Richard Nugent

Mr. NUGENT

Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts, my colleague on the Rules Committee, Mr. McGovern, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave

Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this rule and the underlying resolution it brings to the House floor. The rule provides for consideration of two contempt of Congress charges laid against Attorney General Eric Holder. You're going to hear a lot of folks say how historic today is. That ``historic-ness'' is why the rule provides for debate and separate votes on both contempt charges. The rule also provides for a motion to refer the criminal contempt charges, if offered by Mr. Dingell, as well as motions to recommit both resolutions. I don't assume to put words in his mouth, but I'm sure and I'm willing to bet that Mr. McGovern is sitting over there getting ready to tell me it's not enough time. I'm not going to disagree. But as we all know, before we leave Friday evening to go to work in our districts, we have a lot to get done here. We need to reauthorize our Nation's highway and infrastructure systems. We need to save college students and recent graduates from student loan interest rates that are 2 days away from doubling. We need to move forward with the open amendment process and finish considering the appropriations bill to fund our transportation and housing programs. It's a lot to get done in 2 days. And, frankly, if we didn't put a time limit on today's contempt debate, we could spend days on end talking about nothing but this one issue. But beyond all of that--beyond floor schedules and expiring authorizations, we're left with this truth: Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was shot on December 14, 2010, and died of those injuries the next day. His family has been looking for answers about what led up to and caused his death for over a year and a half. If we can do anything to answer those questions, then we cannot and should not do anything to make them wait any longer--not another month, not another day, not another hour. Today, the House of Representatives is going to do what we can to get those answers for the Terry family. Thanks to whistleblowers at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Members of Congress were alerted to the fact that Agent Terry was killed by guns--AK-47 assault rifles, specifically--that our government allowed to walk into Mexico. When confronted with these claims, the Justice Department denied the whistleblowers' claims. What we now know all too well is just how right the whistleblowers were. However, it took the Department of Justice 10 months after their first denial, almost a year after Border Patrol Agent Terry's death, to formally retract their denial about the reckless program that contributed to the deaths of Agent Terry and hundreds of Mexican citizens. You know, I was a cop for almost 40 years and a sheriff for the last 10. As the head of a law enforcement agency, you have two options when you make a mistake: you can hope it doesn't come out, and if it does, you go into lockdown and deny, deny, deny; or you can get out in front of it, admit you made a mistake, tell the American people you're going to investigate, and then do everything you can to make sure that this never happens again. As sheriff, I found it was my moral imperative to always admit when we'd been wrong, hold folks accountable, and make my agency better so we wouldn't make the same mistake twice. It's the responsible thing to do, and it takes away any sting of the possibility of a coverup. That's not what DOJ did. They've gone the other route--hide, deny, and stonewall. They sent a letter with false information to Congress, the institution that's constitutionally mandated with government oversight, and it took them 10 months to retract that statement. It appears that in those 10 months between lying and admitting the truth, members of DOJ and the ATF colluded to intentionally cover up what happened. What we're trying to figure out is if there really was a coverup, and we need the information to determine the facts. Yesterday at the Rules Committee, a couple of people mentioned President Nixon and Watergate. And I agree, this is like the Watergate scandal. But President Nixon didn't leave office because of the scandal itself; he was forced to resign because of the coverup. I said it last night and I'm willing to bet, Attorney General Holder didn't know all the specifics about what was happening with Fast and Furious, but when the facts started coming to light and congressional investigators started looking for answers, he repeatedly kept us from getting information we need. And that has kept the Terry family from getting the closure they need. Attorney General Holder is responsible for his agency, but he has essentially given his top leadership a free pass. Mr. Speaker, a law enforcement officer who was employed by the United States Federal Government is dead. Somebody knows what happened to result in his death, and the Justice Department and now President Obama are refusing to release that information to Congress, to the American public, and to Agent Terry's family. This institution has a duty to oversee the executive branch and to find out what happened. The answers are there. Attorney General Holder knows the answers are there because he's the one who has the documents that contain the answers we're looking for. He's the gatekeeper here, and if he won't give us the information this institution needs to do our duty, our constitutional duty, then we will use every legal and constitutional tool that we have to get to it. I've heard some people say this is all about politics. In my heart, it's just the opposite. It couldn't be further from the truth. These contempt charges aren't about politics. They aren't about Attorney General Holder, President Obama, or anything else but this: a man died serving his country, and we have a right to know what the Federal Government's hand was in that. It's clear this country somehow played a role in his death. We need to root it out, find the cause, and make sure this never, ever happens again. These votes today aren't about politics; they are about answers that, at the very least, this country owes Agent Terry and his family. President Obama promised his would be the most open administration in history. When discussing executive privilege in the past, Attorney General Holder has made it clear that the DOJ won't invoke the State secrets privilege to conceal ``violations of the law'' or ``administrative error,'' avoid ``embarrassment,'' or to ``prevent or delay the release of information.'' Unfortunately, that is exactly what has happened so far with Fast and Furious. It is for this reason why the House today sees no other choice other than to charge Attorney General Eric Holder with both civil and criminal contempt of Congress charges. I'm going to support both of these resolutions, Mr. Speaker, not because it's the political thing to do, not because it's the easy thing to do, but because it's the right thing to do. And with that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Massachusetts made a statement. This is about a contempt citation because the Attorney General has not provided all the information the committee has asked for. Out of 140,000 pages--by his own testimony in front of Judiciary-- he's given a little over 7,000 pages. That's not reaching out and doing the right thing. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Scott), a fellow Rules Committee member.

