Pete Sessions

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and the underlying legislation. The rule provides for consideration of the Senate amendment to the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 1892, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018. Mr. Speaker, this 2-year budget agreement begins to repair our military and frees our armed services from the harmful spending caps and the devastating practice of funding our troops with stopgap spending bills. It raises defense discretionary spending levels in fiscal year 2018 by $80 billion and nondefense levels by $63 billion, while raising fiscal year 2019 levels by $85 billion and $63 billion respectively. I have been told that this will move spending levels from 2009 spending levels to 2011 spending levels, consistent with what we had done during those periods of time. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the distinguished gentlewoman for her help to make sure that the Rules Committee effectively and carefully got their work done this evening, and I want to thank the gentlewoman. I do know it is 3:30 in the morning, and the entire committee, the entire Rules Committee, was prepared on both sides, and I thank the gentlewoman and the staffs that were included. Mr. Speaker, Members of Congress who are elected by their respective districts come to Washington to represent their districts. But perhaps, I think, more importantly, some bit of those people also take into account, not just the representation of their district, but the pride and authorship they have in particular about America, about being a part of America and us standing together. Tonight, we are going to have a chance to say back to one of our Members who has come to Washington, D.C., representing her home of Puerto Rico, home territory of Puerto Rico, and to say back to her that this body offered its condolences for the storms that happened last year. She stood up, representing Puerto Rico. She is a former Speaker of the House of Puerto Rico. She stands with the people of Puerto Rico. She has come and visited Member after Member after Member to sell to them, not only the attributes of how to fix Puerto Rico, but came and did the things legislatively. With great, great admiration, I will tell you that our next speaker, who is a member of the Republican majority, has really done an outstanding job as a brand new Member of this body; and I am pleased that we can say tonight, included in this package is that disaster package that the House passed last, I think, October. She has worked hard. She has had faith and confidence, not only in her home territory of Puerto Rico, but in her body here, the United States Congress. Mr. Speaker, it is with extreme pride that I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Puerto Rico (Miss Gonzalez-Colon), the former Speaker of the House of Puerto Rico.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Mitchell), a member of the Republican leadership team.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a Statement of Administration Policy, which is referred to as a SAP. It comes from the Executive Office of the President. Mr. Speaker, if I could read the last paragraph: ``If the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 were presented to the President in its current form, his advisors would recommend that he sign it into law.'' Statement of Administration Policy Senate Amendment to H.R. 1892--Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018--(Sen. McConnell, R-KY) The Administration supports Senate passage of the substitute amendment to H.R. 1892, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018. This amendment raises the defense spending caps for fiscal year (FY) 2018 and FY 2019, a key step toward fulfilling the President's promise to rebuild America's military and ensure funding would be provided to support the enacted National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (NDAA). After years of dangerous spending reductions and an unpredictable budgetary environment perpetuated by numerous continuing resolutions, the Bipartisan Budget Act lays the groundwork for full funding of America's national defense, within the framework of the Administration's National Security and Defense Strategies and the NDAA. Passage of this legislation would ensure America is prepared to deter and, if necessary, defeat the full spectrum of threats from rival powers, rogue states, and terrorist organizations like the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. The Bipartisan Budget Act lays the groundwork for higher investments in several Administration priorities, including infrastructure and combating the opioid epidemic, and the Administration looks forward to working with the Congress to reflect the Administration's detailed funding priorities for the remainder of FY 2018 and for FY 2019 for both defense and non-defense needs. At the same time, it is critical that the Congress work to decrease non-defense spending in other areas to reduce America's growing national debt. The Bipartisan Budget Act provides non-defense discretionary spending levels higher than the Administration deems necessary. Additionally, although the Bipartisan Budget Act does include some spending reductions, the Administration has proposed hundreds of billions of dollars in additional spending reductions that the Congress should also enact without delay in order to improve our fiscal state. Further, the Administration recognizes the Congress's desire to provide significant funding for victims of the recent hurricanes and wildfires, as provided in the Bipartisan Budget Act and previously in the House-passed supplemental bill (H.R. 4667). The Administration looks forward to working with the Congress to ensure that adequate oversight is exercised over disaster-related funds to ensure that these funds reach the communities devastated by natural disasters and are not misapplied. The Administration supports other components of the Bipartisan Budget Act, including greater certainty for the Children's Health Insurance Program, an extension of funding for Community Health Centers, and repeal of Obamacare's Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB). The IPAB authority allows an unelected, unaccountable board to undertake major changes to the Medicare program. The repeal of IPAB furthers the President's goal of repealing and replacing Obamacare. The Administration also supports suspending the debt limit until March 2019 to provide the certainty to markets around the world that the United States will honor its obligations. Furthermore, the Administration is concerned with future extensions of special interest tax deductions and benefits in the wake of tax cuts and reforms that were enacted in December 2017. The President's top priority is to keep the Nation safe from those who wish to harm it, both at home and abroad. To do so, the United States military needs the resources provided in the Bipartisan Budget Act, which have previously been supported on a bipartisan basis in the NDAA and in multiple bills passed by the House. If the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 were presented to the President in its current form, his advisors would recommend that he sign it into law.

Mr. SESSIONS. There should be no question about that, that the President of the United States is asking not only Members of Congress but the American people to understand how important it is to make sure that this government is up and running, to make sure that our military is funded, and that the men and women who protect this great Nation, those volunteers to our military, deserve a right to have us fully fund our military for the rest of the year. I know and the Chair knows, Mr. Speaker, that this deal is only until March 23. But we should not ever allow our military to be put in harm's way. They are the ones who protect us, and for us putting them in harm's way without the money to protect them I think is bad timing and a bad way for us to extend our support to the military. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today, at 10 minutes to 4 o'clock Eastern time, that we can say we are going to move forward with this bill that fully funds the military for the rest of the year. I will ask our Members at the very end, accordingly, to please support this underlying legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I would advise the gentlewoman I will be closing as soon as she does.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, this past year, 80 members of our armed services lost their lives in training and noncombat-related fatalities. We are going to attempt tonight, not wait, to pass a bill which will offer funding for our military. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, my friend and colleague, the ranking member of the Rules Committee; and the entire Rules Committee, Republicans and Democrats; and our staffs for their work late tonight and well into the morning. Mr. Speaker, there was a question about the President of the United States and his advice that he has provided to this body. The President of the United States has indicated through a Statement of Administration Policy that there would be an expectation the President would sign this bill. What does this mean? This means that, as quickly as we can accomplish this rule, the underlying legislation, and the vote, perhaps as early as 7 o'clock this morning or earlier, the President of the United States may sign that; meaning that the American people could wake up today with confidence that the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives has averted a further problem through the leadership of making sure that we move forward to fund the government. Make no mistake about it: there will be people who vote ``yes'' and people who vote ``no,'' and that is up to them. But, Mr. Speaker, tonight I would ask every Member of this body for that ``aye'' vote to do the right thing to fund the government. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying bill.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 727 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Rochester, New York (Ms. Slaughter), my dear friend and ranking member of the Rules Committee, 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. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this rule and the underlying legislation. The rule provides for consideration of the Senate amendment to H.R. 1892, the Further Extension of Continuing Appropriations Act of 2018. Mr. Speaker, the House amendment will extend government funding until March 23, 2018, while simultaneously funding the Department of Defense for a full year. This will ensure our Nation's defense and pay for our proud servicemen and -women who will no longer be in jeopardy during ongoing discussions on funding for the long-term spending caps, until we agree to that. Mr. Speaker, we just have come out of Rules Committee where we had a hearing for several hours where we detailed not only the parts of this bill, but also the agreement and disagreement between the two parties. I want you to know that I am pleased to report today the Rules Committee favorably reported out this bill, and we will be talking about the substance of that today. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague for being here so that we may move forward on this important funding for the government. Mr. Speaker, from time to time, there are Members of Congress who distinguish themselves in ways that draw not only attention upon an organization more than just themselves, but also distinction. Our next speaker is a gentleman who served for 14 years in the United States Air Force. He holds the record for the fastest nonstop flight ever in the world in one of the United States Air Force planes that is called a B-1 bomber. This gentleman not only served with distinction and honor but is here today to speak about the importance of funding our United States military. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Stewart).

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge, also, Mr. Stewart's service to the United States Air Force and this country. Mr. Speaker, I had an opportunity to talk with a security officer from Pearl Harbor, Lieutenant Kevin Fahland. Lieutenant Fahland essentially told me: We are out in the middle of the Pacific faced with danger every day, and we represent the greatest Nation in the history of the world. Please do us a favor and recognize that we need the funding to continue what is an aggressive race against us. He is a lieutenant in the Navy, a security officer, who sees firsthand the attack, all sorts of ways, at Pearl Harbor that happens every day, and it is his job to protect this great Nation. I want to thank the lieutenant and other members of the United States Navy and the United States military for their service. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess) from the Rules Committee.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. It is amazing how the President, by honing the message and focusing his ideas on Congress, has brought this entire issue to a forefront. Last year, the President said: I am calling on Congress to please resolve this issue with the DACA people who are in this country. I am asking Congress to please do this by next March. Now he is being treated--instead of like a firefighter, he is being treated like an arsonist; and he is not. He is the person who has the ability and the desire to lead Congress, on a bipartisan basis; lots of meetings down at the White House. For months now that has been happening, with the date of March. What happens? Somebody gets frustrated and they want not what we agreed to do in March, but they want it in January--actually, December, rather than attempting to work with the President, who, I believe, forthrightly, has held lots of meetings. So, Mr. Speaker, what I would say to you is that it is a moving target. There is never something that this President can do that will satisfy our colleagues on the other side. If it is not DACA, it is going to be the caps issue. If it is not the caps issue, it is going to be the military issue. If it is not the military issue, it is going to be Children's Health Insurance Program. Mr. Speaker, we are addressing those. We are trying to bring those issues professionally, on a bipartisan basis. Just a week ago--10 days ago, we respectfully did not include yearlong funding for the United States military. What did we hear back over and over and over from the other body? They said: Well, I would have voted for this bill, but the funding for the military is not in there for a 1-year basis for the remainder of the year. So that is what we have done. We are trying to bring forth ideas of agreement that say we need to find a deal. We need to come to an agreement. We recognize this is not the last funding agreement for the year, but what we are trying to do is to avoid a government shutdown. The way you do that is by voting ``yes,'' and that is what we are asking people to do today. That is why we had Dr. Burgess. That is why we had Major Chris Stewart, the United States Congressman from Utah. That is also why we have the gentleman from Waterford Township, Michigan, here, a member of the Republican leadership, a bright, young, thoughtful, articulate man. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Mitchell).

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, a year or so ago, I received a rather urgent phone call from Dr. Shelley Hall from Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas and Dr. Rick Snyder from Medical City in Dallas, which are hospitals, and they spoke with me about a change in the law some year and some ago that would change infusion therapy. What is infusion therapy? It involves administering medication through a needle or a catheter, which is prescribed when a patient's condition is so severe that it cannot be treated effectively by oral medications, meaning, through this needle or the opportunity for a catheter. What happened was there was a change in the law that did not fully fund this effort. ``Home infusion'' means, instead of having to receive this in the hospital, which is more expensive, they would be able to do this at home, and the doctor would manage that. As a result of the change in some law and funding levels, that stopped the patients from being able to do this at home. I want to congratulate Kevin Brady, the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, for working not only with these doctors, but also with me on this insistence that we go and review this, an opportunity for more effective healthcare and cost effective from the perspective of not only the patient, but also to make sure that physicians would stay involved in the health of their patients. I would like to thank Dr. Shelley Hall of Baylor University Medical Center and Dr. Rick Snyder, both from Dallas, Texas, for working with me to make sure that this change happened today. This is one of the pages of the changes that we are making today, to go in and offer some corrections and to update and extend the privileges that we have in this country to have the greatest healthcare system in the world. I want to thank Chairman Brady for his work, and his staff, to make sure this was involved in this change today. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I appreciate the gentlewoman's advocacy because, in many respects, I feel the same way. But I would offer, in speaking to you, Mr. Speaker, that you made sure this House passed the $81 billion spending bill on October 12 last year. The House of Representatives, through the leadership of not only Speaker Ryan, but also the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen) were tasked with the duty of making sure that we would take feedback from States, from cities, and came up with a figure of $81 billion. That is not in any way not living up to our responsibility, Mr. Speaker. We are the ones who did this--this whole body. It is stuck in the United States Senate, and the President and this administration have not been authorized to spend more than what has been appropriated.

