Steve Scalise

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 551, and YEA on Roll Call No. 552.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, during my medical recovery, I missed the following Roll Call votes. Had I been present, I would have voted: June 15, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 308 June 20, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 309 Yea on Roll Call No. 310 June 21, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 311 Yea on Roll Call No. 312 Yea on Roll Call No. 313 Nay on Roll Call No. 314 Yea on Roll Call No. 315 June 22, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 316 Yea on Roll Call No. 317 Nay on Roll Call No. 318 Yea on Roll Call No. 319 June 23, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 320 Yea on Roll Call No. 321 Yea on Roll Call No. 322 June 26, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 323 Yea on Roll Call No. 324 June 27, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 325 Yea on Roll Call No. 326 Yea on Roll Call No. 327 Yea on Roll Call No. 328 Yea on Roll Call No. 329 Yea on Roll Call No. 330 June 28, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 331 Yea on Roll Call No. 332 Yea on Roll Call No. 333 Yea on Roll Call No. 334 Yea on Roll Call No. 335 Nay on Roll Call No. 336 Yea on Roll Call No. 337 Yea on Roll Call No. 338 June 29, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 339 Yea on Roll Call No. 340 Nay on Roll Call No. 341 Yea on Roll Call No. 342 Nay on Roll Call No. 343 Yea on Roll Call No. 344 July 11, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 345 Yea on Roll Call No. 346 July 12, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 347 Yea on Roll Call No. 348 Yea on Roll Call No. 349 Nay on Roll Call No. 350 Nay on Roll Call No. 351 Yea on Roll Call No. 352 July 13, 2017 Nay on Roll Call No. 353 Yea on Roll Call No. 354 Yea on Roll Call No. 355 Yea on Roll Call No. 356 Nay on Roll Call No. 357 Nay on Roll Call No. 358 Nay on Roll Call No. 359 Nay on Roll Call No. 360 Nay on Roll Call No. 361 Yea on Roll Call No. 362 Nay on Roll Call No. 363 Nay on Roll Call No. 364 Nay on Roll Call No. 365 Yea on Roll Call No. 366 Yea on Roll Call No. 367 Yea on Roll Call No. 368 Yea on Roll Call No. 369 Yea on Roll Call No. 370 Nay on Roll Call No. 371 July 14, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 372 Yea on Roll Call No. 373 Yea on Roll Call No. 374 Yea on Roll Call No. 375 Yea on Roll Call No. 376 Nay on Roll Call No. 377 Yea on Roll Call No. 378 July 17, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 379 Yea on Roll Call No. 380 Yea on Roll Call No. 381 July 18, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 382 Yea on Roll Call No. 383 Yea on Roll Call No. 384 Nay on Roll Call No. 385 Nay on Roll Call No. 386 Nay on Roll Call No. 387 Nay on Roll Call No. 388 Nay on Roll Call No. 389 Nay on Roll Call No. 390 Yea on Roll Call No. 391 July 19, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 392 Yea on Roll Call No. 393 Yea on Roll Call No. 394 Nay on Roll Call No. 395 Nay on Roll Call No. 396 Nay on Roll Call No. 397 Yea on Roll Call No. 398 Nay on Roll Call No. 399 Nay on Roll Call No. 400 Nay on Roll Call No. 401 Yea on Roll Call No. 402 July 20, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 403 Nay on Roll Call No. 404 Nay on Roll Call No. 405 Yea on Roll Call No. 406 July 24, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 407 Yea on Roll Call No. 408 Yea on Roll Call No. 409 July 25, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 410 Yea on Roll Call No. 411 Yea on Roll Call No. 412 Yea on Roll Call No. 413 July 26, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 414 Yea on Roll Call No. 415 Nay on Roll Call No. 416 Nay on Roll Call No. 417 Nay on Roll Call No. 418 Yea on Roll Call No. 419 Nay on Roll Call No. 420 Nay on Roll Call No. 421 Nay on Roll Call No. 422 Nay on Roll Call No. 423 Nay on Roll Call No. 424 Yea on Roll Call No. 425 July 27, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 426 Yea on Roll Call No. 427 Yea on Roll Call No. 428 Yea on Roll Call No. 429 Nay on Roll Call No. 430 Nay on Roll Call No. 431 Nay on Roll Call No. 432 Nay on Roll Call No. 433 Nay on Roll Call No. 434 Yea on Roll Call No. 435 July 28, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 436 Yea on Roll Call No. 437 Yea on Roll Call No. 438 September 5, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 439 Yea on Roll Call No. 440 September 6, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 441 Yea on Roll Call No. 442 Yea on Roll Call No. 443 Yea on Roll Call No. 444 Yea on Roll Call No. 445 Yea on Roll Call No. 446 Yea on Roll Call No. 447 Nay on Roll Call No. 448 Yea on Roll Call No. 449 Nay on Roll Call No. 450 Yea on Roll Call No. 451 Yea on Roll Call No. 452 Yea on Roll Call No. 453 Yea on Roll Call No. 454 Yea on Roll Call No. 455 Yea on Roll Call No. 456 September 7, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 457 Yea on Roll Call No. 458 Nay on Roll Call No. 459 Nay on Roll Call No. 460 Nay on Roll Call No. 461 Yea on Roll Call No. 462 Yea on Roll Call No. 463 Yea on Roll Call No. 464 Nay on Roll Call No. 465 Nay on Roll Call No. 466 Yea on Roll Call No. 467 Yea on Roll Call No. 468 Yea on Roll Call No. 469 Yea on Roll Call No. 470 Nay on Roll Call No. 471 Yea on Roll Call No. 472 Nay on Roll Call No. 473 Yea on Roll Call No. 474 Nay on Roll Call No. 475 Nay on Roll Call No. 476 Nay on Roll Call No. 477 Yea on Roll Call No. 478 Yea on Roll Call No. 479 September 8, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 480 Yea on Roll Call No. 481 Yea on Roll Call No. 482 Nay on Roll Call No. 483 Yea on Roll Call No. 484 September 12, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 485 September 13, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 486 Yea on Roll Call No. 487 Yea on Roll Call No. 488 Yea on Roll Call No. 489 Nay on Roll Call No. 490 Nay on Roll Call No. 491 Yea on Roll Call No. 492 Nay on Roll Call No. 493 Nay on Roll Call No. 494 Nay on Roll Call No. 495 Nay on Roll Call No. 496 Yea on Roll Call No. 497 Yea on Roll Call No. 498 Nay on Roll Call No. 499 Nay on Roll Call No. 500 Nay on Roll Call No. 501 Nay on Roll Call No. 502 Nay on Roll Call No. 503 Yea on Roll Call No. 504 Nay on Roll Call No. 505 Nay on Roll Call No. 506 Nay on Roll Call No. 507 Yea on Roll Call No. 508 Yea on Roll Call No. 509 Yea on Roll Call No. 510 Yea on Roll Call No. 511 Yea on Roll Call No. 512 Yea on Roll Call No. 513 Nay on Roll Call No. 514 Yea on Roll Call No. 515 September 14, 2017 Nay on Roll Call No. 516 Yea on Roll Call No. 517 Yea on Roll Call No. 518 Yea on Roll Call No. 519 Nay on Roll Call No. 520 Nay on Roll Call No. 521 Nay on Roll Call No. 522 Nay on Roll Call No. 523 Yea on Roll Call No. 524 Yea on Roll Call No. 525 Yea on Roll Call No. 526 Nay on Roll Call No. 527 Yea on Roll Call No. 528 Yea on Roll Call No. 529 September 25, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 530 Yea on Roll Call No. 531 September 26, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 532 Yea on Roll Call No. 533 Yea on Roll Call No. 534 Nay on Roll Call No. 535 Nay on Roll Call No. 536 Yea on Roll Call No. 537 September 27, 2017 Yea on Roll Call No. 538 Yea on Roll Call No. 539 Yea on Roll Call No. 540 September 28, 2017 Nay on Roll Call No. 541