Mr. NUGENT. I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.

Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. You know, it's amazing that my friends forget about history because they referenced history in 2008 as related to House Resolution 979 and House Resolution 980. And you know what they did? They passed a rule and said it's hereby adopted. You never even had discussion on the House floor like we're going to do today. Never had debate on the House floor. They just passed it in the Rules Committee and said, guess what, it's hereby adopted. I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa), the chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Ross).

Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Speaker, I yield another 15 seconds to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to a former law enforcement officer who lost her husband in the line of duty, the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Adams).

Mr. NUGENT. I yield the gentlelady an additional 15 seconds.

Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Speaker, I just want to make it very clear that the House rules of article XI talk about, specifically, j(1) as it relates to the rights of the minority. But you have to ask for that. A majority of the minority has to ask for it. It has to be focused on the issue at hand. They were talking about issues as it related to, I guess, gun ownership, and that was not germane to that issue. With that, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Quayle).

Mr. NUGENT. I will continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Chaffetz).

Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire how much time remains.

Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Chaffetz).

Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 90 seconds to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lankford).

Mr. NUGENT. I yield the gentleman an additional 15 seconds.

Mr. NUGENT. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NUGENT. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This is about Agent Terry, who gave his life for this country. This is about what this government has done not to expose the truth but to block the truth. This is about calling on the Attorney General to follow the Constitution. It's about us following article I of the Constitution in regards to our ability to have oversight. I hear this stuff about witch hunt and about politics and it gets me sick, because I will tell you this: as a former law enforcement officer, we should be more worried about what lousy policies that Attorney General Holder has covered up that caused the death of one of our own in protecting this country. That's what this is all about. This is about holding people accountable. I hear a lot of things down here. But the rule of law, when I was subpoenaed as a sheriff, we complied with the subpoena. I understand that the Attorney General feels that he's above the law in regards to the subpoena, and I understand the President's come in to protect him. But we talk about this body and what the American people think. How about we do the right thing, Mr. Speaker, and we move forward and do the right thing in regards to all the Attorney General has to do is comply with the subpoena. By saying that he's bent over backwards, I would suggest to you that under 8,000 pages of documents out of 140,000 is not bending over backwards. This is about our constitutional responsibility to provide oversight. This is about our constitutional responsibility to make sure that the Federal Government stays on track, that these executive branch decisions that are made don't put more Americans at risk. Nobody seems to care about the 200-plus Mexican nationals that have been killed. Obviously, Mexico cares because they want to indict those that were responsible for coming up with this failed idea. This is about Congress doing its constitutional responsibility, holding hearings to find out what happened. And when the Federal Government or branches of the Federal Government stand in the way and obstruct, that's not the right thing to do. My friends on the other side of the aisle should be more concerned that the Attorney General has said to the Congress: Guess what, you don't matter. Congress does matter. Congress has a constitutional responsibility, Mr. Speaker, to do just that, to have oversight over the executive branch, and the subpoena is a tool to allow us to do that. And, unfortunately, this Attorney General feels he doesn't have to comply. I beg to differ. I think the American people--but more than that, the family of Officer Terry--deserve to know what transpired and what the end of this is. And I think that we should be protecting those law enforcement officers that are out there today. In the United States of America, they are going to be facing these same guns that were walked during Fast and Furious. If you read the transcripts, hundreds--hundreds--of guns walked. Some have been recovered in the United States. And, unfortunately, some have been recovered in Mexico and have led to deaths in Mexico. One has to wonder how many of those guns are going to lead to deaths here in America. You know, when I raised my hand, along with everybody else, it was to support and defend the Constitution. When I raised my hand as a sheriff, it was to support and defend the Constitution. And when Officer Terry raised his hand, it was to support and defend the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America. We owe it to all of our law enforcement officers--Federal law enforcement officers, in particular--on this issue, to make sure that they're protected. And to all of our local law enforcement officers who are going to be the first line of defense on the streets of our cities and counties, they have a right to know what this Attorney General's office and the leadership has done, not giving people a free pass because it is expedient to do and because we really don't want to hear what the absolute facts are. Let's just push the facts aside. Those on the other side of the aisle really don't want to talk about the facts. They want to talk about it is a witch hunt or it's politics. The facts are clear. Officer Terry is dead. Officer Terry died because weapons were allowed to walk from the United States under the nose of the ATF and under the nose of the Attorney General's office through an OCDETF case. Those are the facts. I would suggest that we should find out how did that come to pass. And then in regards to what was transpired and sent to Congress and Members of Congress about the fact that it didn't really occur, and then 10 months later, Oh, by the way, you know that memo we sent, it wasn't correct; we did, in fact, allow guns to walk. We put law enforcement officers of the United States of America at risk because this Federal Government had a botched idea and a bad idea.

