Tom McClintock

Mr. McCLINTOCK

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 46) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study of Fort Ontario in the State of New York.

Mr. McCLINTOCK. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, Congressman John Katko of New York brings us H.R. 46, which authorizes the National Park Service to conduct a special resource study of Fort Ontario in Oswego, New York, to evaluate the site's national significance and determine the suitability of its designation as a unit of the National Park system. Fort Ontario was first established in 1755 to defend Americans during the French and Indian Wars. You might say it was the first time our Nation has dealt with organized terrorism. It played a role in the American Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 and served our country as a hospital, training facility, and a refugee center in the First and Second World Wars. In 1946, after nearly 200 years of active military use, Fort Ontario was transferred to the State of New York, which has operated and maintained it ever since. The House passed a nearly identical version of this legislation in the 114th Congress. I urge adoption of the measure. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Katko), the author of this measure.

Mr. McCLINTOCK

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I would urge the House to finish the work that it began in December by passing this bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McCLINTOCK

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the House has before it H.R. 374, sponsored by our colleague, Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler of Washington. This bipartisan, consensus-based legislation would permanently reauthorize the successful management of the Dungeness crab fisheries of Washington, Oregon, and California by these respective States. They have been doing so since 1980, and doing it well. This permanent reauthorization is broadly supported by commercial and recreational fishing organizations. It is an example of the maxim: ``If it ain't broke, don't try and fix it.'' I might add that these three States manage these fisheries in both Federal and State waters, and the management is funded by the participating States--a relief to the Federal Treasury. In the last Congress, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that an identical bill would save up to $1 million in discretionary Federal spending since State management would continue under this act. This bill is a win for the American taxpayer, a win for the seafood consumer, and a win for the three States involved. I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves).

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. McCLINTOCK

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 538) to redesignate Ocmulgee National Monument in the State of Georgia and revise its boundary, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Austin Scott), the cosponsor of this legislation.

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.

Mr. McCLINTOCK. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the Ocmulgee Mounds are among the oldest archaeological sites in our country. The earthworks date back before 1000 A.D., and the site has evidence of human habitation dating back to the ice age, some 17,000 years ago. Between the 10th and 12th centuries A.D., the site was occupied by a sophisticated society that we know as the Macon Plateau culture, which built earthen mounds up to 55 feet in height, representing a distinct political and cultural society. It is believed that Hernando de Soto recorded the site as the chiefdom of Ichisi in 1540. Just before the American Revolution, naturalist William Bartram marveled at ``the wonderful remains of the power and grandeur of the ancients in this part of America.'' H.R. 538, introduced by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop), would redesignate the Ocmulgee National Monument in Georgia as the Ocmulgee Mounds National Historical Park and adjust the boundary of the historical park to include approximately 2,100 new acres to be acquired by donation or exchange only. Additionally, the bill directs the Department of the Interior to conduct a special resource study to determine the feasibility of adding the Ocmulgee River corridor to the National Park System. The study will also examine the national significance of the site as well as the best methods and means for ensuring protection and interpretation of this area. The bill was passed by voice vote in the House in the 114th Congress. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of its passage today. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McCLINTOCK

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.

Mr. McCLINTOCK. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 558, introduced by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Loudermilk), expands the boundary of the Kennesaw National Battlefield Park by authorizing the Secretary of the Interior to acquire approximately 8 acres of land by donation or exchange only. The expanded area includes the historic Wallis House and Harriston Hill. The Wallis House is one of the few remaining structures associated with the Kennesaw Mountain Civil War battle, while Harriston Hill was strategically significant as the Union signal station. The Battle of Kennesaw Mountain in June of 1864 was critical to the Union campaign to split the Confederacy, and although it was a tactical victory for the Confederates, it opened the way for the Union's strategic victory of taking Atlanta. The sacrifices of more than 3,000 Union troops on Kennesaw Mountain made possible Sherman's famous telegram to Lincoln 3 months later that ``Atlanta is ours and fairly won.'' These battlefields remind succeeding generations of Americans of the price paid by so many for the preservation of our Constitution and the liberty it protects and the enormous responsibility that each of us has to maintain and defend that same Constitution today. Nearly identical legislation passed the House by voice vote in the 114th Congress. Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of the bill. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the sponsor of this bill, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Loudermilk).

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption of the bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McCLINTOCK