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Wow. Mr. Speaker, you have no idea how great this feels to be back here at work in the people's House. As you can imagine, these last 3\1/2\ months have been pretty challenging times for me and my family. But if you look at the outpouring of love, of warmth, of prayer, my gosh, Jennifer and I have been overwhelmed with all of that outpouring. It has given us the strength to get through all of this and to get to this point today, and it starts with God. When I was laying out on that ball field, the first thing I did once I was down and I couldn't move anymore is, I just started to pray. And I will tell you, it gave me an unbelievable sense of calm knowing that at that point it was in God's hands. But I prayed for very specific things, and I will tell you, pretty much every one of those prayers was answered. There were some pretty challenging prayers I was putting in God's hands, but He really did deliver for me and my family. And it just gives you that renewed faith and understanding that the power of prayer is something that you just cannot underestimate. So I am definitely a living example that miracles really do happen. The first place I want to go to thank true angels along the way starts with the United States Capitol Police. When I was elected majority whip, as you know, the elected leadership has a security detail, and if anybody ever wondered why we are assigned security detail, I surely found out that day. Let me tell you, I want to specifically mention Crystal Griner and David Bailey. Crystal and David were assigned to my security detail that morning. Day in and day out, they are part of our family. Jennifer and I truly do treat them as part of our family because they are with us everywhere we go. On that day, it was no different. On June 14, they came at 6:30 in the morning. We arrived at the baseball field just to play and practice for a game of charity baseball. Nobody would have suspected what ensued, and yet, as soon as those shots were fired--I will tell you, when I was laying on the ground, one of the things I prayed for was that David and Crystal would be successful in carrying out their duties. Both David and Crystal are incredibly well-trained and incredibly professional. But when I was laying there, not long after the first couple of shots were fired, I could hear a different caliber of weapon. That told me that they had immediately engaged the shooter. Let me tell you, if they didn't act so quickly--even after being shot both themselves, they continued to engage the shooter and ultimately got him down, which not only saved my life, but saved the lives of a lot of other people that are here in this Chamber today. Crystal couldn't be with us today, but David Bailey is with us. David, you are my hero. You saved my life. Thank you so much. Tiger blood. I also owe thanks to a lot of the people who were on the field with me. Right after the shooter was down, a lot of my colleagues came and ran to come check on me. One I want to mention in particular is one of those things that Jennifer and I call the little miracles that happened that day and throughout the next few months of our recovery. We happened to have Brad Wenstrup on the field that day, and he was one of the first to come to my side. As you know, Brad is not only a doctor, but he is a decorated Army Ranger who served in combat. And one of his roles and missions was to take care of people that were wounded before they went off on the helicopter to go get prepared. Who would have thought that God would have put Brad out there on that field with me because the tourniquet he applied, many will tell you, saved my life so that I could actually make it to the hospital in time with all of the blood loss. So, Brad, where are you at? Right down in front. Once I arrived at MedStar Washington Hospital Center, I was a little bit out of it at that point. But luckily, I ended up in the trusted hands of Dr. Jack Sava and his great team over at MedStar. They gave me a second chance at life. Through many, many surgeries, where my life was truly in the balance in a few of those, they did a wonderful job at making sure that I was well taken care of and, ultimately, made it through that point so I could get to Dr. Golden and his team who actually put me back together again, which was quite a task, to the point where I am actually able to relearn how to walk again. So, Dr. Sava, Dr. Golden, thank you for being here and thanks for your team's work. Above all else, I want to thank my lovely wife, Jennifer. Those of you who know her know how strong Jennifer is. She is an incredibly warm and loving wife, and she is an incredible mother to our children. Somehow, through the late nights and the surgeries and all of the other things, she managed to hold our family together, to make sure that Harrison and Madison were cared for as well. Still, to this day, she is not only by my side, but she is also serving as a great mother. I am lucky to have you. Thanks for being here. I love you, Sweetheart. While it has been a challenging time for my family, the thing that really overwhelmed us from the start was the outpouring of love and warmth and prayers. From southeast Louisiana, the district that I represent, we saw blood drives at St. Catherine of Siena Parish. We saw prayer groups at First United Methodist Church in Slidell. But what we also saw were prayer groups and well-wishes being given from people that we never met before throughout all of your districts. You shared it with me, and it was one of those things that was hard for us to completely comprehend that you had people from all walks of life that had never met me before, and yet, they saw what had happened and they just wanted to offer prayers. Let me tell you, to each and every one of you--and please convey it to your constituents, and I sure convey it to my constituents back home--that warmth and love gave us just incredible strength that you can't imagine during some really, really difficult times. So that is one more example of the power of prayer. Something else I saw firsthand wasn't a surprise to me, but it was the outpouring of love from you, my colleagues, both Republican and Democrat. I know right after the shooting--we were practicing on the Republican side and the Democrats were practicing too--my colleague and friend, and sometimes archrival in baseball from back home in New Orleans--unfortunately, the star of the game too many times--Cedric Richmond somehow figured out which hospital I was sent to, and he got there. He was probably the first person there on the scene, in his baseball uniform, to check on me. So many others of you, again, both Republican and Democrat, reached out in ways that I can't express the gratitude and how much it means to me, Jennifer, and our whole family. It really does show the warm side of Congress that very few people get to see. I want to thank each and every one of you for that. You don't know how much it meant to me. When I came back into this Chamber here today, just seeing the faces of all of you, it just means more to me than you can imagine. So thanks for all of that love and support. A lot of people ask: Did the event change you? And I think those of you who know me know I am an optimistic person. I am just a fun-loving person. I am from south Louisiana, and we believe you work hard and you play hard and joie de vivre. Is an event like this really going to change that? The first thing I can tell you is, yes, it changed me, but not in the ways you might think. It has only strengthened my faith in God, and it has really crystallized what shows up as the goodness in people. I got to see that goodness in people. While some people might focus on a tragic event and an evil act, to me, all I remember are the thousands of acts of kindness and love and warmth that came out of this and kept me going through all of it