an artist who never backed down, a man whose honesty above his own failings and willingness to pick himself back up inspired music that lifts our spirits and feeds our souls. Merle Haggard's name will live on in this building, but his spirit will live on in his music that calls us to do the best we can every day God gives us.

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for the continuing work he does as the chairman of the Rules Committee. It is very important work for this Nation and the House. Mr. Speaker, there are some debates on this floor that are very complicated. They hinge on technicalities and complex judgment calls. You need to properly weigh all the data, all the studies, and all the nuances. But I will tell you, Mr. Speaker, that today's debate is not complicated. This is not about nuance. The subject is not complex. This is about answering a simple question: Is the purpose of our government to protect the American people first, or is the purpose of our government to protect felons who have entered our country illegally, broken our laws, and threatened our people? I wish this were an exaggeration, but American citizens have died because some local governments have refused to uphold our laws. These so-called sanctuary cities offer safety for illegal felons, but they do so by putting our families, neighbors, and fellow Americans in danger. The American people now look to their government and they are uncertain. They elected people to represent them, but would those Representatives rather protect felons here illegally or their fellow citizens? As far as this House is concerned, let us end the uncertainty today. Our government should, and always will, put the safety of American people first. Cities offering sanctuary for criminals will no longer be ignored. Criminals who threaten our citizens and reenter our country with no respect for our laws will be punished. Kate Steinle, an American citizen, a daughter, and a promising young woman would be alive today if local governments did not act as a safe haven for lawbreakers. Juan Lopez-Sanchez shot Kate after being deported five times. He had seven felony convictions before he murdered her. After this crime, we asked the same questions the rest of America did: How could this man be let free? Why was he in America in the first place? How can cities across our Nation continue to shield such people from the law? In America, the Federal Government has little right to tell States and localities how to conduct affairs properly left to them. But our Federal Government has every right to demand that these governments follow our just laws written in accordance with our Constitution. And if they do not, if those cities protect criminals at the expense of law-abiding Americans, they should not expect their fellow citizens to help them through the Federal Government. For those cities with laws designed to harbor immigrants who have entered this country illegally, our legislation will prohibit those laws, cut off Federal grant money, and allow the families who suffer as a result of their foolishness the right to have their day in court. And to the criminals: If you break our laws and ever return, justice will come for you, and the penalty will be severe. Mr. Speaker, being an American means something. We should never forget that. If America is your home, you are a citizen. If you are part of this national community, rest assured, the government is here for you. The American people come first.

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank him for his work on this. Mr. Chairman, I always get excited when I hear people speak on the floor, especially when they come from California. Mr. Chairman, it is always interesting when people want to tell us what is the best way to make things happen. It is interesting, in California, when the legislature was controlled by Democrats, they did waive CEQA, but it wasn't for a dam. It wasn't to prepare for a drought we were going through. But they waived it twice, all for sports. One was in San Francisco, and one was in L.A. It seems odd, but sometimes people have their priorities, I guess, not in the right place. Now, Mr. Chairman, California and the West recently endured the worst drought in our century. Though it was the worst drought, this was not our first. We have faced droughts for generations, and each time the rain and snow came back and delivered the water that we needed to survive. Just like previous years, this past winter was a godsend to Californians; the wettest on record. Living in the naturally dry region that we do, you would think it would be common practice to prepare for inevitable times of drought by capturing water when Mother Nature blesses us with the rain and snow. But the fact is that we aren't doing enough to store the water we do get for the times we don't get it. So what can we do now? What would help the people in our district and across California and across the West to prepare for future droughts that we know are coming? We should start by building more dams and reservoirs. So what is stopping us? Well, some is a ridiculous permitting process that forces us to wait and wait and wait when actually we should be acting. Just look at history. Take the High Savery Dam in Wyoming. It took 14 years to permit the project but only 2 years to build it. It was finished in 2004. Think about how much the world has changed in those 14 years of time. In 1990, somewhere around 5 million people had cell phones and only about 15 percent of Americans owned a computer. By 2004, when the dam was finished, about 180 million people had cell phones and 62 percent of Americans owned a computer. In 1990, the most popular movie was Total Recall. By 2004, we were already on to Shrek 2. Looking forward to my home State, we can't wait 14 years after starting the permitting process to finish our projects. The Temperance Flat Reservoir, once fully operational, can provide enough water to meet the needs of 172,000 households for an entire year. Finishing the Sites Reservoir proposal could provide 2 million California homes with enough water for a year. That is an astounding number. But, Mr. Chairman, I am sure on this floor we will hear those 2 million should actually wait. But I guess for a baseball stadium, no need to wait. So fixing the process isn't just about saving some headaches or a few hours of time. This is about making sure millions of people in California and across America have the water they need and deserve. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Congressman Tom McClintock for this legislation. Fixing this permitting process for water storage is more than just common sense. It is about making us a nation of doers again to get the American what they actually need. Mr. Chairman, Mr. McClintock has worked. He has tried to work with both sides of the aisle. He has been through this process. But you know what? Mr. McClintock has been home. He has been listening to his constituents on both sides of the aisle that don't have water. We have been through these droughts. We know these droughts will come again, and they have only been worse in the last couple of years. Why? Because of what has been imposed by the Federal Government. Even in the years where we have more than 170 percent of snowpack, we don't keep the guarantee of 100 percent of the water. So as the environmental laws continue to take water away and put it out to the ocean instead of providing for the fruits to be grown and the fiber across our country and provide the water for the citizens of California, we should build more dams, and they should not have to wait 14 years with only 2 years to build it. We can do better, we should do better, and we will do better when we pass this bill.

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, Greg Gianforte is a family man and a businessman. He has been a husband for 29 years, and he is a father of four. He is a founder with his wife, Susan, of RightNow Technologies, which employs over 500 fellow Montanans. It is good to have another businessowner in this House, somebody who knows the way the economy works, who has created jobs, and who cares about his local community. Now, Montana may only send one Member to this body, but out West, it is not about how many of you there are, it is about how much you do. Greg is a doer, and we are happy to have him here. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Montana (Mr. Gianforte), who is the dean of Montana.