Lamar Smith

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the national liberal media repeatedly comment that the current administration is ``scandal free.'' But that's because they ignore scandals involving Democrats. For example, Hillary Clinton claims that everyone knew she used a private email server as Secretary of State. Yet, White House officials stated they were unaware of the server. The media has yet to pursue what was known or why the use of this server was allowed. The national media also has failed to uncover who gave the orders for the IRS to target conservatives or if White House officials helped cover up the incident. And when an American is murdered by an illegal immigrant, the press never connects the loss of life to the president's refusal to enforce our immigration laws. The only people who believe the administration is ``scandal free'' are its allies in the national liberal media.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, today I want to recognize three power linemen from the Bandera Electric Cooperative: Jay Rasberry, John Hernandez and Garrett Clark. These linemen volunteered for the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA) International Foundation and spent three weeks in northern Haiti building and upgrading power lines. These efforts have helped communities in Haiti receive affordable, safe and reliable energy. These three power linemen worked side by side with NRECA International on the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) funded Pilot Project for Sustainable Electricity Distribution. This project commercializes power from the Caracol Industrial Park generation station that is currently serving 8,000 consumers in Caracol and surrounding communities with electricity 24 hours a day. When the project is complete, a total of 10,000 consumers will have access to electricity. Less than 15% of the people in Haiti have access to electricity. The service and sacrifice of these linemen will impact the lives of thousands of Haitians resulting in improvements in healthcare, education, and economic opportunity. In appreciation of all they have done, Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking them for their humanitarian efforts.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, a recent report found that more than half of immigrant households (both legal and illegal) in the United States receive welfare benefits--compared to only 30% of native households. The report by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) determined that welfare use increased significantly for households with children. Almost half of immigrant households who have been in the country for more than 20 years still rely on welfare. This contradicts the commonly held notion that long-time immigrants don't consume government benefits. Our immigration and welfare programs should not subsidize other nations' low-skilled workers who compete with struggling American families for scarce jobs. The CIS report reminds us how much work remains before we have an immigration system that puts the interests of Americans first.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, President Obama is misleading Americans about climate change. At a news conference in Paris, the President claimed that fish are swimming through the streets of Miami as a result of climate change. There is indeed something fishy about this story. According to the National Weather Service, south Florida has been under a coastal flood advisory as a result of ``high . . . tides due to the lunar cycle.'' This is the cause of the high tides which subsequently led to flooding in low-lying areas. The alignment of the Earth, Moon, and Sun, along with strong easterly winds, caused the abnormal tides, not climate change. How could the President not know this? Mr. Speaker, the administration's alarmism and exaggeration is not good science; it is science fiction. The administration wants to advance an extreme climate change agenda that will damage our economy and have little impact on global warming.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the majority leader for yielding me time. And I also want to thank the majority leader, Kevin McCarthy, an honorary member of the Science, Space, and Technology Committee, for sponsoring this important legislation. This bill encourages the private sector to launch rockets, take risks, and shoot for the stars. H.R. 2262, the SPACE Act, facilitates a pro-growth environment for the developing commercial space sector. It creates more stable regulatory conditions and improves safety, which, in turn, attracts private investment. This bill secures American leadership in space and fosters the development of advanced space technologies. It preserves the Federal Aviation Administration's ability to regulate commercial human spaceflight in order to protect national security, public health, and safety. It also preserves the FAA's ability to regulate spaceflight participants and crew safety in the event of an accident. The SPACE Act allows the commercial space industry to develop standards and coordinate with the FAA so the industry can grow in a stable regulatory environment without the threat of arbitrary regulations that would adversely impact their ability to innovate. International law places liability for damages that result from space accidents on the launching country. All spacefaring nations require some form of third-party liability insurance for launching entities. The current U.S. risk-sharing structure expires in 2016. This act extends indemnification to 2025, and this provision prevents U.S. space companies from going overseas