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, in the last 8 years, our Nation's debt has doubled. That means that the Obama administration has borrowed as much in just 8 years as our government borrowed in the 220 years between the first day of the George Washington administration and the last day of the George W. Bush administration. Our interest costs are now eating us alive. Last year the Congressional Budget Office warned that within 6 years on our current trajectory, interest payments on the debt will exceed what we now spend for our entire defense budget. Before we can provide for the common defense and promote the general welfare, we have to be able to pay for it, and our massive debt directly threatens our ability to do so. History warns us that nations that bankrupt themselves aren't around very long. I am confident that the new administration clearly understands the peril this poses to our country. The nomination of Mick Mulvaney to head the Office of Management and Budget is a powerful signal that this danger will soon be addressed aggressively and effectively. This debt is our generation's doing. It is our generation's responsibility to set right. When we do so, we will need to leave behind the mechanisms to assure that reckless borrowing never threatens our government again. For this reason, last week I introduced a proposal for a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, H.J. Res. 12. The beauty of the American Constitution is in its simplicity and its humility. The American Founders recognized Cicero's wisdom that the best laws are the simplest ones, and they humbly realized they couldn't possibly foresee the circumstances and conditions that might confront future generations. They resisted the temptation to micromanage every decision that might be made in the centuries to come. Instead, they set forth general principles of governance and erected a structure in which human nature itself would naturally guide future decisions to comport with these principles. In crafting a balanced budget amendment, we need to maintain these qualities. We should not attempt to tell future generations specifically how they should manage their revenues and expenditures in times that we cannot foresee or comprehend. The experience of many States that operate under their own balanced budget amendments tells us that the more complicated and convoluted such strictures become, the more they are circumvented and manipulated. In 1798, Thomas Jefferson wrote this observation to John Taylor: ``I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution. I would be willing to depend on that alone for the reduction of the administration of our government to the genuine principles of its Constitution; I mean an additional article taking from the federal government the power of borrowing.'' What is a balanced budget? It is simply a budget that doesn't require us to borrow. So why don't we just say so, as Jefferson did? Instead of trying to define fiscal years, outlays, expenditures, revenues, emergencies, contingencies, triggers, sequestrations, and on and on, I would hope we would consider 27 simple words: ``The United States Government may not increase its debt except for a specific purpose by law adopted by three-fourths of the membership of both Houses of Congress.'' That is it. Such an amendment, taking effect 10 years from ratification, would give the government time to put its affairs in order and thereafter, naturally, require future Congresses to maintain both a balanced budget and a prudent reserve to accommodate fluctuations of revenues and routine contingencies. It trusts that three-fourths of Congress will be able to recognize a genuine emergency when it sees one and that one-fourth of Congress will be strong enough to resist borrowing for trivial reasons. The States' experience warns us that a two-thirds vote is insufficient to protect against profligacy. Some advocate going much farther and establishing limitations on spending and taxation as well, but prohibiting borrowing sets a natural limit to the limits of the people to tolerate taxation and, therefore, spending. The real danger is when runaway spending is accommodated by borrowing--a hidden future tax. The best and most effective way to invoke that natural limit is a simple prohibition. In drafting an amendment to guide not only this generation but all those to follow, I would hope that we would do as the Constitutional Convention would have done if it had the benefit of Jefferson's wise counsel: set down the general principle only and allow future generations, with their own insight into their own challenges, to put it to practical effect.

Mr. McCLINTOCK

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I support the REINS Act and the rule that brings it to us, but I want to underscore the point made earlier by Mr. Barr. The REINS Act says that any regulation--that is, an act with the force of law--adopted by the executive branch and costs more than $100 million must then be approved by Congress to take effect. As necessary as this bill is in the current environment, I am afraid it has got it completely backwards. Under the Constitution read on this floor today, it is not the role of the executive branch to make law and for the legislative branch then to approve or veto it. Quite the contrary, making law is the singular prerogative of the legislative branch; the executive then approves or vetoes that law. The REINS Act is necessary solely because for years Congress has improperly ceded its lawmaking powers to the executive, and it is time we restored the proper role of the legislative branch to make law and for the executive branch to faithfully execute it.

Mr. McCLINTOCK

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.J. Res. 3 by Congressman Roe of Tennessee authorizes the National Desert Storm War Memorial Association to consider sites along or near the National Mall for a memorial to honor the members of Armed Forces who served on Active Duty in support of Operation Desert Storm or Operation Desert Shield. Under the Commemorative Works Act, any memorial proposed to be located on Federal land along or near the National Mall must be approved by Congress after the Secretary of the Interior determines that the proposed work is ``of preeminent historical and lasting significance to the United States.'' The Secretary of the Interior has recommended that the Desert Storm War Memorial Association be authorized to consider sites in Area I for the memorial, and this resolution would provide Congress' approval of the Secretary's recommendation. Congress provided initial authorization for the Desert Storm and Desert Shield Memorial in 2014, and the memorial is to be funded solely by private donations. History will no doubt continue to debate the political decisions that stopped our forces before they reached Baghdad, but it has already recorded and judged the effectiveness, the heroism, and the devotion of our Armed Forces and their commanders in the field who utterly vanquished the largest army in the Middle East in just 100 hours and who liberated the people of Kuwait from a hideous and sadistic occupation. This memorial will do more than honor the 382 Americans who gave their lives in the gulf war and ensure that they will not be forgotten. After all, as Lincoln said at Gettysburg: The honor they earned on the battlefield cannot be added to or detracted by us, and long after our words are forgotten, their deeds will be remembered and celebrated. But this monument will also remind future generations at home and abroad, friend and foe, of what American Armed Forces can do to rescue and protect the weak, and vanquish and punish the guilty, when competently commanded in the field and backed by the full resolve of the American people in a righteous cause. I urge adoption of the measure. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 3) approving the location of a memorial to commemorate and honor the members of the Armed Forces who served on active duty in support of Operation Desert Storm or Operation Desert Shield.

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the joint resolution under consideration.

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of the measure. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Roe), the author of this measure.