and, again, just reemphasized just how wonderful most people are and how much compassion there is out there. Finally, I want to talk about something that I guess hit me and probably struck me more than anything that I was not expecting, and that was the outpouring of love and support from world leaders, people I have met and have known. Benjamin Netanyahu and I have had some incredible conversations from the hospital. And Theresa May, King Abdullah of Jordan--leaders that so many of us have met--reached out. But other world leaders also reached out, people I had never met before. That touched me in a different way because each and every one of us, we come here and we fight for the things that we believe in. I have passionate beliefs. For some reason, some of you don't agree with all of those. But it is so important that we come up here. We are the people's House. This is the place where these ideas are supposed to be debated, and we fight through those issues. But, ultimately, we come together on whatever the board shows is 218. If you can put the majority together, that is what rules the day. It is so important that, as we are having those political battles, we don't make them personal. One of the things I saw--and I guess this is the thing that really kept coming back to me--is I tried to make sense of all of this. In comprehending the outpouring of love that I saw, it kept coming back to those world leaders. Why would leaders from around the world that I had never met before reach out and say: ``Steve, we hope you can get back to work. We hope you can come through this.''? And what it says is, sure, they cared about my wellbeing, but more than that, they saw this as an attack on all of us. They saw this as an attack on the institution of the United States Congress and our government. And they really count on us to be successful. Look, we all know the United States is the leader of the free world. It is something that we have, frankly, had the honor as a country to hold as a distinction for generations. And yet, when you look at that title, what it really means is, is that there are people all around the world that want freedom, maybe that have freedom, but they know the United States being strong is critical to the rest of the world having the opportunity for freedom. That is why I am so excited to be back because, as we are fighting through the issues of the day, let's just keep in mind that we rise above the challenges of the day and understand that it is not just us and our constituents and the country, the United States, that is counting on our being successful. People all around the world who believe in freedom are counting on us as well, and we will deliver for them. That is why I am so honored to be back here in the House serving with you. God bless each and every one of you, and God bless the United States of America. (By unanimous consent, Ms. PELOSI was allowed to speak out of order.) Answered Prayers

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Chairman, I want to first thank my colleague from Ohio for his leadership on bringing forth this important legislation to actually help us focus more resources on killing mosquitoes, especially as the mosquito season starts, as we see so many threats with Zika, with West Nile, just the damage that we see happening around our country from mosquitoes. We have decided we are going to put resources into killing mosquitoes, and then we come about and find out about these regulations that were imposed by the courts in a way that actually makes it harder for us to kill mosquitoes. What you hear so often from people around the country is: Why is it that you have got things happening out of Washington that make no sense? Congressman Gibbs identified one of those areas and said it really doesn't make sense. We tried to work through a different remedy to try to get the administration to fix it, and they pointed to a court case that keeps them from fixing it. It is one of the big frustrations you have that it actually takes an act of Congress to bring common sense into the process of killing mosquitoes, for goodness sake. But here we are doing it. At least we are spending the people's business doing something that actually injects common sense back into the things that people do in their daily lives. All across our community and across this country, you have local governments that are really the ones that focus on killing mosquitoes, and we started hearing about this problem. Of course, Mr. Chairman, we asked the EPA to identify just how much this is actually costing. So as everybody scrambles and fights and you hear agencies saying ``I need more money to do this,'' ``I need more money to do that,'' we need to be more responsible with the taxpayers' money, and people are saying, ``Live within your means.'' And we have asked the EPA. The EPA, Mr. Chairman, told us that the cost of implementing these EPA regulations is an extra $50 million a year. Think of how ludicrous that is. Because of the way the EPA is implementing the law, as we are trying to kill more mosquitoes, it is costing $50 million a year to comply with burdensome, duplicative regulations--rather than killing mosquitoes. We should be spending that money, $50 million, killing more mosquitoes, not killing trees to comply with ridiculous regulations. So I want to commend my colleague from Ohio for bringing this back. The House passed this in a very bipartisan way last Congress. We didn't get it all the way to the President's desk. So this year, hopefully, we will get this bill not only passed through the House, but through the Senate and to President Trump's desk, where he will sign a bill that injects common sense back into the process of killing mosquitoes. Let's spend our money killing mosquitoes, not killing trees and having to comply with ridiculous regulations that come out of Washington and make no sense. Let's pass this bill.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to honor an American hero. Jeremy ``Scott'' McGuire was a special agent assigned to the National Security Investigations Division at the Department of Homeland Security in New Orleans. Scott began his career in law enforcement while pursuing a bachelor's degree in criminal justice at the University of Southern Mississippi, where he received the Most Outstanding Undergraduate Pursuing a Career in Law Enforcement Award. After graduating with honors from USM, Scott was hired by the former U.S. Customs Service, where he was an import specialist. After the September 11 terrorist attacks, Scott was selected to be a special agent with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement team at the Department of Homeland Security. There, he received numerous awards and citations while he investigated successes that included preventing the export of radioactive material in Iraq and halting an attempt to smuggle military aircraft parts to Pakistan, just to name a few examples. On January 25 of 2016, Scott was killed in the line of duty while conducting investigations to dismantle transnational criminal and terrorist organizations that threaten the United States. Scott will forever be in our hearts and minds. I want to thank his family for being here with us in the balcony.