Steve Scalise

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. I appreciate my friend from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry) for leading this Special Order to highlight, Mr. Speaker, what is at stake in this latest proposal by President Obama. As you can see from the passion that my friend from South Carolina just exhibited, this is an issue that rivets throughout the country. People understand what is at stake. People across America know that there are bad people around the world that want to do us harm. ISIS is on the move. They are not a JV team. They are not being detained. In fact, they are recruiting Westerners. In fact, they are recruiting Americans into the battle. So you look at Guantanamo Bay. And this is something that, for whatever reason, has become a rallying cry for the political left. They wanted to close it down. They wanted to bring those terrorists into the United States, to give them taxpayer-funded rights that the President can't even identify, but that everybody acknowledges they don't deserve. We don't need that kind of threat here. When you look at the President's proposal this week, I think he has made it clear that he has put the political priorities of the far left elements over the safety and security of the United States of America. This would put Americans at risk by bringing these terrorists into the United States. Just go look at what kind of people are being held at Guantanamo Bay. These are the worst of the worst. These are people who have plotted and actually carried out attacks against American servicemen and -women. They have killed Americans in the battlefield, killed our troops. These are the people who have carried out those attacks. So they are being held at GTMO, as it is called, because that is the best place to ensure that we don't have to see them again on the battlefield. Over 100 of those who have already been released have gone back into the battlefield, in many cases, to kill American soldiers. Why would the President want to give them extra rights? Why would the President want to bring them into the United States of America? So, Mr. Speaker, we rise today and highlight this to point out, number one, what the President's intent really is and what the President is trying to do. This is something the President has asked Congress to take up. Mr. Speaker, we are making it very clear it is not going to happen. This House will not allow these terrorists being detained at Guantanamo Bay to enter into the United States to undermine America's national security. They are over there for a reason, which is because of terrorist attacks they have not only plotted, but carried out, against Americans. So, Mr. Speaker, they belong in Guantanamo Bay. Under this House, they are going to stay in Guantanamo Bay and not be brought into the United States. Again, I thank my colleague from Pennsylvania for this Special Order that he is leading.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. I thank my colleague from Georgia for yielding, for his leadership, and for bringing this important bill to the floor. Mr. Speaker, this is a historic day. This is the first time that the House of Representatives has had a vote to override President Obama's veto. If you look at what the veto is about and what the legislation that was vetoed is about, it is about letting the American people actually determine their own healthcare destiny. It is about stopping taxpayer money from going to abortion providers like Planned Parenthood. What this bill does is something very historic by gutting ObamaCare and returning that power back to families. I see in my district, and my colleagues share the same stories, all across the country, millions of Americans have lost the good health care that they had. They were promised by this President ``if you like what you have, you can keep it.'' Everybody knows that that is a promise that was broken by this President in his own healthcare law. We restore that ability back to the American people with this bill. With this bill, we also say that abortion providers like Planned Parenthood should not be able to get taxpayer money. We completely defund Planned Parenthood in this bill. If this is something that is so vital, look at what the bill does. It actually transfers the money to federally approved health centers all across the country--many more, by the way, than Planned Parenthood facilities that exist. These are facilities that actually provide services for women that don't include abortion. So if you look at what this bill is doing, it shows very clearly to the country what is at stake this November. We sent a bill to President Obama's desk that guts ObamaCare and that defunds Planned Parenthood, and he vetoed it. We are going to have the override today. If it is not successful in the vote today with a two-thirds vote, it makes clear what is at stake this November. Just by changing the President, by having a President who shares our values, Mr. Speaker, who wants to gut this law that is failing Americans, who wants to defund Planned Parenthood, by having a President with those values, we can accomplish those important objectives. I urge everyone to vote ``yes.''

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, when building a strong team, you need a strong leader. Lynnel Ruckert has been that strong leader. As my chief of staff, Lynnel has also been an ally and a friend since the very first day I arrived in Congress. Whether it has been the whip team, the Republican Study Committee, or Louisiana's First Congressional District, under her guidance, strong leadership, and relentless drive, Lynnel played a crucial role in delivering countless conservative victories for both our country and Louisiana. I wouldn't be where I am today without Lynnel Ruckert. I am and will forever be grateful for Lynnel's dedication and unwavering commitment to our Team Scalise family. Every day, she made the extra effort to bring a little Louisiana to Washington. We call it lagniappe. There was not a day that went by where she didn't wear a fleur-de-lis or some other symbol of our great State of Louisiana that we both love. Lynnel, you will be truly missed. I wish you, Kyle, and the whole Ruckert family all the best as you enter this new, exciting chapter in your life back home in Louisiana.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. I thank the gentleman, again, for yielding. Of course, as the gentleman knows, many of these issues that he discussed are at various stages of the legislative process. Some are in current hearings in committees. Some legislation is being developed or being voted on. Some of those issues that were discussed by the gentleman have already come to the House floor and passed. In fact, many of the bills to get the economy back on track passed this Senate with good, strong bipartisan votes that had been stuck in the Senate. I encourage the gentleman from Maryland, the minority whip, to work with us in the majority to get our colleagues in the Senate to move forward on some of that important legislation that we have passed out of the House in a bipartisan fashion. I know the gentleman from Maryland was at the same ceremony as I was earlier this week, where the Navy did, I think, a very important, significant action in naming a class of Naval vessels after our colleague and civil rights hero, John Lewis. It was an honor to participate in that ceremony, as I know you were there as well, in a very touching, warm moment where you saw House Members come together to pay tribute to our colleague, John Lewis. Also, you saw the Navy making such a significant step in saying they are going to develop and build a class of Naval ships that honor civil rights legends, starting with and, in fact, naming the entire class of ships after John Lewis.

Mr. SCALISE. I thank the gentleman from Maryland for yielding. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the House will meet at noon for morning hour and 2 p.m. for legislative business. Members are advised that first votes of the week are expected at 6:30 p.m. on Monday. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for morning hour and noon for legislative business. On Wednesday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for legislative business. No votes are expected in the House on Thursday or Friday. Mr. Speaker, the House will consider a number of suspensions next week, a complete list which will be announced at the close of business today. I want to take a moment to highlight one of those bills. The North Korea Sanctions Enforcement Act by Chairman Ed Royce is a critical bill, given current events, which would prohibit North Korea's access to the hard currency and other prohibited goods that allow this oppressive regime to continue its destabilizing behavior. Additionally, Mr. Speaker, the House will consider a bill, H.R. 3662, the Iran Terror Finance Transparency Act, sponsored by Representative Steve Russell. This bill, Mr. Speaker, would block the President from offering sanctions relief to an individual or bank until certifying that the entity has not conducted any transactions with a terrorist organization. Lastly, Mr. Speaker, the House will consider two bills aimed at burdensome rules and regulations by this Obama administration. The first of those, Mr. Speaker, is a bill by Representative Alex Mooney, H.R. 1644, the STREAM Act, which is a critical piece of legislation to address the administration's stream protection rule. This is a rule which is designed to shut down all surface mining and a significant portion of underground mining, particularly in the Appalachian region. H.R. 1644 would save taxpayer dollars and protect American jobs. The second is a joint resolution, S.J. Res. 22, calling for the disapproval of the Obama administration's regulatory overreach on the Waters of the United States. This resolution would express congressional disapproval of an unprecedented power grab that harms the traditional Federal-State partnership in implementing the Clean Water Act and would expand the scope of the EPA to puddles in the backyards of millions of Americans. Those are the bills that I wanted to highlight and feature.