Mr. NUGENT. With that, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. NUGENT

Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Speaker, I think we can all agree that the integrity of our elections is of fundamental importance to our democracy. We need to ensure that everyone who is eligible to vote has the ability to vote, and those that are ineligible to vote are stopped from voting in our elections. We also have the responsibility to ensure that this responsibility falls largely on the States to ensure that voters have the right to vote that are eligible to. They do this by making sure that their voter rolls are clean, that their voter rolls are accurate. It's important that States have the ability to do that. In my own State of Florida and others throughout this country, the Federal Government is being asked to help. The Department of Homeland Security, in particular, has been unwilling to help those States that are asking for it. Mr. Speaker, DHS is denying Florida the process to access what is called the Systematic Alienation Verification Entitlement database, or SAVE, as it's commonly referred to. SAVE undoubtedly is the best database for the States to use to cross-reference and cross-check their voter rolls for eligible or ineligible voters. DHS is denying us access to this database, despite its own documents and regulations clearly stating that SAVE, for voter registration purposes, is one of the permissible uses. This is within their own documents as it relates to the operation of DHS. By denying access to the SAVE database, DHS is preventing States from ensuring to the best of their ability that the integrity of our elections is saved and preserved. As we move forward with appropriations for Homeland Security, I feel we need to acknowledge the DHS refusal to meet this basic need and a basic request of our States. DHS' stonewalling is not something the people of Florida deserve, and it certainly isn't something that elected officials should tolerate. Mr. Speaker, Floridians should not be denied the right to the fairest and most accurate elections possible. Floridians' votes should not be diminished because of political maneuvering by a Federal agency. No vote should be counted when it's cast by someone who is not eligible to vote in the United States, vis-a-vis, they're not a citizen of this country. DHS, through their SAVE program, has the ability to pass that information on to States. Florida is not the only State that has requested this information from DHS. DHS has, I believe, an ethical responsibility to provide that information because it's contained within their own bylaws and operation procedures within the Department of Homeland Security; and they have just stonewalled the States in regard to them trying to make sure their voter rolls are the most accurate possible. Mr. Speaker, I believe that they are doing a disservice to the American public. Every vote should count. Every vote should count, and DHS should be required to submit the information to the States so they can make sure that their voter rolls are as accurate as possible.

Mr. NUGENT

Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor a proud American family with over one hundred total years of military service to this Nation. In 1980, Violet I. Roebuck, originally from St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands, moved with her family, to Lake Placid, Florida. Harold Roebuck Jr., father to Carlos, Harold III, Venecia and Gisette tragically died shortly after the family's move to Florida during a return trip to St. Croix. their mother, Violet I. Roebuck had the difficult task of raising her five children, including her eldest son Wayne Moorehead, as a working single mother. Of her five children, four served in the military, each for more than 20 years for a total of over 80 years of service. In addition, Violet's son-in-law Ira Wenze II served an additional 22 years. With such a strong commitment to this Nation, it's really no surprise that the patriotism Violet had instilled in her children was passed on to a second generation of her family who have now begun their proud and faithful service to this Nation. Today, Harold Roebuck IV and Eddie Moorehead are following in the footsteps of their parents in proud service to this Nation. It is important to always remember that families like Violet Roebuck's are clear examples of what makes this Nation so great. Today, I am humbled to have the opportunity to bring the attention of this house to a family of true American heroes. To the Roebuck family, God bless you and your family's brave service to this Nation. With that, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing and honoring the achievements of this patriotic American family.

Mr. NUGENT

Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Speaker, I first want to thank my friend, Mr. Scott, and fellow Rules Committee member, for allowing me time to speak on this important issue. This rule brings to the floor a series of health issues that I hear about every day from constituents back home. About 46 million Americans have either a flexible spending account or a health savings account. These are hardworking American families that plan ahead for their health care. They're folks who don't want to be a drain on the health care system. But the Federal Government has the audacity to look at these funds from these families that have put aside for their health needs and see this as money for the government's taking. We need to be rewarding these people, not seeing them as a revenue source to pay for ObamaCare. But the government takeover of health care is going to punish them and encourage them to use more expensive treatment options. The bill we are considering today will undo ObamaCare's limitation on purchasing over-the-counter medications, freeing both health savings accounts and physicians' offices from these new, burdensome regulations that go into effect. It will allow families to cash out up to $500 in their unused FSA balances at the end of the year as regular taxable income, and it will repeal a 2.3 percent tax imposed on the sale of medical devices. This tax will make health care more expensive. It will be passed down to the consumer, and it's already costing innovation and jobs in the medical device industry. I applaud the Ways and Means Committee for their work on this legislation and encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to pass not only the rule, but support the underlying legislation.

Mr. NUGENT

Mr. NUGENT. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave