David McKinley

Mr. McKINLEY

Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is similar to ones that have been offered in previous appropriations bills, and all have passed with strong bipartisan support. This amendment would prohibit agencies like the Department of Energy and the Corps of Engineers from being required to spend money on climate change policies forced upon them by the Obama administration and which have been based on biased studies. In a time of fiscal austerity and prioritization of spending, how can we justify taking money away from our country's leading scientists, physicists, and engineers at the National Energy Technology Lab, but at the same time ask them to research and develop clean coal technologies, carbon capture and sequestration, increased efficiencies for our turbines and power plants, and improving our natural gas extraction techniques from shale? We should not be reducing funds for rejuvenating our locks and dams along America's rivers, especially when the American Society for Civil Engineers have rated our Nation's waterway infrastructure and land infrastructure a D-plus. Mr. Chairman, a D may be a passing grade for our President, but it is a failing mark in my book. Spending precious resources to pursue a dubious climate change agenda compromises our clean energy research and America's infrastructure. When similar amendments were adopted previously, some claimed we were denying agencies the use of science. That is simply not true, Mr. Chairman. We want them to use science, but, Mr. Chairman, I want them to use science that doesn't come with a biased agenda. For example, the United Nations report says that the Antarctic ice is shrinking; however, NSA's satellites have confirmed that Antarctic ice levels have increased--increased by the size of Greenland, an alltime record. Congress should not be spending money pursuing ideologically-driven experiments when we face real, serious challenges to our country's infrastructure and its pursuit for energy efficiency. I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, because there has been efforts, I suppose, to privatize and consolidate the National Energy Technology Laboratory, also known as NETL, this amendment is offered to eliminate that uncertainty and to continue the present public-private partnership. NETL is our Nation's premier energy laboratory for fossil energy, using 600 government scientists, technicians, and employees, but they couple that with nearly 1,200 private sector contractors. Through this partnership, NETL has developed breakthrough research, carbon capture, enhanced natural gas exploration and production, emission control for our power plants, and steam and gas turbine efficiency. Mr. Chairman, the bottom line is that no other national laboratory has the expertise and the capabilities in fossil fuel energy to develop what NETL already has. This public-private model has also been used by the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control. Mr. Chairman, if our government research laboratories were privatized, what assurance would Members of Congress have that that research would be done in America? Just pick up a newspaper on any day and you will read about another corporation moving its research and development work offshore. People looking to privatize and consolidate these laboratories seem to be searching for a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. I urge all my colleagues to support this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McKINLEY

Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, this and other amendments challenging NETL and the fossil fuel research, I would oppose. I would oppose because NETL is providing us the doorway--the pathway for energy independence. In the past, it has been funded by over $700 million. This administration, in the last 4 or 5 years, has seen that erode down. Thanks to the appropriators, they have been putting that number back up again to what is appropriate, so it is a big difference, but we have already made a cut from $700 million down to $590-some million. We are talking about a huge cut that has already occurred. What we have to understand is this facility, just in the sponsor of this amendment, there are 24 projects, $27 million being spent in his State, to be able to take care of 300 jobs that are at risk. More importantly, what they are doing in these research laboratories across the country--they are trying to find ways to have carbon capture, for example. If we truly want to reduce our carbon footprint, we need to spend it through the Department of Energy in their laboratories. They are doing chemical looping. They are trying to develop ways of reducing our carbon footprint by energy-efficient high turbines for boilers to make energy from our coal and natural gas and steam. They are trying to find ways to improve it. These are things NETL is working with. They are trying to find ways of fracking the gas, so we get more gas out of the ground than we are getting right now. Instead of 15 or 20 percent, we would get 25 or 30 percent. So NETL has a terrific track record. We have some of the best scientists and physicists in the country trying to improve energy efficiency, and we have already cut their budget by over $100 million in the last few years. This is not a time, Mr. Chairman, to be cutting their budget and challenging them even further. If we are going to reach this, I want them be able to reach internally to do the things that will give us energy independence. It is not a time to poke an eye at these hardworking people and what they have done. This is a time to continue the funding and continue this. If we are going to get energy independence, this is a way to do it, so I ask my colleagues to reject this amendment and any others that further erodes the power of NETL to do their job.

Mr. McKINLEY

Mr. McKINLEY. Madam Speaker, I rise today to share a letter from a 10-year-old, Stephanie Santilli of Philippi, West Virginia. She wrote: Seven-and-a-half years ago on October 4, 2007, my Uncle Jim passed away due to pancreatic cancer. His cancer was found too late because of being misdiagnosed too many times, and a CT scan finally found the cancer. His son Isaac was only 9 when his father died. He is missed by so many. I hope that some day a cure a found so other families don't have to go through the same pain we have. Her story is just one of many across the Nation. For every 100 people diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, only six survive. Madam Speaker, by funding the research to develop a cure, we honor Stephanie's uncle and those we have lost to pancreatic cancer.