Mr. SCALISE. I thank the gentleman from Maryland for yielding. I know that the gentleman from Maryland is aware that Speaker Ryan has laid out a vision that we want to have a bold agenda that we are going to bring forward for 2016. In fact, one of the things that the Speaker laid out is not an agenda that is going to be driven from the top down; it is not agenda that is going to be driven by leadership. In fact, it will be driven by the Members. One of the things that both the House Republican and House Democrat conferences do in the upcoming weeks is have Member retreats, where our Members can come together and discuss those items. That is what we are going to be doing next: our Members are going to be coming together. We want to build a consensus amongst our membership, again, not from the top down, but one that includes the interests of the Members of our conference to fix the problems that have been created by the President's healthcare law and actually bring forward a patient- centered approach that puts patients back in charge of their healthcare decisions.

Mr. SCALISE. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Again, Speaker Ryan's commitment has been that we are going to restore regular order in the House. What regular order means is that there is not going to be some predisposed outcome by leadership to determine what is going to happen and when it is going to happen, regardless of what the membership feels, regardless of what the committee process produces. Again, I think what is exciting to our membership about this year is that the Members are going to be able to participate in that process and the committees will be involved in this. I can't tell you what the committees will ultimately do or produce. This is going to be a process that is going to be very open and transparent. People can watch on C- SPAN as hearings are held. It is not going to be some predisposed outcome from the top down. Again, this will be something that will be membership-driven, using the regular order of the House.

Mr. SCALISE. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Of course, as the gentleman from Maryland knows, Puerto Rico is facing a serious debt crisis and is in need of structural reform. That is critical. That is why our committee is starting the process of examining solutions. In fact, as the gentleman mentioned, next week, on January 12 at 10 a.m., the committee of primary jurisdiction, the House Committee on Natural Resources, led by Chairman Bishop, as the gentleman mentioned, has the first hearing scheduled on this matter. In keeping with Speaker Ryan's commitment to regular order, it is important that we allow the committees of jurisdiction to work through these issues to put forward the best solutions to a bad situation.

Mr. SCALISE. I appreciate the gentleman yielding. I would just say, in the spirit of bipartisanship, at some point I would like to bring up some great blue crabs from the Gulf of Mexico, and the gentleman can bring up some of those great Maryland blue crabs, and we can do a good taste test and enjoy some of our great cuisines and enjoy some good company.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I move to postpone consideration of the veto message to January 26, 2016.

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, this is a simple motion which will postpone further consideration of the President's veto of the bill gutting ObamaCare and defunding Planned Parenthood. This short delay will ensure that the Members of the House and the American people will have the time to fully consider the President's veto and its implications. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the motion. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet on Monday, January 11, 2016, when it shall convene at noon for morning-hour debate and 2 p.m. for legislative business.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chairman of the Budget Committee for the good, hard work that his committee did for bringing this bill to the floor. Ultimately, Mr. Speaker, this is something that we have been talking about doing for a long time, but now we have the opportunity to have a vote on the House floor that will send a bill to President Obama's desk that actually guts ObamaCare and defunds Planned Parenthood. This is something very important to people all across the country. But this is something that allows us through the reconciliation process, which is a rare opportunity. There have been a lot of really good bills that this House has passed to address problems, whether it is getting the economy back on track, whether it is pushing back on so many of the radical agenda items, through regulatory actions, through executive actions that this President has done to try to circumvent the Constitution and Congress, and they go over to the Senate, and Senate Democrats filibuster the bill. And because of their archaic rules that require 60 votes just to bring a bill up, so many of those bills don't even come up for debate, Mr. Speaker. So the budget process of reconciliation gives us one opportunity a year, if we are able to come together and agree on a budget, which this House and Senate did. We came to agreement, in fact, on a budget that gets to balance in the 10-year window for the first time since 2002. And it also gives us that one opportunity to move a bill through, not just the House, but through the Senate with a majority vote, rather than 60 votes. Why that is so important, Mr. Speaker, is it allows us to finally put on President Obama's desk this important question. This President needs to be confronted with this, and he will now be confronted with the question about addressing his failed healthcare law that has denied health care to millions of people, that has resulted in double-digit increases for so many others. In my home State of Louisiana, we are seeing over 20 percent increases because of this failed law. And then also, to defund Planned Parenthood. That bill will now go to his desk with this important vote. It is a historic vote. I would encourage the President to sign this bill. It would be an important landmark moment in his Presidency. If he vetoes it, it shows the country just what is at stake if you have a President that is willing to do this for the American people. I urge a ``yes'' vote, and I look forward to this vote.