Kevin McCarthy

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today alongside my colleague, David Valadao, to recognize Mr. James ``Jim'' Camp, a philanthropist and community leader from Bakersfield, California. Jim will be recognized as the Kern County Fair's Person of the Year for his lifetime of commitment to bettering the quality of life in Kern County. Jim is a tireless advocate for promoting and supporting the community he calls home. He has served three terms on the Board of Directors for the Kern County Fair--first appointed by Governor Pete Wilson and later appointed twice by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. As a member of the Board of Directors, Jim worked year-round to fulfill the Kern County Fair's mission of providing a safe and friendly environment for educational, cultural, and entertainment experiences celebrating the accomplishments of the Kern County community. During his time with the Kern County Fair, Jim also participated on the Finance and Livestock Committee, serving two terms as Chairman of the Board. More than anything else, Jim has distinguished himself as a man with a heart for the Bakersfield community. Over the years, Jim has paid his personal successes forward, donating to charitable causes across Bakersfield. In particular, Jim and his wife, Beverly, extended their generosity to help fund Bakersfield's Memorial Hospital's Grossman Burn Center. Jim has also been an active member of the Community Action Partnership of Kern (CAPK), serving the community service organization in a variety of roles since 2007, the most prominent being his tenure as chairman of CAPK's Board of Directors from 2013 to 2015. Through his work with CAPK, Jim helped to provide critical services to Kern County's most disadvantaged, organizing and participating in events that helped to reduce poverty and meet critical needs such as education, housing, and healthcare. Over his life of work and community service, Jim Camp has distinguished himself as a man who always put the needs of others first. We have known Jim as a humble servant to Bakersfield--a man who never sought credit or recognition, but always had his community's best interest in mind. He is a giver--pure and simple--a man with a heart of gold with an insatiable desire to enrich the lives of others. That's a rare quality to come by, and our community is a better place because of Jim and his love for the people of Bakersfield. His efforts have measurably changed the Kern County community for the better, and one would be hard pressed to find a person worthier of the designation of `Man of the Year' than Jim Camp.

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, on Monday and Tuesday, no votes are expected in the House. On Wednesday, the House will meet at noon for morning hour and 2 p.m. for legislative business. Votes will be postponed until 6:30 p.m. On 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. Last votes are expected no later than 3 p.m. 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 H.R. 3798, the Save American Workers Act, sponsored by Representative Jackie Walorski. This package of bills will reduce unnecessary burdens on employers by restoring the 40-hour full-time workweek, providing relief from the employer mandate, delaying the Cadillac tax until 2023, and saving small businesses time and money in compliance costs. Mr. Speaker, the House also plans to vote on the conference report to accompany H.R. 5895, the Energy and Water, Legislative Branch, and Military Construction and Veterans' Affairs Appropriations Act of 2019. Finally, Mr. Speaker, additional legislative items are possible in the House, including WRDA, which represents a critical investment in America's infrastructure. As soon as items are added to our schedule, I will be sure to inform all Members.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Not at this moment, but I hope that it will be today. All the reports are there. It is just finishing a very few items, and I expect it to be done today.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his question. Just as I announced, next week, the House is expected to send the full year appropriations for three bills directly to the President's desk. And just this week, we entered into conference with the Senate on six additional bills. These nine bills make up 87 percent of the discretionary budget and represents the most appropriation bills in conference at any point in the last 20 years. I am encouraged by the work our committees are doing, and I believe that we are making good progress. As soon as further items are scheduled for the floor, I will be sure to inform the Members. But the gentleman's question is about a continuing resolution. I want to focus on appropriations, because we have never been at this point in the last 20 years, and I would like to get as many, if not all of them, done before we depart, and we can deal with the continuing resolution with whatever is left when that moment comes.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I have no changes to the schedule at this time, but I am always encouraged. If we get all of our work done, there wouldn't be a point to be here. But as of now, we don't have our work done, so we will need to finish the job.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. As the gentleman knows, in the farm bill, we are still in conference on that; and then additional items, I would like to deal with and get done before we depart, yes.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I continue to monitor the conference reports. I was talking to Chairman Conaway just this week, along with his counterparts over in the Senate. They are making progress. But as we know, I was hopeful that the first minibus, that we could have voted on that today. But I do think the conference will finish up for us to be able to vote on that next week. So as these come together, as soon as they are done, I would like to be able to vote and finish as much business as we can before the end of the year.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his question. I do not want to slow the conference for their work and others, but I would like to see us finish that. And, of course, we do not want those items to expire, so we would deal with that at the appropriate time. But as of now, if we can solve them and vote for the continuation, I would take that up first.

