Paul Mitchell

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of our framework for tax reform to put American workers and businesses first. I come from Michigan, and the last time our tax system was updated, Steve Yzerman was the captain of the Detroit Red Wings. Hockeytown is rebuilding, and it is about time our Tax Code was rebuilt. We have the opportunity to reform and reduce taxes for American workers and the small businesses that create jobs for those workers. America's nearly 30 million small businesses are the engine of our economy, employing nearly 60 million workers, half of the United States workforce. But our current Tax Code is a monstrosity. When combined with State and local taxes, small businesses pay up to 50 percent of their income to the government. Polling indicates that small- and mid-size businesses would use their tax savings to invest in their businesses: opening new locations, upgrading equipment, and increasing hiring and wages. Tax reform is about rewarding work and prosperity for all Americans. Let's get on with that work.

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor a fallen hero. Tragically, Michigan State Trooper Timothy O'Neill made the ultimate sacrifice in an on-duty motorcycle accident. I rise to offer my support and love to Trooper O'Neill's friends, family, and all who were fortunate enough to know him. As the proud parent of a police officer, I can only imagine the pain you must feel. Words are inadequate at such a time of sorrow, but please know you are in my prayers. Trooper O'Neill was known by his friends, fiancee, and family for his sense of humor, compassion for animals, and deep love for his family. He is also remembered for his commitment to bettering our community and our safety. I ask my colleagues and all those watching to join me in a prayer for Trooper O'Neill; his fiancee, Carli Hicks; parents, Kristine and Michael O'Neill; siblings, Sara O'Neill and Brian O'Neill; and his entire family. May God bless them all.

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the 21st Century AIRR Act, a comprehensive act to reauthorize the FAA and reform air traffic control. Our aviation system was once the best in the world, but, unfortunately, America is no longer first in flight. Ask anyone who flies. They know our aviation system is plagued with inefficiencies. These range from indirect routes that send us all over, trying to get from one point to another; seemingly endless delays; and time wasted on the tarmac, hoping to take off to head to your destination. These delays and congestion cost travelers and our economy an estimated $25 billion a year. You may have heard that argument that there is nothing we can do; 50 percent of our air traffic delays are caused by bad weather. Well, underlying that is 50 percent of our delays are caused by bad weather because you have to space out aircraft further and differently when the weather is inclement. Why is that? Well, in many cases, we are using World War II radar technology to keep track of modern aviation. In fact, over 400 air traffic control facilities were built before the invention of the internet and 9 of them are old enough to collect Medicare if they were a live human being. Think about that. They are that old. Questions have been asked: Why haven't we simply fixed the problem? After all, taxpayers and passengers have poured billions of dollars into the FAA to modernize that system over the last 30 years, yet we have little to show for it. As President Clinton pointed out nearly 20 years ago, ``part of the problem is our outdated technology . . . but a more fundamental problem is also how the FAA operates.'' I couldn't agree more. We recently had a hearing regarding air traffic control, and the FAA was asked: What does it take to get to a modern air traffic control system like is used in other parts of the developed world? I was told: If we had 10 more years and $30 billion more, we would hope to have the project done. I come from private business. Hope is not a plan. The 21st Century AIRR Act would replace a Federal entity that has proven itself to be ineffective with an independent, not-for-profit board tasked with modernizing our air traffic control system. They would have one duty: providing the safest, most efficient air traffic control service to all users. Contrary to critics, our board would be balanced. It would be comprised of users of the system. All are represented equally. Quickly, let me bust a few myths here. Critics argue that transferring air traffic control services from the FAA to a new entity would be a free giveaway of Federal assets. Well, first, let me state they are not Federal assets. They are our assets. We paid for them. Everyone in this Chamber has paid for them. Every taxpayer has paid for them. They are owned by the people. Most of these assets are so old and outdated that, in many cases, they are actually a liability. There are many facilities that are actually environmental brownfields. A number of FAA facilities no longer meet OSHA standards, yet, somehow, some of the critics claim that these are valuable Federal assets. In fact, users are going to pay to update this air traffic control system. They will pay for the equipment, staff, and technology to finally update a system that we have been trying to do for over 30 years. Many in this Chamber talk about refocusing the Federal Government, reducing it back to its core missions, reducing government back to what it does best. This bill does just that. Mr. Speaker, after billions of dollars and decades of Federal bureaucrats' fruitless efforts to modernize our air traffic system, it is time for change. It is time for real reform. Mr. Speaker, this bill does exactly that. Let's bring the bill to the floor. Let's achieve real reform, rather than just talking about it.