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairwoman of the Budget Committee for yielding. I was in strong support of this bill, Mr. Speaker, that finally provides relief to the American people across this country from the failures of ObamaCare. Just how bad is it failing? You don't have to look any further than what happened in Iowa yesterday, where literally they are going to have in 94 out of 99 counties nobody to write insurance for people that are in the ObamaCare exchanges. So what do the people, Mr. Speaker, that are opposed to this bill say to those millions of people in Iowa who are about to have no place to go to get health care? What are the people that oppose this bill, Mr. Speaker, going to say to the millions of people with preexisting conditions across the country who are being faced with double-digit increases in their health insurance every year and, oh, by the way, premiums and deductibles as high as over $10,000, which are creaming those folks that are struggling under the weight of this bill? So what we are replacing it with, Mr. Speaker, are reforms that actually lower premiums, that actually put patients back in charge of their healthcare decisions so that elitists up here in Washington won't tell you what you have to buy. You actually get to make that choice yourself. You get to focus on plans that are good for your family at lower costs so that you can be in charge. And, by the way, reforming the Medicaid system, one of the most broken forms of health care so that States actually have the ability to innovate and help low-income families. This bill is important, Mr. Speaker, to rescue the American people from a law that has failed dismally. Let's end the skyrocketing premium increases. Let's lower costs and put patients back in charge of their healthcare decisions.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor an incredible man, Capitol Police Special Agent Angel Morales, who is retiring after 21 years on the force. Angel has dedicated his entire life to serving our country. From 1986 to 1991, he put on the uniform of our country serving in the U.S. Army, working his way up to sergeant. From there, Angel traded his Army uniform for a police uniform and served with the D.C. Metro Police. Starting in 1996, Angel joined the Capitol Police force, where he has protected thousands of visitors, staff, and Members of Congress who come through our Nation's Capitol every single day. Since 1998, Angel has been assigned to the United States Capitol Police Dignitary Protection Division, working with many House leaders, including Dick Armey, Roy Blunt, Eric Cantor, and, for the last 3 years, as the leader of my detail team. I would like to thank Angel's wife, Susan, and his two kids, Tatiana and Mike, for selflessly allowing Angel to serve our Nation in these roles. Angel, on behalf of my family and the entire Capitol family, thanks for your service. We will miss you, young man.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for bringing forward this legislation. The FTC's light touch in case-by-case enforcement had fostered an internet economy that has become the envy of the world, much to the benefit of all American families and consumers across this country. But rather than following the FTC's proven framework of privacy protection, the FCC came in and overreached and missed the mark with these rules, injecting more regulation into the internet ecosystem. With all due respect, the internet was not broken and did not need the Federal Government to come in and try to fix it. The bottom line is that families expect and deserve to be protected online with a set of robust and uniform privacy protections. These rules simply do not live up to that standard. Rather than regulating based on the sensitivity of our data, these rules are applied unevenly, based on what type of company you are or what kind of technology you use. Consumers should feel assured online that there is a cop on the beat with a track record of success, not an agency with a history of regulatory overreach. These midnight rules are harmful, inconsistent, and should be repealed. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to adopt this important resolution.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey for yielding and for managing the time here. I bring forward this FCC Consolidated Reporting Act because this is a bill that focuses on streamlining government. It focuses on really establishing and identifying areas where we need to improve competition in the telecommunications marketplace and make recommendations to Congress that can help us make better policy for the country. At the same time, we are eliminating a lot of unnecessary reports that are currently burdening not only the people who are out there creating jobs but also the FCC by having eight different reports that are required annually to be filed and to be evaluated by the FCC at disparate times throughout the year, to consolidate all that into one report, one report that focuses on the entire telecommunications marketplace on a biennial basis. That report would come in at the end of the 2-year period so that each new Congress would be presented with very relevant and much more timely information that would help each Congress evaluate if changes and reforms need to be made to the law. What laws am I talking about, Mr. Speaker? I am talking about in the current marketplace some of these various disparate reports where you might have throughout the year a requirement where a report has to look just at the satellite industry or a report looks just at the cable industry or a report looks just at the landline industry. Mr. Speaker, as we know, all of these industries now compete against each other, and whether you are getting your telecommunications data at home, through a cable, through fiber, through satellite, on your mobile device, it is all ultimately the same content that people are consuming, and all of these companies are competing against each other. It is not like in the old days where you just had telephone lines and the telephone companies would compete against each other, and then cable companies would compete against each other. Now it is a consolidated marketplace, and it is time that we get all these disparate reports that are outdated and bring them all into one place. When you look at what this means, they say time is money, and so when all of these reports are required by Federal law, where all of these different entities have to put together reports and a lot of times create documents, paperwork that is unnecessary, that is outdated, that doesn't really reflect what is happening in the marketplace, that is time that they can better spend creating jobs, Mr. Speaker. It is time they can better spend reinvesting so that we can have better broadband as consumers, families across the country that use all of this great telecommunications infrastructure. Let's focus more on competing and creating a better marketplace. Something else this bill does is get rid of some outdated laws, Mr. Speaker. Do you know there is still a requirement in Federal law, that we get rid of in this bill, that there is a requirement every year that there has to be a telegraph report that studies competition in the telegraph industry. Mr. Speaker, this might have been useful back in 1934 when Congress mandated it. You can go back to the 1830s when Samuel Morse invented the telegraph, but we don't really need to be spending time and legal requirements that there be a report filed annually on competition in the telegraph industry. We get rid of that in this bill. So often we hear from people around the country, when Congress is contemplating new laws, when are they going to get rid of some of the old laws that are unnecessary on the books? We actually do that in this bill. This has bipartisan support. It is a commonsense piece of legislation that actually streamlines government and focuses on helping increase competition for families across this country. I urge adoption of this piece of legislation.