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. I thank my colleague from Virginia for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this important legislation by the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Miller). To defeat ISIS, it is going to take strong leadership, and it is going to take a strong strategy. I think it is clear that the President's approach isn't working. In fact, our intelligence officials tell us that ISIS is not only not being contained, but now we are seeing that they are coming to America, that they are attacking America, and that has been their stated goal. It is incumbent upon us to do everything we can. Frankly, the American people deserve to know that their government is doing everything in its power to protect them from the threat of terrorists. These are very real threats. In the House, we have been taking decisive action. We have already passed a bill to address the problems of the lack of vetting in the refugee program, a program that ISIS, itself, has said it plans to exploit in order to bring terrorists into America. The FBI Director has even confirmed those concerns that we have expressed, and we have passed legislation to address that. Today, Mr. Speaker, we are bringing forth strong, bipartisan legislation to reform the troubled Visa Waiver Program. We have seen that thousands of people with Western passports, including from the Visa Waiver Program nations, have been going to some of the troubled regions, like Syria, like Iraq, like other countries. There ought to be a higher level of scrutiny. This bill requires the Department of Homeland Security to work with those nations in order to have a higher level of scrutiny so as to ultimately lead to a more secure United States of America. I encourage all of my colleagues to pass this legislation. Let's continue to do what we need to do in the House of Representatives to protect the American people from the real threat that ISIS poses.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Kentucky for yielding and for bringing this legislation to the floor. I rise in strong support of S.J. Res. 24. Mr. Speaker, what we are talking about is rejecting this radical plan by President Obama's EPA that is going to actually impact every power plant in this country. The President has a war on coal. He declared a war on coal years ago, and we are seeing the results of it. The results of it here in America are thousands of good jobs lost, thousands of middle class families that are now unemployed and trying to fight to get back in the middle class. And even more than that, Mr. Speaker, what you see is millions of people across this country paying more for electricity costs because of these regulations. So what is President Obama's answer? It is to go to Paris and say that the biggest threat to national security is global warming. For goodness' sake, doesn't he see what is going on across the world? We are here focusing on national security, Mr. Speaker. We are also focusing on energy security, and we are standing up against a radical regulation that is going to increase costs on the most needy in this country. When you look at the impact, this proposal by President Obama's EPA would have a $29-billion-per-year cost on middle class families. The people that are going to be hit the hardest are low-income families, Mr. Speaker. In Louisiana alone, nearly 1 million middle-and low-income families will be hit by this radical regulation. At Christmas season, I think families would much rather be spending their hard-earned dollars going and buying Christmas presents for their families instead of seeing a 13-percent increase in their utility bills for a regulation that is not going to do anything to clean the air. We are already seeing a reduction in carbon emissions because of the American innovation. When some of these European countries signed Kyoto and some of these other accords that are wrecking their economies, we didn't do it. Because we are actually doing better than them without signing an accord because we used great American innovation. And, instead, the President wants to come behind and bring a regulation that is going to strangle small businesses, it is going to strangle families, and it is going to increase electricity costs on those that can least afford to pay it. Again, let them keep the money in their own pockets. Let's innovate, let's create jobs in this economy, not use radical regulations to strangle our economy and our middle class. Let's pass this resolution.