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Building a Better America budget. That is truly what it does. For too long, our government has spent money on a credit card with our children and grandchildren's name on it. It shocks some here in this Chamber, but the era of overspending is over. Adopting this budget will allow us to deliver the key promises we have made to Americans: getting our spending under control, balancing the budget, and paving the way to deliver meaningful tax reform. This resolution balances the budget within 10 years and produces a $9 billion surplus in fiscal year 2027. It achieves deficit reduction of $6.5 trillion over 10 years. It also reduces the size of our bloated government by giving instructions to 11 House committees to achieve at least $203 billion in mandatory savings. This resolution curbs our unsustainable spending while maintaining a strong defense and protecting critical programs like Medicare. There is much work to be done to create jobs and get our economy moving beyond the pathetic 2 percent growth. This budget is an important step to doing just that. This budget allows us to deliver on our promise to the American people to fix our broken Tax Code. Workers living paycheck to paycheck, like my parents did, need relief and they need it now. We cannot delay any longer. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle seek to raise taxes by $3 trillion and simply spend more. I suggest they study how that approach worked in Greece. I urge my colleagues to support the Building a Better America budget.

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Madam Speaker, I rise today to do a little myth- busting. Critics of the 21st Century AIRR Act are selling a myth that the 21st Century AIRR Act will be damaging and adverse to general aviation. This couldn't be further from the truth. I am a regular general aviation user and a student pilot. My brother- in-law is a GA pilot. I would never support legislation that would be bad for my rural communities and the airports in those communities. Let's address a few of those myths. The nonprofit service provider for air traffic control will be prohibited from charging user fees to any segment of general aviation in contrast to the myths that are being sold out there. The act also prohibits the ATC provider from restricting access to any airspace or any airport. Further, any changes to access to airports or airspace would be subject to extensive government review and approval. Additional funding is provided to community airports to assist them to continue to grow and be vibrant in our communities. Critics would have you believe that general aviation will not have a seat at the table. Again, not true. The nonprofit board of directors designates a seat for community airports, as it designates a seat for general aviation, lease pilots, airlines, and air cargo. The FAA, in a hearing, indicated it would take another 10 years and $30 billion to update an air traffic control system from the archaic system we have now. When asked, they said that they hoped they would have it accomplished in 10 years. Hope is not a plan. The Trump administration supports the 21st Century AIRR Act. Air traffic controllers support the 21st Century AIRR Act. Airline pilots support it. The airlines support it, and air cargo supports it. We can go through a long list, yet we continue to deal with myths being spun out there that somehow this is adverse to aviation. We have an archaic air traffic control system that is hurting our Nation and that is damaging our economy. It is time to move beyond fear and myths. Madam Speaker, I urge colleagues to move beyond those myths and see the 21st Century AIRR Act will benefit all users. Let's bring the bill to the floor, let's have a vote, and let's move the air traffic control system back.

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Wyoming for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 36, Micah's Law, which I proudly cosponsored. It is said that nations are judged by how we care for our weakest members. There are no more vulnerable than a preborn child, whom, unfortunately, we fail to protect. The United States is one of only seven nations that allow elective abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, when science confirms that the babies feel pain. Accompanying us on this list are China and North Korea, nations with disturbing records of human rights violations. Mr. Speaker, this is not simply about a medical procedure. It is about life. Micah Pickering was born at 22 weeks. He is now a happy, healthy kindergartner. There is a lot of talk around here about life. This bill is about life. It is not about being lucky enough to have a birthday. It is about giving every child the opportunity to grow, and we are responsible for them. We should take that action seriously. I cosponsor the bill, I vote for the bill, and I urge everyone support Micah's Law.