Mr. McKINLEY

Mr. McKINLEY. Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor of the 200th anniversary of the Linsly School in Wheeling. Established in 1814, Linsly is a preparatory school committed to academic excellence and character development. The Linsly School was the first of its kind west of the Allegheny Mountains. The school's founder, Noah Linsly, was born in Connecticut in 1772. With a law degree from Yale, he began his career at his alma mater. However, recognizing opportunity in this frontier town of Wheeling, Noah Linsly moved there in 1799 and, valuing the need for education, established a school for children. At the time of Linsly's founding, Napoleon Bonaparte was still causing havoc in Europe. James Madison, the fourth President of the United States, was President; and the British troops had captured and burned Washington, D.C. 200 years ago, there were no phones, no cars, no buses, no trains, just a lawyer with a vision who moved to a small town on the frontier and donated all his belongings to help children get an education. Reno DiOrio, Linsly's current president for external affairs, said it best when he said: When one considers everything that has happened to our country and to our local community in the time period of 200 years--the Civil War, two world wars, the Great Depression, major floods in the valley, the civil rights movement--we are proud that Linsly has been able to adapt with the times, to persevere and overcome challenges, and to remain committed to its founding principles. Linsly's motto--``Forward and no retreat''--has been reflected in their emphasis that the greatest accomplishment is not in ever failing, but in rising again after you fall. With this motto, Linsly has continued to believe that children should be challenged and pressed without the possibility that they will quit. From the fourth President to the 44th President of the United States, Linsly not only has survived, but has thrived. Among its graduates are Federal judges, business leaders, professional athletes, authors, Congressmen, and college presidents, among others. This little school in Wheeling--this little school in Wheeling, not Boston or Philadelphia--is the 25th oldest boarding school in the United States of America, and its reputation is spread internationally. Now in its 200th year, Linsly is welcoming students from 15 States and 12 foreign nations. As one of Linsly's greatest benefactors once stated: Linsly will, in years to come, influence the lives of hundreds of young people who will go forward to serve their fellow men. After 200 years, Linsly has already influenced the lives of hundreds of young people, and now, it is ready for another 200. Madam Speaker, I ask that we honor this momentous and heartfelt anniversary for a program at Linsly. Happy 200th birthday, Linsly School.

Mr. McKINLEY

Mr. McKINLEY. Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor of the 151st anniversary of West Virginia statehood. On June 20, 1863, West Virginia became the 35th State. From those early years, our State has grown to become a significant contributor to America's economy. West Virginia is rich in natural resources. It is the largest producer of oil and gas east of the Mississippi. In addition, West Virginia is a national leader in providing statewide access to preschool and is ranked first in the Nation for pay equity between college-educated men and women. West Virginia is home to nationally recognized centers for research and learning, has produced countless veterans, historical figures, scholars, athletes, and many more for whom we are eternally proud. Like all West Virginians and as a seventh generation West Virginia native, we take special pride in our wild and wonderful State. Madam Speaker, I ask that we wish a happy birthday to West Virginia.

Mr. McKINLEY

Mr. McKINLEY. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. McKINLEY. Madam Chairman, this amendment is identical to the one that the House adopted last month to the National Defense Authorization Act. The amendment would prohibit the Department of Defense from spending money on climate change policies forced upon them by the Obama administration. We shouldn't be diverting financial resources away from the primary missions of our military at a time when we face many threats. Just look at what is happening around the globe: Iraq is splintering; Syria is still engulfed in a civil war; Russia continues its threat against Ukraine and Crimea; North Korea continues its saber rattling; Iran refuses to stop its pursuit of nuclear weapons; the Taliban threatens stability in Afghanistan; Hamas has now captured teenagers and is holding one of them, an American teenager, in Israel; and ISIS, Boko Haram, al Qaeda, and other terrorist groups are promoting instability and threatening liberty and freedom all around the world. Madam Chairman, we live in a dangerous world, yet our military is being forced to make due with less. Spending precious resources to follow the Obama climate change agenda will compromise our national security. When this same amendment was being adopted previously, some people claimed the amendment would prevent the military from using science. That is not true. This amendment merely prevents the Pentagon from spending money--precious money--to implement policies based on the Obama administration's climate assessment and on the United Nations' reports. These are widely acknowledged as political documents, adopted by people with an agenda. We should not be spending money pursuing ideological experiments when we face military challenges around the world. This amendment will ensure we maximize our military might without diverting funds for a politically motivated agenda, so I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McKINLEY. Madam Chairman, with all due respect to the minority leader, in this amendment, we are not stopping research, and we are not denying that there is climate change occurring. We are merely saying that we should not be diverting money to implement the political documents that we list in the amendment. There is ample research. There is ample reason to continue the work that we are doing, but we don't need to be using these documents that are widely acknowledged as politically-driven documents. We want to continue the research, but not using these documents, these very specific documents. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McKINLEY

Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, earlier this year the Office of Management and Budget admitted that they made a mistake when they presented the President's budget request for the National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program. Since then, they have expressed that they intend to correct this mistake by offering a supplemental appropriation, because you and I know supplemental appropriations don't happen very often around here. Congresswoman Napolitano and I have a two-part approach to solve this mistake that has been created by OMB. First, Congress already has unanimously passed our amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act by increasing the authorization by $55 million to take care of this mistake. Under this amendment--this amendment--this bipartisan approach is we are willing to compromise to lower that amount to $21 million and restore the program, keep it intact. Mr. Chairman, we shouldn't perpetuate the mistake that has been created by OMB by rejecting this amendment. Two mistakes don't make it right. Mr. Chairman, this program addresses some serious needs and a dropout epidemic among our youth. These are real people with real problems. They need our help. Society may have given up on them, but we in Congress shouldn't.

Ms. McKINLEY

Ms. McKINLEY. I yield to the gentlewoman from California.

Mr. McKINLEY

Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, this is a mistake caused by OMB. We can correct it right here today. Again, as I said, these are real people with real problems, and they are trying to get on with their lives. The program has worked all across America. Let's not perpetuate this problem by reducing their funds. It was a mistake by OMB, and we can correct it here today. I ask that my colleagues support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McKINLEY

Mr. McKINLEY. I commend the chairman for bringing this bill before us today. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2072. I would specifically like to talk about section 5 of the bill, which is based on legislation I previously introduced, the Safe Housing for Homeless Veterans Act. This is a modification of a bill that passed the House in 2012. Currently, there are over 2,100 shelters for homeless veterans across the country. Unfortunately, some of these structures have been found to be unsafe for habitation. From 2006 to 2010, more than 1,900 fires had been reported in these structures. In the last decade alone, nearly 200 residents have been lost in unsafe shelters. How can this slip through the cracks? The answer is that, currently, there is no law mandating that VA homeless shelters meet building codes. There is only a loosely defined policy that is not universally followed. As a licensed professional engineer, I find this to be a shocking omission in the law governing our veterans' homeless program funds. This bill would require any organization that seeks funding from the VA for services to homeless veterans to have documentation that the shelter meets or exceeds building codes. As a nation, it should be unacceptable for us to allow homeless veterans to be housed in unsafe conditions. In defense of our country, these men and women were put in harm's way. They should not be in doubt about their own safety now that they are back in this country. Mr. Speaker, this is commonsense legislation that will ensure that our homeless veterans are in a safe environment while they work and struggle to get back to a normal life.

Mr. McKINLEY

Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. During meetings held the past 3 years with West Virginia government officials, they consistently state that the money for infrastructure upgrades like sewer and water lines is an absolute priority. The program that funds these projects is what the gentlewoman said, the Community Development Block Grant, known as CDBG. This amendment would provide much-needed funding for CDBG and provide vital funds for improving sewer and water lines throughout America, rehabilitating public buildings, and assisting economic development initiatives. The past 2 years and, again, this year, President Obama has cut crucial funding to the CDBG program. Therefore, I am honored to work with my fellow colleague from West Virginia, Shelley Moore Capito, on an amendment to once again put the money back into this program that the President took away. Mr. Chairman, the CDBG program has made a difference in the lives of Americans, thousands of people all across West Virginia, and this country. That is why, even in difficult financial times, we must make sure that the CDBG is fully funded. I urge support of this amendment.