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend from Ohio, who also loves Boudin, for yielding and for bringing up this important issue of energy. Mr. Speaker, American energy means jobs. When we come here on this House floor and talk about ways to get our economy moving again, ways to help Americans who want to get back to work, there is a very clear- cut, commonsense answer to get our economy moving again, and that is just to open up more of the resources of this great Nation. Just on the placard right there above us, Mr. Speaker, inscribed on the walls of this House Chamber is a plaque that starts off, that says, ``Let us develop the resources of our land.'' It is on the House Chamber. And, yet, President Obama, through his policies, through his radical regulations--every single day his unelected bureaucrats wake up figuring out more ways to close off those resources, to kill those American jobs. When my colleagues come here on the House floor and tell story after story about things like the war on coal, these are real wars that this Obama administration is waging upon American workers. The war on coal is real. I have seen it in the eyes of coal workers when I went to my colleague's district in Ohio. We sat out before a whole room full of coal workers, many of them multi-generational. These aren't people who have their first job in the industry. For many of them, their father, their grandfather, worked in the coal industry. When you look out at coal workers today, as I saw in Eastern Ohio, you see the look of fear, not because they face global competition. They can beat global competition. What they can't beat right now is the barrage of radical regulations coming from the Obama administration killing American jobs. It has got a real direct impact on workers across this country, people who are part of the middle class today that the President loves talking about. Yet, that middle class dream is under attack by these policies. They have real impacts, Mr. Speaker. In fact, one of the other things I went out and saw when I was out in Eastern Ohio, was the Utica shale play, another example of great American ingenuity. These aren't just American jobs. This is American ingenuity that is figuring out how to explore new areas of energy, to allow us not only to create good jobs in America, but to be completely energy independent, to export our energy to other countries, including some of our friends in the world, our allies around the world right now that have to get energy from countries like Russia, who use energy as a weapon against those very countries who would love to get energy from America. What is the President's answer to them? The President's answer is to make it more difficult to create that energy here through rules, through regulations. What are some real examples? Just this week, Mr. Speaker, the President is in Paris not to talk about ways to combat ISIS and the global threat of terrorism. The President is over in Paris talking about global warming. As people are walking around this town in parkas right now because it is so cold, the President is trying to focus on ways to make our economy in America less competitive globally. So this week we are bringing up more legislation to push back on those kind of regulations. One example is later this week, under the Congressional Review Act, we are going to be bringing up legislation to reverse President Obama's new source performance standard. This was one of the many radical rules coming out of the EPA. One of the biggest threats to jobs in America is the unelected bureaucrats over the EPA who have another brilliant idea, again, dreamed up by people that are unelected, that now have a plan to actually make it more difficult to create electricity in America, not only more difficult, Mr. Speaker, but dramatically more expensive for hardworking taxpayers in this country to buy electricity. So we are going to bring up a bill on the House floor this week to reverse that radical regulation. As we bring that up, we are going to have this debate about something very specific in terms of a policy brought up by the President that is going to make it much harder for our country to be competitive, much harder for middle class families to achieve that American Dream, because it is going to make things more expensive for them, things that they buy, not just their electricity, but it cascades into all the other things that people buy when they go to grocery stores, when they go do their Christmas shopping. These are having real impacts on real people. Something else we are going to be taking on is the Department of the Interior right now, one of the other agencies of President Obama, coming out with a well control rule that is going to make it very difficult to drill for oil in the Gulf of Mexico, a place where we, through American ingenuity, have figured out ways to generate more energy in America that we can use not only to help our economy, but to help our friends all around the world. So what is the President's answer? Using unelected bureaucrats, once again, to propose a rule that is going to make it more difficult to create those American jobs. Then, of course, as my colleague from Ohio was talking about, this week we are also going to bring up a bill called the Architecture of Abundance, a bill to create more American jobs, to create real American energy security, again, to open up those natural resources that are being shut down by this President. So when you talk about getting the economy back on track, you don't need a team of economists to come in and figure out some new way to invent the wheel. Mr. Speaker, the answer is sitting right underneath our feet. In many cases, it is the energy that is trapped, not trapped by the lack of ingenuity, because Americans, more than anybody in the world, have figured out great ways to go and use technology, to go and get those resources, attract those resources, explore and then produce those