Mr. MITCHELL

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

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Chairman, our Nation faces a dire fiscal situation. We have reached our debt limit, we have lifted our debt limit, and we are now determining how to control our spending while still funding necessary programs. What is worse, too many of our Federal regulations and mandates that we fund--or maybe more appropriately, the taxpayers fund--are unnecessary and exact burdensome, excessive costs on our constituents, both families and businesses. The reality is we can and we must make cuts to our government before financial markets make them for us. We can do that without impacting essential programs if we make the right targeted cuts. If we make those cuts, we can actually grow our economy by stopping overeager bureaucrats who seem to believe that everything--and I do mean everything--should be regulated until it no longer functions. Not only is such action possible, it is essential for the well-being of the American economy and our families. We in Congress need to be focused on growing and protecting Main Street, not protecting an already bloated Federal Government. The amendment I have proposed today makes a cut to the bureaucracy of several offices of Financial Services. These cuts are a modest 10 percent reduction of administrative expenses, which will save taxpayers over $596 million, annually. Let me repeat that. That is over half a billion dollars a year. If we put enough together, it is real money. One of the cuts included in the amendment is to the IRS. My amendment does not target IRS services, those that help taxpayers get a lost refund or have questions about filing. Lord knows those people need all the help they can get to understand our Tax Code. Rather, the amendment focuses on IRS enforcement. This is the part of the IRS that abused their power by targeting groups based on their political beliefs, victimizing groups and individuals for exercising their constitutional rights and trying to follow the rule of law. They misled Americans and took 3 years to provide a full list of organizations that were targeted for their political beliefs. This is an agency that must be stopped, and my amendment is a step towards doing so, while saving the American taxpayers money. I urge my colleagues to seriously consider my amendment as we work to secure our financial future and hold our government accountable. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Graves), my colleague and the chair of the subcommittee.

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Chair, I have to say, I am astonished at the response that an across-the-board cut is indiscriminate. It actually allows the agencies within their administrative accounts to manage money as they best see fit. The idea that we can't cut 10 percent of the budget only works in government. I spent a big part of my career in the private sector--over 30 years. I spent quite a period of time with the Chrysler Corporation in the original loan guarantee days, where Lee Iacocca said: If you can't cut 10 percent of your budget, I will find a new manager. We saved the company. It happens in the real world every day--Lord knows it happened after 2008 and the financial crash--yet somehow we are looking at government agencies and they can't save 10 percent in administrative costs. It is not possible to do it without Armageddon in Financial Services, without a cybersecurity crash, without all the fear-mongering that comes over a simple cut. If we are ever going to get to the point that we can afford the government we have, we have to have some fiscal limitations. We have to have some responsibility. Rather than these broad strokes of it is indiscriminate, if we target it, that will be a problem, too. I urge my colleagues to support an amendment that holds some accountability and saves half a billion dollars in the Federal budget and makes people simply manage within their resources like the rest of the world has to. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MITCHELL

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

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Chairman, our Nation faces a dire fiscal situation. We have now reached our debt ceiling and are determining how to control spending while funding necessary programs. The path we are on is not sustainable. It jeopardizes our future, our children's future, and our national security. We must get our fiscal house in order and take this problem seriously. Paying lip service to the problem will not solve it. We must be responsible now before it is too late. The reality is that we can make cuts to the size and cost of our Federal Government without impacting essential programs. In fact, the right cuts will allow our economy to grow by stopping overeager bureaucrats who seem to believe everything should be regulated until it no longer functions. We in Congress need to be focused on growing and protecting Main Street, not protecting an already bloated Federal Government and bureaucracy. The amendment I propose today is simple. It makes a cut to the bureaucracy of several offices of division F relating to Labor, Health and Human Services. My amendment cuts funds from the same Department of Labor that gave us the overtime rule and the persuader rule. This is an agency of bureaucrats that wishes to legislate through regulation. My amendment puts forth a modest 10 percent reduction of administrative expenses, which would save taxpayers $351 million annually on Labor and HHS alone. Let me restate that: We can actually save $351 million annually by just cutting administrative costs. We, in fact, may well find the money to put the additional $10 million into youth employment services if we cut our bureaucracy. I come from a world of privacy business, so I understand that fiscal responsibility starts on a small scale and requires commitment to changing the trend. My amendment, when combined with similar measures across all appropriations, will yield big savings to taxpayers, and will do so without cutting projects or essential programs that we hold dear. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to seriously consider my amendment as we work to secure our fiscal future, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the efforts of the chairman, and, in fact, all of the appropriations efforts. In fact, this week we will pass a full set of appropriations bills out of the House to send to the Senate--something that has not happened here in a very long time, although I am new. The reality is that many of the cuts we have talked about thus far are cuts to the increases many agencies requested. I worked in the private sector where a cut meant you really spent less real dollars. Now, I believe there are a number of programs we need to be very careful of. Item by item would be the best way, but at some point in time, we need to draw a line. We can't continue spending what we are spending, and I hope that we are going to be fiscally responsible down the road. So I appreciate the chairman's comments. I worked very carefully with him, and, yes, I agree that entitlement reform is a huge issue and we have got to take it on. We need to amend the Budget Control Act. There are so many things we need to accomplish. I am going to support our appropriations package and continue to try and work to tweak those so we actually save money, and we are efficient, and we save programs that we hold dear that are productive. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment to increase funding for current technical education programs. For some people, pursuing their desired career means securing a college degree. In my 30-year career in workforce education, I have seen firsthand this isn't the right path for everyone. Unfortunately, too often, success has been defined by the 4-year-or-bust model, leaving students who would be better served by current technical education behind, out in the cold, and leaving job creators unable to find qualified workers for in-demand jobs. Democrats and Republicans agree that the skills gap is a serious problem challenging our workforce. More importantly, my constituents, schools, and employers throughout my district recognize this is a crisis that needs to be addressed. Mr. Chairman, I urge passage of the amendment.