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the career of Dr. Donald E. Cornforth, a radiologist and businessman serving the communities of Bakersfield and Delano in Kern County, California. One of the leading voices of our local medical community, Donald is retiring after committing nearly two decades of his life to bettering the quality of life for the people of Kern County. Though he would leave his biggest mark on the City of Bakersfield, Donald was born and raised in Media, Pennsylvania. Upon graduating high school, he began his journey west, attending Colorado State University at Fort Collins and graduating with his Bachelor's degree in 1964. He furthered his medical education in California, studying four years at the Loma Linda University School of Medicine and graduating as a Doctor of Medicine in 1968. Around this time, the United States was embroiled in the Vietnam War, and for five years Donald served his nation in the United States Army, attaining the rank of Major before being honorably discharged in 1972. In 1975, Donald was certified by the American Board of Radiology and began a lifelong career in medicine. Before moving to Bakersfield, Donald practiced radiology across Wisconsin and Colorado, and even taught at King Fahad Hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. During this period, he accumulated a reputation for his medical talent and technical acumen, performing Colorado's first percutaneous trans-renal kidney stone extraction in 1982, and the first percutaneous trans-renal UPJ endopyeloplasty in 1983--a world first. For all his contributions to medicine, however, perhaps the biggest impact Donald made in his career came with his decision to move to Bakersfield in the early 1990's. Upon arriving in Bakersfield, he established himself as one of Kern County's premiere medical professionals, and since 1991, he has led a number of medical practices, most significantly Quest Imaging Medical Associates and Adventist Health Bakersfield. Through Quest Imaging, Donald brought cutting-edge technology to our community that was previously unavailable to Kern County residents, and the company remains a cornerstone of Bakersfield's medical community. Donald has been a fixture at San Joaquin Community Hospital, serving as the head of its Stroke Program and providing his talent as a radiologist for years. For over ten years, Donald has also given his time and talent to the community of Delano, frequently making the trek to Delano Regional Medical Center to provide radiological services. Donald retires leaving an indelible impression on the community he has called home for two decades. He will be remembered fondly in the Kern County community for his brilliant mind, his tireless work ethic, his philanthropy, and his pioneering, entrepreneurial spirit that pushed him from the suburbs of Philadelphia around the world and back again. I will miss discussing health policy with him, and I know many of his former patients will miss him for his kindness and attentive bedside manner. As he begins this new chapter of his life, on behalf of our community, Judy and I wish him, his wife, Edna, and his two children all best.

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I am thankful that he is back with us, but at times I wish he weren't as healthy as he is. I am just joking. (Mr. McCARTHY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. McCARTHY. 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 p.m. 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. Last votes are expected no later than 3 p.m. On Friday, no votes are expected in the House. Mr. Speaker, the House will consider a number of suspensions next week, a complete list of which will be announced by close of business tomorrow. In addition, the House will consider several bills aimed at giving Americans more affordable healthcare choices: First, the Protect Medical Innovation Act, sponsored by Representative Erik Paulsen. This bill would permanently repeal ObamaCare's burdensome medical device tax. Doing so will create jobs, promote research, and allow for innovation that could lead to the next generation of lifesaving medical technologies; Next, the Increasing Access to Lower Premium Plans and Expanding Health Savings Accounts Act, sponsored by Representative Peter Roskam. This package would expand access to lower cost healthcare options, encourage healthcare savings, and put a 2-year delay on ObamaCare's health insurance tax, which drives up costs of insurance for almost every American; Finally, the Restoring Access to Medication and Modernizing Health Savings Accounts Act, sponsored by Representative Lynn Jenkins. This bill would transform and modernize health savings accounts and allow for more innovation in healthcare delivery. I look forward to the House passing all three of these critical bills without delay. Mr. Speaker, we also hope to vote on the conference report to accompany H.R. 5515, the National Defense Authorization Act.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, the Appropriations Committee has now passed all 12 bills out of subcommittee. By next week, all 12 bills will have also cleared the full committee. By passing the Interior and Financial Services bills today, the gentleman knows the full House has adopted for the full-year appropriations half of those, six bills, making up over two-thirds of the discretionary budget authority. House and Senate conferees on the first package are working to produce a conference report, and I look forward to continuing work on FY19 appropriations in the weeks to come. As soon as the items are scheduled for the floor, I will be sure to inform all Members. As the gentleman knows, this is a different year, as just last year we were able to pass all 12. But what is different about this year is, over in the Senate, there is action being taken, which is positive for us. That is why we are already into conference. I look forward to having those conference reports coming back and moving those bills to the President's desk to be signed. I am proud of the fact that two-thirds of all the discretionary spending will have already passed this floor as of this day.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I do not know at this time. I know they are continuing to work. As soon as they get their work done, I will advise the Members. I will bring it to the floor then.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, there is one part of what the gentleman said with which I disagree. The vote we just had was a motion to recommit. We all know what motions to recommit are. The good news about this is, last year in the omni, we fully funded the Help America Vote Act. That vote was a different vote. That was a vote that moved on to the President and was signed into law. Now, of that funding that we fully funded--because we believe, just as the gentleman does, that we want to make sure our elections are fair, honest, and that people do not try to manipulate them--40 percent of that money that we fully funded is still available. The challenge here is that we have 19 States that have yet to apply. So we should work together to make sure those States are applying, because the money is sitting there, and the money has been fully funded. We want to make sure, in the Help America Vote Act, that it continues, that States apply for that money, and that the elections are safe and sound and honest.