where other nations have much more favorable liability protection. The SPACE Act also closes a statutory loophole that negates an experimental permit once a launch license is issued for the same vehicle design. This fosters greater innovation and allows an experimental permit holder to continue its tests while a license holder conducts operations. Current law only allows for two categories of individuals carried on a spacecraft: crew and spaceflight participants. Now that NASA allows other astronauts to travel to the International Space Station, a new category is necessary to outline the roles, responsibilities, and protections for astronauts on a commercial human spaceflight launch. This bill closes a loophole that carved out an exception for spaceflight participants from indemnification coverage. By including these individuals in the indemnification provision, spaceflight participants who participate in a launch as a result of a contest or for other reasons are not exposed to liability more than anyone else involved in the launch. Current law requires that all parties involved in a launch waive claims against each other. This bill adds spaceflight participants to the cross-waiver requirement to ensure consistency and reinforce the informed consent requirements. Many bipartisan provisions recently considered by the Science, Space, and Technology Committee are included in this legislation. These provisions establish in United States domestic law that U.S. citizens are entitled to explore, use, and take possession of space resources. They also streamline the regulatory process for commercial remote sensing and update the Office of Space Commerce. Numerous space companies have expressed support for this bill. They include SpaceX; Virgin Galactic; Blue Origin; World View Enterprises; XCOR Aerospace; Mojave Air and Space Port; Planetary Resources; Moon Express; Spaceport America; Spaceport Camden, Georgia; Midland Development Corporation; Masten Space Systems; the Satellite Industry Association; and the Commercial Spaceflight Federation, which represents more than 50 commercial space companies across the United States. This bill is the product of over 3 years of work, 14 committee hearings, multiple markups, a rule on the House floor that allowed amendments, and input from industry, education groups, and grassroots citizen advocacy groups. Virtually every space stakeholder group supports this bill. And, in fact, it passed the Senate unanimously last week. H.R. 2262 keeps America at the forefront of the aerospace technology, promotes American jobs, reduces red tape, promotes safety, and inspires the next generation of explorers. It provides the boost America's private space partners need as they lead the world into the future. Mr. Speaker, we have reached this point because of the persistence, over many weeks, of very able staff members. I especially thank the Space Subcommittee Staff Director, Tom Hammond; Science Committee Senior Adviser and Legislative Director, Chris Wydler; and Chief of Staff Jennifer Brown for their work on this legislation. I also want to thank Majority Leader McCarthy again, for his initiative on this bill, and I encourage my colleagues to support it.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, this year marks the 70th anniversary of Padgett Stratemann & Co., a newly selected Texas Treasure Business Award recipient. Run by the Texas Historical Commission, the Texas Treasure Business Award Program pays tribute to the state's well- established businesses and their historical contributions to the state's economic growth and prosperity. Founded in 1945 by Sidney Padgett, Padgett Stratemann & Co. focuses on accounting and business advisory services. It has been a thriving member of the Central and South Texas business community. With over 200 employees in San Antonio, Austin, and Houston, the company is committed to the communities through financial and in-kind support of numerous non-profit organizations. By displaying professionalism, service, and quality, Padgett Stratemann & Co. exemplifies what it means to be an award-winning Texas-based business enterprise.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Chair, I support the amendment sponsored by Representative Barbara Comstock, chair of the Subcommittee on Research and Technology of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, and the subcommittee's ranking minority member, Dan Lipinski. The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology has jurisdiction over research, development, and technology programs at the Department of Transportation. In anticipation of a House surface transportation authorization bill, the committee exercised its jurisdiction with a transportation research and development hearing in June. In September the Subcommittee on Research and Technology marked up H.R. 3585, the Surface Transportation Research and Development Act of 2015. It is essential that we find a way to maintain a healthy, substantive research base for America's transportation initiatives. We have to ensure that Congress gets its priorities right and that taxpayers receive maximum value for their hard-earned tax dollars. H.R. 3585 does just that. This makes the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology's jurisdiction over R&D programs at the Department of Transportation particularly relevant. Since the introduction and subsequent markup of the underlying bill, members and staff of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology have worked closely with our counterparts on the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure to ensure inclusion of some of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology's priorities into the highway bill. I want to thank Chairman Shuster for working with Congresswoman Comstock and me in this venture. I look forward to further discussions after the House passes this bill, as we continue to work cooperatively on policy deliberations and resolution of individual R&D provisions during the House-Senate conference. Again, I thank Chairman Shuster for his support of this amendment, and I thank the gentlewoman from Virginia for introducing the underlying bill that has been put into this underlying bill as well.