Mr. McKINLEY

Mr. McKINLEY. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. McKINLEY. Before I get to my remarks, let me join in the thanks for Chairman Wolf and Ranking Member Fattah and for their staffs for all of the hours that they put in here tonight. I have sat here and listened to all of these amendments. I have appreciated the patience you all have exhibited through this. Madam Chairman, many small businesses around the country are struggling to compete against unfair, low-priced foreign imports. They are intimidated by the cost of the legal challenge to push back. The intent and purpose of this amendment is simple. It transfers $1.5 million to the International Trade Commission to provide legal and technical assistance to small businesses seeking a remedy. Time and time again, small businesses are losing business against unfair, low-cost imports that flood this country. Something needs to be done. Small businesses need help. They don't have access to the same legal resources as larger companies, and they can't afford the cost to file a claim against large state-supported industries like we find in China. In West Virginia, we have one particular company that manufactures glass lead-free marbles. The company has fewer than 50 employees, and it has asked our office a very simple question: When the average cost to file an antidumping claim is between $1 million and $2 million, how can a small manufacturer afford access to justice? The Federal Government provides pro bono attorneys in criminal cases for those who can't afford representation. Why not offer something similar to our small businesses facing unfair dumping competition? On two occasions last year, this particular company had the opportunity to bid on significant contracts that would have allowed it to hire back laid-off workers, plus add an additional 20 people. Both times, the company was knocked out by questionable Chinese competition. A recent contract was offered for 300 million marbles per year. That contract would have guaranteed 300 days of production for hardworking Americans. Again, a Chinese company undercut them unfairly. Unfortunately, we have seen this story before with Chinese currency manipulation and State subsidies that have crushed our tin, rebar, and hot rolled steel industries, among others. The ITC must have the tools to protect our small businesses, and this amendment is a step in the right direction. Let's be clear, Madam Chairman. Do we want to keep talking about jobs? Or do we want to do something about it? Supporting this amendment will be an immense help for small employers in fighting back against unfair trade. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McKINLEY

Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would prohibit the Department of Defense from spending money on climate change policies forced upon them by the Obama administration. We shouldn't be diverting our financial resources away from the primary missions of our military and our national security in pursuit of an ideology. For example, earlier this year, the President diverted crucial funding on rural sewer and water line grants to promote his climate change initiatives. Let's make it clear. I acknowledge that climate change is occurring. The climate has always been changing. The question is whether or not, given the global unrest from these rogue nations and our war on terrorism, whether we should be diverting our funds to support an ideology instead of maximizing our investments in national security. Now, climate change alarmists contend that man-made CO2 is the cause of climate change. Most people may not realize that 96 percent of all the CO2 emissions occur naturally, and America's CO2 emissions' contribution to the global community is actually less than 1 percent, Mr. Chairman. But even with these facts, decarbonizing America's economy is still a long-term goal of the climate alarmists. But to what end? If America totally stopped burning coal--I mean this, Mr. Chairman. If every coal-fired powerhouse, factory, school, institution, if every institution in America stopped burning coal today, we would reduce the emissions of CO2 in the globe around the world by 0.2 percent. Think about that, Mr. Chair, 0.2 percent. Within 5 years, the rest of the world's CO2 emissions would make up the difference while our entire economy would have been turned upside down. We would have gained nothing in America at considerable cost to our country's economy. Yesterday, Secretary of State John Kerry was quoted saying: ``If we make the necessary efforts to address climate change, and supposing we are wrong, what's the worst that can happen?'' ``What's the worst that can happen?'' What about spending trillions of dollars, the loss of millions of jobs, more expensive electric bills, and making our economy less competitive? People like this talk about these issues as if there is no downside or cost to what they are advocating. Mr. Chairman, you and I know that is not the case. Germany is switching back to coal-fired power, and China and India are building coal-fired power plants every week. America is the only industrialized nation discouraging the use of coal and other fossil fuels. Leadership expert John Maxwell once said: ``He who thinks he leads but has no followers is only taking a walk.'' The President should look around. He is alone on this issue. We shouldn't be putting our funds for the military and our defense at risk by diverting funds for an ideologically motivated agenda. If this administration truly wishes to address the problem of CO2 emissions, they should help the rest of the world tackle the deforestation of our tropical rain forests. Al Gore and the Sierra Club acknowledge that deforestation in Africa and the Amazon is five to six times more of a polluter than the combination of every coal-fired powerhouse in America--five to six times worse. These tropical forests are being destroyed because developing nations don't have access to affordable electricity for heating and cooking and clean water. Unfortunately, the debate on this issue has turned to name-calling. One of my colleagues today has called those of us who disagree with the President over this issue ``irresponsible,'' ``Republican science deniers,'' and ``members of the Flat Earth Society.'' Al Gore called people who question climate change policies ``immoral, unethical, and despicable.'' Mr. Chairman, you and I are old enough to know that bullying and name-calling are just childish tactics and don't have a place in this debate. Let's stop the name-calling. It is time for an adult conversation. We should not sacrifice our economy and our national security by diverting funds in pursuit of an ideological crusade. This is not the time to divert our financial resources from our military for climate change purposes when we are confronting Syria, Iran, Russia, Libya, and other rogue nations around the world. In addition, we have Boko Haram, Hamas, al Qaeda, and other terrorist groups promoting instability and threatening liberty and freedom around the world. Consequently, this amendment will ensure we maximize our military might without diverting funds for a politically motivated agenda. I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. McKINLEY

Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor mothers across America. Mothers play an incredible role in our lives. We have all seen the sacrifices they make to raise their children and the care and devotion they dedicate to them. We know their commitment. Mothers have been our greatest advocates. When we were young, they cared for us when we were sick, supported us in our pursuits, lifted us up when we fell down, and read to us at night. They held our hands when we needed them. Mothers work 8 to 10 hours a day in the workforce, come home and do the cooking, the laundry, and help with the homework, and then get up the next day and do it all over again. So when was the last time we actually took a moment to say thank you to our mothers and grandmothers? Do enough people take time to stop and say, Thanks, Mom? There is one person who did so in a very special way. She was a young lady born in 1864 in a small coal mining town in West Virginia. Her mother had worked during the Civil War to provide nursing care and promote better sanitation, helping save thousands of lives on both sides of the conflict. When she passed away in 1902, this young lady, Anna Jarvis, wanted to celebrate her mother's life and came up with the idea of a national honor for mothers: Mother's Day. Consequently, in 1908, Anna Jarvis organized the very first official Mother's Day celebration, which took place in the Andrews Methodist Episcopal Church in Grafton, West Virginia. However, Anna wanted more people to honor mothers. She worked with a department store owner in Philadelphia, and soon thousands of people started attending Mother's Day events at retail stores all across America. Following these successes, Anna resolved to see her holiday added to the national calendar. She argued that the national holidays were biased towards male achievements and that the accomplishments of mothers deserve a day of appreciation. Anna Jarvis started a letter-writing campaign to newspapers and politicians urging them to adopt a special day honoring motherhood. By 1912, many States, towns, and churches had adopted Mother's Day as an annual event. Her persistence paid off. In 1914, President Woodrow Wilson signed a measure officially recognizing the second Sunday in May as Mother's Day. Anna Jarvis, who never married or had children of her own, dedicated her life to establishing a day to honor her mother and all mothers across America. This Sunday, we will celebrate the 100th anniversary of Mother's Day. This holiday is just a small way to show our gratitude to our mothers and grandmothers. This Sunday, we can stop for a moment to simply say thank you. Because when our mothers are gone, that loss reaches into all of our hearts and touches each of us, for no longer will we hear the sound of their voice, the touch of their hand, or that warm embrace. It causes a huge loss in all of our lives. We should pause on this one day to say thank you to our mothers, who love us in spite of ourselves. Mr. Speaker, I ask that this Mother's Day we honor the dedication and vision of Anna Jarvis, as well as all of our mothers.

Mr. McKINLEY

Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Speaker, on April 14, we lost a friend in West Virginia. Mick Staton and I had known each other for some time. I considered him a true friend, someone who had a passion for West Virginia. He was a trailblazer for numbers of us, all through West Virginia, in trying different techniques, campaign styles, and work ethic. He made a difference for numbers of his conservatives in West Virginia. He was elected to the House of Representatives on behalf of the Second District. He brought with him a background of work with the National Guard for 8 years. His role here in the House meant a lot to him, and after he left, whenever I would run into him, Mr. Speaker, he would always ask: What about something new? What is happening? Because he cared passionately about our country and the State of West Virginia. Afterwards, after leaving office, he served as the chief political adviser for the United States Chamber of Commerce. He continued his mission to try to get the message across of how we can be a better Nation, stronger, more vibrant, because he cared very much. As you heard, he has left behind his wife, Lynn, and two adult kids: David ``Mick'' Staton, Jr., and his daughter, Cynthia. Mr. Speaker, again, we have lost a friend. I would ask that we have just a moment of silence on behalf of the family.

Mr. McKINLEY

Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Speaker, March is National Developmental Disabilities Awareness Month. Every year at this time we all bring attention and understanding to the needs and the potential of people with developmental disabilities. As an individual with a hearing disability and a grandfather of a child who has CHARGE syndrome, I am very familiar with the hardships of overcoming these disabilities. We must all think of ways that would be more inclusive, respectful for our communities, schools, and our workforce. Interning for us in our Washington office we are fortunate to have a young woman who happens to have Down syndrome. She is also attending a local university. We look forward to those days we have her in our office. Her cheery disposition and her work ethic is infectious. I encourage everyone to engage with people in our communities who have developmental disabilities and recognize their talents and abilities that will make this a better Nation.

Mr. McKINLEY

Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.