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment within the en bloc amendments as a step to protect the Great Lakes. Ontario Power Generation, a Canadian energy company, has proposed to build an underground nuclear waste facility along the shores of Lake Huron, which borders my district. Their plan is nothing short of irresponsible. Any failure at this site would have devastating impacts on Michigan and Canada, which rely on the Great Lakes for drinking water, tourism, and commerce. Canada and OPG have displayed intransigence in the face of the near universal objection of my constituents, and many of the residents of the Great Lakes region. My amendment serves to further highlight to the Canadian Government the gravity of this issue. The International Joint Commission was developed to resolve binational water disputes between the United States and Canada, yet they have not addressed this critical risk to the Great Lakes. My amendment would prohibit staff from attending or participating in an annual Canadian water resources conference, ironically, titled, ``Our Common Water Future.'' Prohibiting staff from attending this conference does not substantially relate to the IJC's core mission of protecting shared waters, but it sends an important message to our neighbors in Canada. It is time for the Canadian Government to take our concerns seriously regarding this potential threat to our precious Great Lakes.

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Our Nation faces a dire fiscal situation. We have now reached our debt ceiling once again. The path we are on is not sustainable. It jeopardizes our future, our children's future, and our national security. We must get our fiscal house in order and take this problem seriously. Paying lip service to the problem will not solve it. We must be responsible now before it is far too late. The reality is that we can make cuts to our government without impacting essential programs. In fact, the right cuts will grow our economy by stopping overeager bureaucrats who often seem dedicated to Federal mandates and massive regulations. We, in Congress, should be focused on growing and protecting Main Street, not an already bloated Federal Government. The amendment I propose today makes the cuts to the bureaucracy, the administrative costs within the Department of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies. The cuts focus on administrative expenses and salaries within these two departments. This modest 10 percent administrative cut saves taxpayers $222 million and, admittedly, is but a small step. I come from the world of private business, so I understand that fiscal responsibility requires ongoing and consistent small steps. My amendment, when combined with other similar amendments, will yield big savings for taxpayers and will do so without cutting projects or essential programs. I urge my colleagues to seriously consider my amendment as we work to secure our fiscal future. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Chairman, I respect the work of the committee, certainly the chairman. As I said earlier, I come from the private sector where, frankly, a 10 percent cut in administration is not uncommon. I worked at Chrysler Corporation back in the original loan guarantee days where Lee Iacocca said: ``If you can't cut 10 percent of your budget, I will just find a new manager.'' We have made cuts. We made more substantial cuts than many other agencies. As noted earlier, we made significant cuts in, for example, the EPA, back to levels of 2005, 2006. I believe we can make these cuts and still maintain the safety and security of this Nation, maintain operations and programs, and while we may disagree, I will certainly work with the chairman and the committee to continue to work on getting our fiscal house in order. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I am here to support House Resolution 480 that allows for consideration of the Veterans Choice Act. For a while there, I was confused. I wasn't sure what we were talking about there. I thought we were here talking about the Veterans Choice Act. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to support the Veterans Choice Act. Our veterans selflessly answer the call to protect our families, our communities, and all that we hold dear. We can never repay our veterans for that sacrifice. But our country, this government, made our veterans a promise to care for them. Mr. Speaker, if we do not act today, we will breach that promise by denying healthcare benefits to those veterans who access it through the Choice Program. This bill will provide $2 billion for the Choice Program. Without this step, the Choice fund will be depleted by mid-August. VA Secretary Shulkin has made it clear that community programs are unable to care for veterans who need them if the Choice Program is eliminated. Sometimes it astonishes me how it is that we wait until the last minute here to address problems like this. Millions of America's veterans rely on the Choice Program. That is millions of promises we break if we fail to pass this legislation today. We cannot allow these funds to run out and leave our veterans without access to care. Contrary to critics, today's debate is not about whether to privatize the VA. Secretary Shulkin has openly said numerous times that he has no plans to privatize the Veterans Administration. Beyond that, today's debate is about people. It is about veterans who already use the Choice Program who would lose access to care if we do not pass this legislation. It is about allowing veterans choice. Let's not play politics with our veterans. Over the course of the week, the VA Choice and Quality Employment Act has been improved with amendments. It would improve the hiring at the VA by enhancing recruitment, retention, and training of the VA workforce, but to those who continue to have concerns about veterans' choice, I ask we not let perfect be the enemy of good. I have learned in life nothing is ever perfect. Lord knows I have learned that in business. I have certainly found that to be true about legislation during my short time here in Congress. Mr. Speaker, the clock is ticking. We must not allow it to run out and default on the promises we made to veterans. We need to act today.