Mr. SESSIONS. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.

Mr. SESSIONS. And continue to right now.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time because the gentlewoman is going to switch subjects. I would tell the gentlewoman that the House, respectfully, before we got to any tax cut bill, made sure that we did a constitutionally responsible thing, and that was to make sure that we measured three times, sawed once, came up with the $81 billion. It is, in my opinion, something that the United States Senate needs to solve. I would also add that I don't know what the Democratic Party is doing over there to push this issue. I think it needs to be an important attribute. But we are waiting for the Senate, Mr. Speaker. And for us to blame both houses, I think, is not fair to the leadership that Paul Ryan has provided, to the leadership that Rodney Frelinghuysen has contributed to this effort, and most of all, Mr. Speaker, to the people who voted for the bill in the House. They did the responsible action. And I think that if we are going to do anything, we need to look to the United States Senate, which is constitutionally required. President Trump and Vice President Pence not only visited the ravaged areas, but they tried to provide the leadership. But it is up to the constitutional provisions of the United States Senate, and that is where the problem lies. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains?

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank the gentlewoman, my dear friend from Rochester, New York, not only for her working together, but for her long hours that are a requirement of being on the Rules Committee; for her leadership not only of her team, but each of the individuals who represent not only her team, but, really, Members of Congress, and the collegial activity that she brings to the table. I thank the gentlewoman very much for that. Mr. Speaker, we have an obligation to ensure our Nation's servicemen and -women are adequately trained for missions and to support this great Nation. We have talked about several members of the military today. My son is at Pearl Harbor also and is on duty as we speak today. He is proud of his service to the United States Navy. There are proud parents all over the country, patriots, veterans, people who deeply believe in our military. We have got to get this funding done. That is what we are doing here today. This rule and the underlying legislation provides funding for the Federal Government and fully funds our Nation's military. But I will tell you that the discussions we have had here today are similar to what we had at the Rules Committee. The gentlewoman gave us credit. The Republican Party is the party of fiscal responsibility. But also, I would say to you, we are trying to do the right thing across the board, not just what we do today. But what we are faced with is similar to a changing viewpoint about how someone justifies a ``no'' vote; a ``no'' vote that they know means that while they are for something, they can't vote for it because of an issue. Just an hour ago at the Rules Committee, we had a Democratic Member who came and wanted more money for a specific project. And I asked that Member how much money were we going to spend in the budget this year. They didn't know. I asked: How much do you want to add to that? They said: Well, I don't know. It is a continuing drumbeat that we, as Republicans, are puzzled by. And that is: Why do we fund the government fully for the entire year? Let's know how much we have agreed to, and then let's make a determination if we are not meeting the needs. Mr. Speaker, this Congress must ask the tough questions, but this Congress must be up to tough decisionmaking also. I was sent to Congress to make tough decisions, not just popular decisions. So I think I would recalculate each of us today and say the bill that we have on the floor today and the rule are designed to fund the government for the remainder of the fiscal year. We would ask that all Members really look deep within them and let's end this mess that we are in. Let's fund this effort and let's look to March 23, when we can finalize all that we have done. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying legislation.