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman from Tennessee for bringing this budget resolution to the floor. Mr. Chairman, ObamaCare has failed the American people. And if you go back to the beginning, it was created with a series of lies to the American people. We all remember: if you like what you have, you can keep it. How has that worked out for millions of Americans who lost the plans that they liked and now cannot keep that plan? What about the promise, Mr. Chairman, that premiums would go down by $2,500? President Obama made that claim. And today, in States all across the Nation, you are seeing premiums go up, on average, 25 percent, and that is on top of double-digit increases every single year ObamaCare has been in effect. This law is not working. It is failing families. It is costing jobs across our economy. It is time to repeal this law and actually replace it with reforms that put patients back in charge of their medical decisions with their doctors. What a great concept that would be. It is about time we focus on lowering the cost of health care and giving people real choices. In so many markets across the country--and it is a growing number--families have only one choice for health care now because ObamaCare has forced so many people out of the marketplace, which means you as a family don't have any choices, because one choice means it is a monopoly. And you wonder why the costs are skyrocketing. Mr. Chairman, this should not be about preserving somebody's legacy. It should be about fulfilling those promises to the American people that were broken. And we are here to fulfill that promise--how refreshing it is that you have people that ran for years saying we are going to repeal ObamaCare--with a President who is ready to sign the bill to repeal ObamaCare. Today, just in the second week of this new Congress, we are taking the first step to fulfill that promise to the American people, to put their healthcare decisions back in their hands with costs that they can afford, and real choices that work for all Americans.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. I thank the gentleman from Kentucky for his leadership in bringing this critical piece of legislation forward. Mr. Speaker, I specifically want to talk about the important language that is in this bill to help the people of south Louisiana recover from the devastating flooding that we saw last month. Over 100,000 houses were damaged, and thousands of families are still making the decision of whether or not they are going to be able to rebuild. This legislation gives them not only hope but a serious down payment so that people will know that the Federal Government is there to help them get back in their homes and rebuild their communities at such a vital stage. We saw so many positive things come out of the resiliency of the people of Louisiana. You saw the Cajun Navy--citizens--just helping their fellow neighbors, saving people's lives over and over again, and faith-based organizations coming together. When you see the worst of times, like we did during that tragic flooding, you also see the best in people, and this bill makes a serious down payment to help those people get back in their homes and rebuild their communities. I urge all of my colleagues to vote for this bill so that we can do the work of the people of this great Nation.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding and for his leadership in bringing this bill to the floor. Mr. Chairman, back in June of 2015, President Obama said: ``It is United States policy to deny hostage-takers the benefits of ransom, prisoner releases, policy changes, or other acts of concession.'' That was back in 2015. Of course, just 6 months later, President Obama released seven Iranians and sent $400 million in cash to Iran in exchange for Americans held hostage. When the initial word came out that $400 million was sent in unmarked bills on an unmarked plane to, in essence, exchange that money for American hostages, it sent a chilling signal all across the world. Not only was the administration completing a prisoner swap, but the administration was actually cowering to the Iranians' request for a cash payment. $400 million was converted into European currency, flown through Geneva, and then transferred to Iran just as the American hostages were released. But what we heard from the White House were denials, actually calling us out, saying it wasn't a ransom payment, despite the clearly coordinated series of events. Mr. Chairman, nonetheless, we learn that the President's own Justice Department warned that this cash payment would signal a change in U.S. ransom policy and, of course, the Iranians themselves consider it a ransom payment. In fact, the Iranians bragged that they received cash ransom from the United States. Nonetheless, the administration continues to refuse to confront this problem and how it actually makes America less safe. And we have seen that play out. Since this hostage ransom payment, more Americans and other Westerners have been taken hostage because the President put a bounty on the heads of Americans and other Westerners. We have also learned there is another $1.3 billion sent to Iran in cash. The administration said that there was no other way to send the payment; that they couldn't wire it. But, of course, since then, we have learned that there have been wire transfers made to Iran. So the President continued to mislead the American people about this serious breach of American protocol as it deals with Iran. Now, a serious question to ask is: Where is that $1.7 billion going? And not if, but how much of that $1.7 billion is going to end up in the hands of Hezbollah, Hamas, and other terrorist organizations? After all, Iran is the largest state sponsor of terror. I think these are all important questions that need to be answered, Mr. Chairman. So all of these serious questions need to be answered by the administration, which has continued throughout this entire process of misleading the American people about what really happened. And the American people are demanding answers. This bill by Chairman Royce is a serious response to stop these kinds of cash ransom payments from ever happening again to make America less safe. I appreciate all of my colleagues voting for this.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from Tennessee for yielding and for her leadership not only on this bill, but especially for her work as chair of the Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives. When we talk about this legislation, the Conscience Protection Act, I do want to also thank the author of the bill, Diane Black, as well as Dr. John Fleming, who helped lead this effort to draft it, Chairman Joe Pitts, and Chris Smith as well. Madam Speaker, it is so important that we pass the Conscience Protection Act. If you look at our Bill of Rights, our Constitution, and the framework that gives people all across this country true religious freedom, we recognize now that religious freedom is under attack. You don't need to look any further than the State of California which passed a law that really was the genesis for bringing this bill forward, because under the California law, it literally started forcing people to perform abortions against their own faith. We have heard about the story of Cathy DeCarlo, a nurse who was forced to participate in an abortion of a baby who was 22 weeks old at delivery. This should not happen in the United States of America. People should not be forced to violate their religious freedom, yet it is going on because this administration has not been enforcing the law. The Weldon amendment, which has been on the books since 2004, gives that very religious freedom protection that is now in jeopardy. Madam Speaker, what we are doing with this bill is restoring the law, but we are doing two specific things: First, we are making it very clear that this annual appropriations language becomes permanent. We shouldn't have to rely every year on reestablishing the law. Let's make this law permanent giving that religious freedom protection. Second, we are no longer depending on HHS alone, which is not doing its job to enforce the law. We actually give people the ability to enforce the law themselves and let government work for them in protecting their religious freedoms. It is critically important that we pass the Conscience Protection Act. I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Pennsylvania for yielding, but especially for taking the lead on this issue. Mr. Speaker, it has been decades since Congress has reformed our mental health laws. Unfortunately, we have seen so many negative aspects since then. Suicide rates are through the roof. There are so many other problems throughout our country. It has touched every community in this Nation. We see a growing problem with mental health. This bill really refocuses efforts, but it also puts a different priority on Federal grants and Federal agencies to force them to do a better job of addressing these problems. It also helps families to get more involved in the mental health problems that their own children face. Right now, some Federal laws make it harder for parents to help their own children. These kinds of serious problems have been complicated to work through. Mr. Speaker, when you look at the fact that it has been decades, there is a reason why. This is hard work. It is complicated work. This bill has been at least 3 years in the making, and so it is very important that we bring this bill to the floor today and pass it over to the Senate. This is not only reform that can pass the House, but reform that actually get signed by the President and make a real difference and impact in improving people's lives.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, Chairman McCaul, for bringing this package of bills to the House floor, and I especially want to thank Representatives Fleischmann, Katko, and Loudermilk for their leadership in saying that we need to focus our efforts on the problem that we have in this country, and that is terrorists are radicalizing Americans. Time after time now we have seen more than a dozen terrorist attacks on American soil in the last 7 years. Unfortunately, some people around this town want to try to take advantage of that as an opportunity to talk about gun control, taking away rights of law-abiding citizens, Mr. Speaker, instead of focusing on the problem. They don't just use guns. They use pressure cookers, they use pipe bombs, they use axes, they use the Internet to recruit Americans. It is time we put a sharper focus on solving this problem and addressing the fact that Americans are being radicalized and carrying out terrorist attacks here in the United States. It is going to continue until there is a sharper focus. This package of bills puts the focus where it needs to be. It is time for the President to join with us to actually speak out in getting more tools to our intelligence agencies to go and do a better job of rooting out the attacks that are here on our homefront. This is no hypothetical problem. Terrorism has come to the United States. Our hearts and prayers are with the victims of the attack in Orlando as well as the attacks that we have seen all throughout this country and that, no doubt, are being planned right now against Americans here on our home soil. It is time that we take action. I am so glad that the House has already moved a package of bills. This package right here that we are passing today puts a sharper focus on the real problem, and that is rooting out radicalization of Americans on our home soil. Let's stop the terrorism here. Pass this bill.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Tennessee for yielding. I am proud to bring forward this legislation, Mr. Speaker, that expresses the strong sense of Congress that a carbon tax would be detrimental to the United States economy. If you look at what this administration has done through radical rules and regulations, through all of its agencies, starting with the EPA, with the IRS, with the NLRB, the whole alphabet soup of Federal agencies that every morning wake up trying to figure out how to make it harder for our economy to get moving again, how to make it harder for people to create jobs in America, frankly, the results of these radical regulations are shifting and running jobs away, out of our country to foreign countries like China, like India, and they want to keep it going. This is not a new concept, Mr. Speaker. They tried this years ago when they brought through the cap-and-trade bill. Passed out of the House, it couldn't even pass in the Senate when they had a supermajority in the Senate with 60 votes because it was such a detrimental idea that would devastate our economy. Yet even with that defeat, President Obama still tries to come back with a carbon tax through other means, whether it is regulations or whether it is superimposed carbon taxes through the EPA and some of the other things they are doing. We have had hearings on this, Mr. Speaker. There is data all around that confirms how devastating a carbon tax would be to the United States economy. You can just look at what some of the outside groups that look at this said. The National Association of Manufacturers, the people that make things in America, have confirmed we would lose more than a million jobs in America if a carbon tax was imposed. Where would those jobs go? They would go to countries, ironically, that don't have the good environmental standards we already have. So they would go to countries like China and India where, if you are concerned about carbon going into the atmosphere, the things that they do to produce the same things we produce here in America, it creates more than five times the amount of carbon in those countries. So you are shifting jobs out of America to send it to countries where you would actually create more carbon. They talk about somehow being able to create policy that will stop hurricanes and change the sea level rising, for goodness sake, as if some policy is going to do that. By the way, the result of their policies will increase carbon in the Earth's atmosphere. But let's not even talk about that. Let's actually talk about the track record of this administration that now wants to control the Earth's temperature. They spent over $500 million and couldn't even create a Web site to take your health insurance requests, healthcare.gov. Remember that? Well, this same group now thinks they can control the Earth's temperature through radical policies. Again, let's look at the devastating impact these policies would have. They wouldn't work, first of all, but they would have a devastating impact on the middle class of this country. The Congressional Budget Office, our own Congressional Budget Office that looked at this, said a carbon tax would actually hit low-income people the hardest, even harder than high-income people. It would have a devastating impact on those people who are least able to afford it because it would increase the cost of everything they do. It would increase your food costs at the grocery store. It would increase, of course, what you pay at the pump. It would increase your electricity prices.