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close if the gentleman from Virginia has no more speakers.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3033, the Research Excellence and Advancements for Dyslexia Act, or READ Act, will help millions of Americans who struggle with dyslexia. It is fitting that the House considers this bill today, as October is Dyslexia Awareness Month. Dyslexia affects an estimated 8.5 million school children and 1 in 6 Americans in some form. It causes these individuals to have difficulties with reading, though they often have normal or above- average intelligence. Despite the prevalence of dyslexia, many Americans remain undiagnosed, untreated, and silently struggle at school or work. Too many children undiagnosed with dyslexia have difficulties in the classroom and sometimes drop out of school and face uncertain futures. The READ Act requires the National Science Foundation's budget to include a specific line item for the Research in Disabilities Education program. The bill requires the NSF to invest at least $5 million annually for merit-reviewed, competitively-awarded dyslexia research projects. The bill uses funds already appropriated for the NSF and does not authorize any additional spending for these priority projects. NSF research supported by the READ Act is focused on practical applications, which include the following: Early identification of children and students with dyslexia, professional development for teachers and administrators of students with dyslexia, curricula and educational tools needed for children with dyslexia, and implementation and scaling of successful models of dyslexia intervention. The House Science, Space and Technology Committee held a hearing last year on the science of dyslexia. Experts testified how research in the area of neuroscience has led to practical ways to better diagnose and deal with dyslexia but that more research is necessary. At a second committee hearing held just a few weeks ago, we heard from experts who work directly with dyslexic students and their teachers. They know firsthand about the obstacles these children, parents, and educators face, and they stress the importance of research in developing practical tools. If you can't read, it is hard to achieve. If we change the way we approach dyslexia, we can turn this disability into an opportunity for a brighter and more productive future for millions of Americans. I am a co-chair of the bipartisan Dyslexia Caucus, along with Congresswoman Julia Brownley, which is comprised of more than 100 Members of Congress. I have met hundreds of children and their parents in my congressional district in Texas and others across the U.S. who are affected by dyslexia, and they have shared their personal stories with me. One child I met recently was Eddie, a middle school student from Baltimore. He, along with his family, has been on a long journey to receive a proper diagnosis and find a supportive learning environment. After our meeting, his mother wrote me a letter explaining: ``In only 1 year, Eddie has gone from repeatedly missing recess because he would not `try harder,' a boy who would stare at his homework in defeat before he has even tried an assignment, to a boy now daring to dream of a career in the sciences.'' Eddie is very fortunate to have a mother who advocated for his proper education. He is now not only able to learn, but also to excel. His mother comments: ``He is a voracious reader and wants to join the Jet Propulsion Lab or work with NASA.'' I also have had the pleasure of meeting an Austin, Texas, resident Robbi Cooper and her son, Ben. They shared many stories with me about the hardships they have faced in their attempts to ensure Ben receives the best education possible. Ben has even taken his abilities one step further by becoming an advocate and has traveled to D.C. numerous times to lobby Congress so others can learn from his experiences. The bipartisan READ Act, which unanimously passed the Science Committee 2 weeks ago, will help ensure that all children like Eddie and Ben have the means to succeed. Nothing could be more important to them. I also want to acknowledge two young friends who are on the floor with me today, Leighton and Gipson, who have an interest in this bill too. The READ Act is a significant step in the right direction to help those with dyslexia. Thanks go to my Dyslexia Caucus co-chair, Representative Julia Brownley, and the other cosponsors of the READ Act, such as Congressman Don Beyer, who is handling the other side of this debate tonight, for their interest and support. And I urge my other colleagues to better the lives of millions of children and adults with dyslexia. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to thank Mr. Beyer for his generous comments. It has been nice working together with him on this particular bill. I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Virginia (Mrs. Comstock), who happens to be the chair of the Research and Technology Subcommittee of the full Science Committee.