Mr. McCARTHY. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you voted against the omni, correct?

Mr. McCARTHY. So you voted against the funding----

Mr. McCARTHY. If I can finish, you had stated at the end of your last statement that you voted for that funding. I was just correcting. By voting against the omni, you voted against the funding for that.

Mr. McCARTHY. The only reason I brought it up is your statement at the end was that you voted for it.

Mr. McCARTHY. At any time, if I may finish, if I state that I voted for something that is incorrect, please bring it up.

Mr. McCARTHY. In saying that, you just recently said you supported CHIP, but you voted against it because you voted against the omni. Also, is it not true, when CHIP was by itself on the floor, you voted against CHIP there? Because we brought CHIP to the floor three times. But if I could move on, that was the case. So you voted against CHIP even when it wasn't in the omni, so there are other reasons to vote against CHIP. You had a question about a bill.

Mr. McCARTHY. As we all know, America is a Nation of immigrants. Almost all of our ancestors came from somewhere else in search of a better life in this land of freedom and opportunity, and we want to maintain that. Mr. Speaker, America is also a Nation of laws. We support immigration, but it also must be legal immigration. We must have the security, especially, along our southern border. As we speak, our men and women at the border are doing their absolute best to maintain both order and decency. Since 2014, Border Patrol has completed more than 13,000--let me say that again, 13,000--life-saving rescues along the border, including many children. We would be naive to think that there are not certain individuals hoping to enter this country illegally and to do us harm. Yesterday, when we talked about ICE, one of the elements that came up was the thousands of gang members that they stop. We all know the most vicious gang out there is MS-13. We know it because we know it in our communities. We see the murders. We see the drugs. We know the hundreds of MS-13 members that they have stopped from being a part of our communities. That is why we had that vote. Simply put, the entire immigration enforcement community deserves our support because they work under very difficult circumstances. I think everybody would agree with that, which is why, if I can be very honest with my friend, I was upset to see many Democrats refuse to stand with the men and women of ICE yesterday. Why? Six individuals who work for ICE gave the ultimate sacrifice of their life. One was murdered by the Los Zetas cartel. The gentleman asked if I would bring up a bill. I offered to bring up a Democrat bill, but the author of the bill who put it across the desk and asked people to cosponsor said he would vote against it. What was most shocking to me is the number of people who voted ``present.'' The gentleman can argue with me all day on things I vote ``yes'' and things I vote ``no'' on. The only time he will ever see my vote up there for ``present'' is a quorum call, because I believe the American public and my constituents expect me to make a decision when I come. I think it was very clear yesterday. You can make a decision. I know my friend and his beliefs, but I also know his party has a new movement. It is a socialist party, and they are gaining steam. But that new party and that new movement in there, I still believe, would want you to make a decision one place or the other. Just last year alone, ICE made almost 5,000 gang-related arrests. They seized nearly 1 million pounds of narcotics and opioids. The gentleman knows, those 2 weeks we spent on this floor dealing with the opioid epidemic, there will be more than 100 Americans who will die today because of opioids, and tomorrow will be the same. That is why we did CARA in the last Congress. That is why we came back with billions of dollars of funding to combat the epidemic. That is why we came back and spent 2 weeks on this floor passing more than 50 bills. But think for one moment. If my friend on the other side, his colleague, was able to abolish ICE, that would be 1 million more pounds of narcotics. And it is more than just opioids. It is fentanyl. A small dose will kill you. They rescued more than 900 sexually exploited children. They stopped thousands of predators. My friend knows that, too, when we were able to finally stop human trafficking on the internet. Backpage.com is no longer there because this Congress acted, and they are being prosecuted. Seventy percent of all human trafficking happens online. But do you know what? We can celebrate that that has changed because of this Congress. Now, Mr. Speaker, we want America to remain a land of opportunity, but demeaning the individuals who keep this country safe and calling to abolish ICE is certainly not the way to do it. I thank my friend, and I think we have a difference of opinion, and I think a strong difference of opinion, and that is healthy. But sometimes when you have a difference of opinion, it is a ``no'' and a ``yes,'' not just a ``present.'' You might come to the debate, but you ought to participate and you ought to take a stance.