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to give special recognition to one of Michigan's oldest residents who will celebrate her 101st birthday on August 9th. Ms. Alu was born in 1916 and lived in the Detroit area for over 60 years, witnessing first-hand the incredible changes of the city before moving into Michigan's 10th District. Val, as she likes to be called, spent her life serving others by teaching immigrants the path to gain U.S. citizenship. Val also enjoys reading and has fond memories baking cookies with her daughter every day. I would like to congratulate Ms. Valeria Alu on this amazing milestone, and thank her for countless years of service. I wish this centenarian a very healthy and happy birthday.

Mr. MITCHELL

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3210) to require the Director of the National Background Investigations Bureau to submit a report on the backlog of personnel security clearance investigations, and for other purposes, as amended.

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

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today in support of H.R. 3210, the SECRET Act of 2017, introduced by my colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Knight). Mr. Speaker, the backlog of security clearance investigations causes tremendous waste for Federal employees and contractors and jeopardizes our national security. There are thousands of jobs waiting to be filled in important national security positions and at least as many qualified Americans eagerly ready to fill them, but they can't, because they are waiting on their background investigation. As of June 2017, the backlog stood at 650,000 clearances for employees, new hires, and contractors waiting either for an investigation or a reinvestigation. Many of those people are unable to perform their jobs while waiting, leading to contract delays and a pure waste of time. Mr. Speaker, in order to fix the problem, you have to start by understanding the problem. Fixing the background investigation backlog requires information on the size, scope, and nature of the problem. Currently, Congress receives information about the size of the backlog through briefings--only through briefings. We receive no regular data on the backlog and have no way to track progress over time. My colleagues from California and Virginia, Representative Knight and Representative Gerald Connolly, authored this bipartisan bill to provide Congress the information it needs to assess these backlog investigations. H.R. 3210, Securely Expediting Clearances Through Reporting Transparency Act, requires a simple quarterly report from the National Background Investigations Bureau known as NBIB. The report will disclose the size of the backlog and the average length of an investigation broken down by level of clearance. Additionally, this bill requires two nonpartisan reports to help Congress plan potential reforms to the background investigation security clearance process. NBIB will be required to issue a report describing the general security clearance procedure in the Executive Office of the President. The bill also requires NBIB to issue a report on the duplicative costs that would likely arise from transferring responsibility for background investigations to the Department of Defense. Like the quarterly backlog report, this report will help Congress determine whether proposed options to reduce the backlog would do so or actually would increase it. This bill is an important first step in addressing the security clearance investigation backlog, thereby reducing waste and increasing our Nation's security. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan good government bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Knight), the sponsor of the bill.

Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this issue that Mr. Krishnamoorthi refers to is an issue that spans administrations and requires attention not for partisan matters, but for the safety and security of our country. I am pleased with the amendment. I supported the amendment in committee, and, as noted, it did pass unanimously. The reason I support this bill is because it pursues some commonsense goals. Think about it: 650,000 outstanding requests, and the only way we get information on that is we get a briefing, no routine reporting. I have no further speakers, and I reserve the balance of my time to close.