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

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Palazzo), who is a member of the Appropriations Committee but, more importantly, is a former member of the Science Committee.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3033) to require the President's annual budget request to Congress each year to include a line item for the Research in Disabilities Education program of the National Science Foundation and to require the National Science Foundation to conduct research on dyslexia, as amended.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Johnson), who is a distinguished member of the Science Committee.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman), who is a member of the Science Committee.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Bucshon), who is a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee and a former member of the Science Committee.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. Mr. Speaker, I thank the Members on both sides of the aisle who have cosponsored the READ Act and spoken in favor of the bill. Today we can shine a light on dyslexia and help millions of Americans have a brighter and more prosperous future. I can think of no better way to honor Dyslexia Awareness Month than to pass the READ Act, a bill that will help students and individuals with dyslexia and the parents and teachers who support them in very practical ways. Jay Leno, Walt Disney, Steve Jobs, and Carol Greider, the 2009 Nobel Prize winner in medicine, among others, are some of the most recognized and brilliant creators and innovators who have struggled with dyslexia but have not let it limit them. We need to enable those with dyslexia to achieve their maximum potential. The READ Act will help accomplish this. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, on October 7, 2015, I was unable to vote on H.R. 3192, the Homebuyers Assistance Act, introduced by Rep. French Hill. I would have voted in support of final passage of H.R. 3192, roll call No. 540, had I been present. Additionally, I would have voted in support of H. Res. 461, roll call No. 538, to establish a select investigative panel on the Energy and Commerce Committee, introduced by Rep. Fred Upton.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate Mr. Leon Ewing, President and CEO of Firstmark Credit Union in San Antonio, on his over four decades of hard work and contributions to South Texas. On December 31, 2015, Mr. Ewing will retire from Firstmark Credit Union after 34 years, concluding a distinguished career in the credit union industry. Under Mr. Ewing's leadership, Firstmark Credit Union became the fourth largest credit union in San Antonio. In the local community, Mr. Ewing contributed his time and energy to San Antonio by serving on the boards of the San Antonio Chamber of Commerce and the Children's Hospital of San Antonio. He has earned the trust and respect of his colleagues, employees, and customers and we wish him all the best in the years ahead.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 1020) to define STEM education to include computer science, and to support existing STEM education programs at the National Science Foundation, with the Senate amendment thereto, and concur in the Senate amendment.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague from Pennsylvania and fellow member of the Judiciary Committee for yielding. Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment. The social cost of carbon is a flawed concept that should play no role in the environmental decisionmaking process. It is based on speculative formulas and has no basis in reality. Formulas can easily be manipulated to support any costly regulation. The social cost of carbon is a political tool the Obama administration uses to impose its extreme agenda on the American people. It is also another way that the administration tries to use secret science and data to justify questionable rulemaking. Speculating on the social cost of carbon should be restricted, not expanded. For these reasons, an agency should not use the social cost of carbon in its environmental review or in its environmental decisionmaking process. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. SMITH of Texas. I thank Chairman Goodlatte for yielding. A couple of things. First of all, we have found in the past that the judiciary, of course, always opposes anyone else changing these rules except for themselves. That is no surprise, that they object to this change that we propose today. That doesn't mean the change isn't a good one, but that is their history. If they didn't think of the change, they don't like it. Clearly, this is good for the American people because it reduces the number of frivolous lawsuits. The gentleman from Tennessee mentioned a poll a few minutes ago. I would like, first of all, to mention a poll that was taken when this rule was in effect in 1990. At that point, 751 Federal judges responded to that survey, and they overwhelmingly supported a rule 11 with mandatory sanctions. The gentleman mentioned, I believe, a 2005 survey. In that survey, only 278 judges responded. Over half of the judges who responded had no experience under this stronger rule 11 because they were appointed to the bench after 1992. So the 2005 survey tells us very little about how judges actually view the stronger versus the weaker rule 11. It is just amazing to me to hear individuals try to justify these frivolous lawsuits. There is no effort in this bill to deny individuals the right to file lawsuits if they have legitimate claims. But to try to justify frivolous lawsuits and lawsuits that are found to be frivolous by judges, to me, is so contrary to the best interest of Americans who are innocent of these charges. I just don't understand the opposition to this bill. Innocent Americans sacrifice reputations. They sacrifice money. They oftentimes lose their livelihoods to frivolous lawsuits. I think we ought to do everything we possibly can to reduce the number of these frivolous lawsuits.