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. To answer his last question first, yes, we will extend flood insurance through November 30 as we continue to work through the other differences we have. We do not want flood insurance to lapse, and we will have that on the floor. But the gentleman brought up a couple of other points. If I may, I come from a family of immigrants. I come from a family in which nobody was a Republican. I chose to be in this party based upon its philosophy. If you come to my office, I have two Presidents' hanging portraits: Abraham Lincoln. The greatest challenge ever to this Nation was the Civil War. Abraham Lincoln was the first Republican President. And the other one is, the other reason why--both of those men--I chose to, and that was Ronald Reagan. Ronald Reagan did talk about that shining city on the hill. There was another President at the time, and I saw the difference, and I made my selection. But the gentleman talks about the challenges with the rule of law, the challenges at the border. Nobody on this side wants children to be mistreated. That is why we dealt with the issue, and we brought it to the floor. There was an executive order that dealt with it. But we moved two pieces of legislation dealing with immigration. Not one Democrat on the other side worked with us. Maybe there were problems. Maybe they disagreed with having greater security on the border, having a wall. I understand that, but maybe that is the difference. But the question you brought forward was the bill on the floor yesterday. It had nothing negative in it. It had nothing about children. It talked about: Do you support ICE? Do you support the families of those six individuals who were murdered in the line of duty? Do you support the stopping of drugs coming across the border? Do you stand with those children who get exploited? Those ICE agents actually find them. Do you stand with ICE when they stop those human traffickers, the modern-day slavery of today, and stop those people? Well, we had an opportunity for that. I know this other side of the aisle and I know the new Democratic Socialist Party feels differently, probably feels differently than my friend. They want to abolish it. They never put a bill in to reform it. They said, ``Abolish it.'' If we were proposing a bill that said ``support it,'' I would allow your bill to come up as well so we could have a clear choice. But when you were given that offer, the author of the bill said, ``I would vote `no.' '' The people you asked to cosponsor, ``We vote `no,' '' makes me wonder. But the most shocking part to me--I know we take tough votes on this floor. I know there are tough decisions to be made. But at the end of the day, you have to make a decision because that is why the American people sent you here. I have never been in a debate, in a primary or a general, where they ask me: If a bill came to the floor, will I vote ``present''? I have never been asked that by my district. Republican or Democrat or Independent or Green Party: ``I want you to go to Washington. I want you to be on that floor. I want you to make a strong debate down in the well. And when you get the opportunity, you press that `present' button,'' never, never have I heard that and never would I have thought I would see that. I have never seen so much color on that board as I saw yesterday. And if you truly felt your convictions of what you said, your own ``present'' vote made it pass, then go back to the individuals you talk to, go back to that new Socialist Party and tell them what you did, because I didn't see convictions yesterday. I saw you play politics. Our issues are too important. People have lost their lives, and you vote ``present.'' Now, we have more work to be done. We take this job seriously. Ronald Reagan talked about that shining city on the hill, about everybody rising up. This is the exact same debate we had when we wanted to pass tax reform. Not one person on the other side of the aisle could vote with it, but there are 1 million more Americans working today. When I look at the last 49 years of America--because there are a lot of people in this Chamber who are younger than that--there has only been 7 months where unemployment has been below 4 percent. And do you realize that 2 of those months, you just lived through it in April and May? You have never seen the opportunity that you grasp for today. And do you know what happens with that opportunity? More people want to come, and that is good for America. But we should come legally. We know our system is broken, and I know my friend knows it, too, because we spent hours talking and trying to work something out. So, yes, we brought a bill to the floor, and we had a pretty good idea that probably it wouldn't pass. Why? Because nobody on the other side of the aisle wanted to step forward. You know the process; it would go to the Senate. Maybe it is not just perfect, but I think this country is too important to vote ``present,'' and I am going to take risks and I am going to bring bills to the floor that take risks. So I thank the gentleman for the question. But what I really ask--the election is still a ways away. Stop playing politics. Be a part. That voting card, I don't even know why we have a ``present'' button here. We want quorum, let's just all say it. But the idea of something so important that people have lost their lives over, what do you think those families felt like today? What do you think those families felt like? Or what do you think about that young child who got saved from being exploited or got put back to the family and saved? What do you think about the drugs that didn't come through, the number of lives that continue to live today because of that? Or what do you think about those men and women, a part of ICE, who question does this government even support them. And every day they risk their lives for that. It is not a day to vote ``present.'' If you disagree, if you are part of the Socialist Party, stand up and take a stance. Let the American public know where you stand.

Mr. McCARTHY. May I ask the gentleman what am I not saying correctly? Were there ``present'' votes in that Chamber?

Mr. McCARTHY. May I ask the gentleman--the 133 ``present'' votes, did they not take place yesterday?

Mr. McCARTHY. Will the gentleman yield?