Mr. SCALISE. The Heritage Foundation looked at this and said that this kind of carbon tax would actually increase the cost of everything that families buy by over $1,400 per family. Families are going to pay $1,400 more every year for the cost of a carbon tax that the other side wants to defend. And to yield what? To just yield an opportunity for countries like China and India to grow their economies at the expense of ours. So, Mr. Speaker, if you look at what they are trying to do--and, again, if you want to do this, bring it forward as an idea in legislation. They tried it with cap-and-trade, and it got defeated when Democrats controlled everything. There is bipartisanship on this issue, and the bipartisanship is in opposition to a carbon tax. So why don't we go on record and be very clear about it, not just that it is bad policy, but also to reaffirm how devastating it would be for the United States economy. It shouldn't move forward. The President needs to stop this radical agenda and instead focus on reversing the depressing economic activity that we have seen in this country since he has been President because of these kinds of policies. Let's get real economic growth. Let's bring those jobs back to the United States. Let's reject a carbon tax. I urge adoption of this resolution.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this Zika Vector Control Act and want to commend Congressman Gibbs for his leadership in bringing this forward as we work here in the House to combat Zika. The House is doing a number of things this week. Number one, we are moving legislation to reprioritize money so that there will be a total of $1.2 billion of moneys allocated to combat Zika. But, in addition, while we are fighting Zika and giving not only Federal, but local agencies the resources they need to combat this terrible disease from spreading, we know, and CDC has told us, that it is spread by mosquitos. Mosquitos are the agents that spread Zika. So here we have got Congressman Gibbs identifying a problem where the EPA is making it harder to actually kill mosquitos. I come from south Louisiana. We have a lot of mosquitos in south Louisiana, and we don't like them. We actually spray using federally approved pesticides to kill mosquitos where they breed. Where do they breed, Mr. Speaker? They breed by water. They breed by sources of water. So you have got federally approved sprays and pesticides that are used to go and kill the mosquitos so that they can't spread Zika, and yet the EPA comes in and has a rule that makes it harder and more expensive to actually go kill mosquitos. All that Congressman Gibbs is saying is let's block that rule because local governments, by the way, still control this. It is our local governments, our parishes and counties, that are doing the spraying. They understand how to comply with their own local laws. They are not going to do anything to jeopardize groundwater, but what they want to do is kill mosquitos so that the mosquitos don't spread Zika to our constituents. If you look, this legislation actually was passed. It actually was passed in 2011 when we were responding to West Nile. So the House did pass this legislation already, and it was good legislation then. In fact, it got a wide bipartisan vote. All of a sudden, some people want to politicize it. This isn't a political issue. This is about common sense. Mr. Speaker, the EPA is just putting additional hurdles in place. It is not like they are saying don't spray these pesticides. They are just jacking up the costs. It is an EPA money grab that makes it more expensive and more difficult to actually go kill mosquitos. So while we are debating whether or not to prioritize more money for Zika--which we are doing, by the way, $1.2 billion worth--shouldn't we make sure that the money can actually be used to effectively kill the mosquitos that spread Zika? If the EPA has got a rule that makes no sense and makes it harder to kill mosquitos, shouldn't we remove that rule and that barrier and allow and trust our local governments? There are some people up here who think that Washington knows best, and if your local parish or county knows what they need to do to control the mosquito population in their parish or county, shouldn't they be able to do it? Or you don't trust them; you don't want to give them the ability to go kill mosquitos. Well, I do trust our local governments, and I want to give them the tools that they need to actually go and kill mosquitos at the source where they breed, and that is near sources of water. It is not in a way that contaminates groundwater at all. In fact, EPA still gives these permits out, but it just costs a lot more money to go and kill the mosquitos. So let's remove that burden so we can kill more mosquitos and stop Zika from spreading. Mr. Speaker, it is a really good, commonsense piece of legislation, and I urge its adoption.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. I thank my friend from Tennessee for bringing this legislation forward. Mr. Speaker, what we are trying to do here is help people and encourage more savings. 401(k) plans were so good at making it easy for people to save money for their retirement. Frankly, we should be doing as much as we can here in Washington to make it even easier to encourage more people to save for their retirement. But here comes the Department of Labor and, literally, with this massive document to define one word--what the term ``fiduciary'' means--is going to make it dramatically harder for Americans to save money for their retirement. Anybody who thinks that this massive document, defining the ability for people to save money, is going to make it easier or make it less costly to save money doesn't understand just how many teams of lawyers will be employed to go and try to figure out what this means. What it will mean, Mr. Speaker, is that the cost for hardworking taxpayers to go and put more money in their retirement is going to go up dramatically. It also means--and you want to talk about a perverse incentive--the rule, this massive rule, actually imposes even more burdens on small businesses than it does on large businesses. So the very engine of our economy--small businesses--will literally have to face the question of whether or not they can even afford to provide 401(k) services to their employees. Employees love the ability to have a 401(k). Employees also move around a lot from job to job and enjoy the ability to roll over their 401(k), and this massive rule actually makes it nearly impossible for people to roll over their 401(k), dramatically increasing the cost. Why would you want to do that? What we are trying to do here is say: Go back to the drawing board. This rule makes no sense. This rule actually hurts the ability for hardworking taxpayers to save money for their retirement, the exact opposite thing the Federal Government should be doing. I applaud my friend from Tennessee for bringing this forward, and I urge adoption.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Goodlatte for moving this bill through his committee. I especially thank Congressman Yoder of Kansas for bringing this bill forward and for being bold enough to say let's modernize a law that is so outdated that it goes back to 1986, governing email communication when we didn't even have email and text messages. Why do we want to do this? We want to do it because Federal agencies are abusing this law to invade the privacy of hardworking, law-abiding citizens all across this country. Mr. Speaker, this is a document from the Internal Revenue Service titled ``Search Warrant Handbook.'' In this document by the IRS, their protocol says: ``In general, the Fourth Amendment does not protect communications held in electronic storage, such as email messages stored on a server, because internet users do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in such communications.'' The IRS has made it clear that they don't believe that American citizens have a Fourth Amendment protection of privacy for their email communications. The IRS has gone further and is actually reading emails of American citizens, and no one across the country knows about it unless the IRS finds something that then they are going to go after you criminally on. So they are reading the private emails, Mr. Speaker, of American citizens every single day, and they have been doing it for years. It is time for this abuse of power to end. We need to pass this bill with strong bipartisan support, send it over to the Senate, and get it to the President's desk so that American citizens have real privacy protections that they deserve, that they think they have, but they don't have, Mr. Speaker, because Federal agencies like the IRS today are reading the private emails of American citizens and using them against them. It is wrong. They ought to go get a warrant, but they should not be reading our private emails when people haven't done anything wrong. Let's pass this bill.