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. This particular rule of construction was a bipartisan effort led by Bobby Scott, a former member of the Judiciary Committee, to avoid the problem that you are concerned about, and that is that this bill in any way would seem to dampen or prohibit civil rights legislation. Again, this rule of construction was put in there to address the very problem that the gentleman is concerned about.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) for bringing this legislation to the House floor. I appreciate all of his efforts to do so, and I appreciate his taking the initiative on this and on so many other issues as chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Mr. Speaker, the Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act, known as LARA, is just over one-page long, but it would prevent the filing of hundreds of thousands of pages of frivolous lawsuits in Federal court. For example, frivolous lawsuits have been filed against The Weather Channel for failing to accurately predict storms, against television shows people claimed were too scary, and against fast food companies because inactive children gained weight. In other cases, prison inmates have sued alcohol companies, blaming them for a life of crime. A teacher sought damages from her school district based on her fear of children. A father demanded $40 million in compensation after his son was kicked off the track team for excessive absenteeism. There are many, many more examples. Frivolous lawsuits have simply become too common. Lawyers who bring these cases have everything to gain and nothing to lose under current rules, which permit plaintiffs' lawyers to file frivolous lawsuits, no matter how absurd the claims, without any penalty whatsoever. Meanwhile, defendants are often faced with years of litigation and substantial attorneys' fees. These cases have wrongly cost innocent Americans their reputations and their hard-earned dollars. They amount to legalized extortion because defendants must settle out of court rather than endure a more expensive trial. According to the research firm Towers Watson, the annual direct cost of American tort litigation now exceeds over $260 billion a year, or over $850 per person. Before 1993, it was mandatory for judges to impose sanctions, such as orders to pay for the other side's legal expenses when lawyers filed frivolous lawsuits. Then the Civil Rules Advisory Committee, an obscure branch of the courts, made penalties optional. This needs to be reversed by Congress. As Chairman Goodlatte noted, even President Obama has expressed a willingness to limit frivolous lawsuits. If the President is serious about stopping these meritless claims, he should support mandatory sanctions for frivolous lawsuits to avoid making frivolous promises. LARA requires lawyers who file frivolous lawsuits to pay the attorneys' fees and court costs of innocent defendants. It reverses the rules that made sanctions discretionary rather than mandatory. Further, LARA expressly provides that no claim under civil rights laws would be affected in any way, and I trust this will address the concerns expressed by the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen). I would like to direct his attention to page 2 of the bill, lines 18 to 23, which explicitly protect civil rights lawsuits. Opponents argue that reinstating mandatory sanctions for frivolous lawsuits impedes judicial discretion. This is patently false. Under LARA, judges retain the discretion to determine whether or not a claim is frivolous. If a judge determines that a claim is frivolous, they must award sanctions. This ensures that victims of frivolous lawsuits obtain compensation, but the decision to find a claim frivolous still remains with the judge. A report earlier this year from the Administrative Office of the United States Courts found that civil lawsuits increased by tens of thousands last year. Such an increase makes this legislation necessary in order to discourage abusive filings, which further strain court dockets with lengthy backlogs. The American people are looking for solutions to obvious lawsuit abuse. LARA restores accountability to our legal system by reinstating mandatory sanctions for attorneys who file these frivolous lawsuits. Though it will not stop all lawsuit abuse, LARA encourages attorneys to think twice before filing a frivolous lawsuit. I want to, again, thank Chairman Goodlatte for bringing this much- needed legislation to the House floor, and I ask my colleagues who oppose frivolous lawsuits and who want to protect hard-working Americans from false claims to support the Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act. Now, furthermore, Mr. Speaker, similar bills to this have passed in the last several Congresses, and I hope this legislation will be approved today.