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I really want to thank the gentlewoman from South Dakota for her leadership in bringing this bill forward. Mr. Speaker, this bill is about restoring trust. This bill is about holding the IRS accountable. Here we are, in a week where Americans had to file their tax returns. And so often, just the letters I-R-S send a chilling effect through people when they hear those letters. Yet, you look at the arrogance over at the IRS, just the attitude that they have and the disdain it seems that they have towards the very people who pay their bills--the taxpayers. Here you have a case where people who have been fired by the IRS for abusing their positions are actually being rehired back to the IRS. Again, this is the kind of disdain that disgusts people as they fear the IRS. The IRS ought to have the same fear towards the people who pay their salaries as people get when they get that letter from the IRS. Mr. Speaker, we have had inspector general reports in the Treasury Department. The inspector general found over 140 IRS agents aren't even accurate in their taxes. The very people who are responsible for auditing American citizens aren't even paying their own taxes. This is the kind of disregard for the American people that we are seeing over at the IRS, and it is time to rein it in. It is time to bring some accountability and transparency back to the IRS. Who is afraid of that? What is so wrong with saying: If somebody has been fired for cause over at the IRS, with the access they have to such sensitive personal information of taxpayers, why should they be rehired back? It is just basic common sense that if somebody has abused their position at the IRS, enough is enough, and they shouldn't be able to return and have access to that sensitive information anymore. I want to applaud, again, the gentlewoman from South Dakota for bringing this commonsense bill forward. I would urge adoption later on when we have this vote on the House floor.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. I thank my colleague from Missouri for bringing this bill to the floor and for his leadership in holding the IRS accountable. Mr. Speaker, I guess we should start with the question of who is attacking whom. When you look at the actions of the IRS, especially in the last few years--and we have exposed this through our oversight here in this House majority--we have found it is the IRS that has been attacking the hardworking taxpayers of this country. It has not only been documented, but it has come out in hearings that the IRS was actually targeting people--American citizens--based on their political views. The IRS was. You could expect this, maybe, in a Third World country where the government would actually be attacking people based on their political views, but, here in America, this IRS was doing just that, and we exposed it. One is seeing with the bill that Congressman Smith is bringing forward that the IRS has created, in essence, a slush fund, using user fees for things that weren't even intended and that aren't even in the purview of Congress. What are they afraid of? Why are they afraid of having some real transparency so that we can actually hold the IRS accountable for these user fees? Hundreds of millions of dollars of user fees, by the way, are paid by hardworking families out there who are struggling to get by. When somebody actually calls the IRS hotline right now, estimates are that fewer than 40 percent of Americans who call the IRS hotline to get help are able to get help. The IRS is not helping people they are supposed to be helping. They have these slush funds, and they don't want them to be under the purview of Congress? What are they afraid of hiding? Is it, maybe, that we are going to expose more things, like they are using taxpayer money to target people? Maybe we are going to expose more things, like they were actually hiring people who were fired from the IRS because they were improperly accessing people's taxpayer data, or the fact that they have given out bonuses to people when they can't even show they have a customer service plan. When one is looking at so many abuses by the IRS, it is an agency that is out of control. Now we have a bill by the gentleman from Missouri to at least bring some of that into the purview of Congress so that it is exposed in the sunshine of transparency. Why be against transparency? Let's pass this bill.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. I thank Chairman Walden, and I want to thank my colleague, Congressman Kinzinger, for his leadership on bringing this bill to the floor. Mr. Chair, what we are trying to do here is to continue to allow the great innovation that we have seen from the technology industry. It has happened not because government has sat there and regulated every aspect of what they do. It is because government, frankly, hasn't figured out how to regulate them because the industry moves so fast. I think that has been a good thing. It has shown that if you allow an industry to go out there and invest private money in creating great new technologies, great new products, and you look at the development and deployment of broadband, it is literally changing people's lives for the good. It has allowed America to be such a great technological leader. But then when you see the threat of the FCC setting rates, regulating broadband, it will send a chilling effect that will not only kill that investment and slow down the ability and the growth that we have seen that has been so revolutionary in this country, but it will kill jobs in this country. We need to stop the threat of the FCC being able to set rates in a way that can slow down that growth. We have seen such tremendous growth in the technology industry by the government not being in this arena. What Congressman Kinzinger is doing with this bill protects taxpayers and protects the growth and innovation that we need in this country. I urge adoption of the bill.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2458 and thank my colleague and friend Congressman Cedric Richmond for his leadership in bringing this important bill to the House floor. The Honorable Lionel R. Collins Sr. is a true Louisiana and American hero, and this bill honors his life and achievements with a fitting tribute. Judge Collins served on the bench in the 24th Judicial District Court in Gretna, Louisiana and was the first African-American elected to public office in my home parish of Jefferson, Louisiana. He also led the efforts to integrate Jefferson Medical Center and helped integrate Jefferson Parish public schools. Judge Collins had an innate sense of justice. His colleagues described him as a `hardworking, fair and honest judge . . . tough when he had to be tough, but he had a sense of fairness.' While we can never fully repay Lionel Collins for his distinguished public service, we can honor his life and legacy as a pioneering civil rights attorney and an education champion in southeast Louisiana by passing this legislation. Judge Collins made meaningful impacts that advanced equality, justice, health care, and access to quality education. In fact, the Ames Montessori elementary school in Marrero was renamed Judge Lionel R. Collins Elementary in 2011. Our community is better for the life and service of Judge Collins. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this measure to memorialize a respected defender of civil liberties, and I urge passage of this legislation by Congressman Richmond.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Madam Chair, I want to thank my friend from Virginia for yielding and for his leadership in bringing the SHARE Act forward. I rise in strong support of this legislation that protects the rights of sportsmen and protects the rights of gun owners. Madam Chair, I am proud to come from Louisiana, which is called the Sportsman's Paradise. We have great traditions of hunting and fishing throughout our State. If you look at the barrage of regulations that have come out from this administration over the years, it has attacked so many different fundamental aspects of our society, so many things that make our country great. Of course, the right to hunt and fish is something that is not only a fundamental right for people, but it is actually something that brings families together. It is one of the great traditions that we love to share with our children. Our parents brought us hunting and fishing. Yet if you look at some of the regulations coming out of these Federal agencies today, it is actually undermining those rights. What this bill is targeted at is restoring those rights, to make sure, for example, when you have got agencies like the Corps of Engineers that are trying to arbitrarily shut off lands for the ability of people to go hunt, they shouldn't be able to do that. In fact, under this legislation, they won't be able to continue doing that. No unelected bureaucrat should be able to limit the rights of law-abiding citizens. Something else we have seen, Madam Chair, is the Environmental Protection Agency, unfortunately an agency we hear a lot about around this town, that is out there threatening jobs, taking away the ability for people to do things that are important to their everyday lives. The EPA has been threatening to ban lead ammo and tackle. In this bill, we block the EPA from being able to ban lead ammo. Again, this is something that is fundamental to our rights as sportsmen, as hunters and fishermen, to be able to enjoy the fruits of our land. There are over 50 sports organizations that are supporting this legislation. I just want to read from the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action: ``The SHARE Act would give law- abiding gun owners more access to carry firearms on land managed by the Army Corps of Engineers, protect lead-based ammunition, and promote the construction and maintenance of public target ranges.'' Madam Chair, it is important legislation. I encourage all of our colleagues to support it and pass it over to the Senate.