resources. But, unfortunately, their biggest challenge every day is not the competition from other States, not the competition from other companies. It is the challenge of the threatening regulations from this Obama administration that are trying to shut those opportunities down. It has real impacts on real people, the coal industry, the oil industry, the natural gas industry, all across the board. When our allies around the world are looking to us and saying, ``We want to trade with the United States,'' we want to be able to buy the oil that America is generating, that we have now a surplus of and, yet, the President wants to issue a veto threat when we say let's allow for exporting of oil, for goodness sake. We have an abundance of it. People are getting laid off in the United States, those middle class workers that the President loves talking about at photo-ops, who are being laid off because of his policies. We have got the technology. We have got the expertise. We are the world leader, Mr. Speaker. All we need is for the right policies to unleash that potential, to unleash that opportunity, to create those American jobs. So as we have been talking about tonight, the House will actually be taking action--not sitting on the sidelines, not just criticizing, but taking action--bringing bills on the House floor this week to open up those opportunities for hardworking taxpayers, to create more middle class opportunities for people who want to be a part of this industry, but also to lower costs for these middle class families who are struggling under these tough economic times to be able to have more opportunities for themselves and their families. Hopefully, we will continue this debate throughout this week and throughout the rest of this Congress as we bring these good pieces of legislation to open up those resources again, as the placard says at the top of the House Chamber here, to develop the resources of this land so that America can be the world leader in energy. So we don't have to get our energy from countries who don't like us, but we can actually export and create more job opportunities and help our allies around the world by undermining countries like Iran and Russia and others who want to do them harm. I look forward to continuing this debate. I am so proud to be a part of this effort in the House to create more energy opportunities in America. I thank my colleague from Ohio for leading in this effort.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding. I want to thank my colleague, the gentleman from Georgia, for his leadership on bringing this reconciliation bill to the floor. Mr. Speaker, as we have fought for years to defeat the President's healthcare law and the many destructive components to that law that are playing out all across the country, we have got one more opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to send a bill to the President--but this time, not just to send a bill to the Senate that actually goes after and guts the President's healthcare law, but also a bill that now, with 51 votes in the Senate, will have the opportunity to get to the President's desk. The bill not only repeals the employer mandate, but it repeals the individual mandate, laws that are crushing jobs across the country and killing middle class jobs. The biggest reason, when you talk to small- business owners, why they can't hire more people and why they are forced by this law to lower the number of working hours of people across the country down below 30 hours is because of these mandates in the law that are crushing American jobs. Why not put that bill on the President's desk? Why not also tell these people who are taking taxpayer money and providing abortion services that you can't do it anymore? If you want to provide women's health care, there is funding for you, but you can't use taxpayer money to provide abortions. That is in this bill to get to the President's desk. Even more than that, it goes further, and we start cutting taxes that are killing jobs in this bill. The medical device tax is shipping jobs to foreign countries. Let's cut those taxes. If the Senate wants to go further under their arcane rules, they will have that opportunity, and we would support those changes as well. Ultimately, Mr. Speaker, let's get this bill to the President's desk and let him make a decision. Is he going to finally stand up for American workers and sign this bill, or is he going to continue to support a law that is destroying jobs and destroying health care in this country? That ought to be the President's burden. We ought to send that bill to the President. This is the first step, and it is a critical step to restoring jobs and good health care across this country. Mr. Speaker, let's pass this bill, send it over to the Senate, and let them do their work.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. I thank the gentlewoman from Kansas for yielding. I want to thank my friend from California (Mr. McClintock) for bringing this bill forward. Madam Speaker, the Default Prevention Act takes off the table the ability for any President to use the debt ceiling as an opportunity to threaten default on the credit of the United States of America. If you think about this, we are talking about whether or not the United States is going to pay its bills. This should be something that the President--any President--should understand as a basic responsibility of his duty in office whether or not Congress can come to an agreement with the President on the debt ceiling, which, by the way, should be something the Speaker, the majority leader, and the President are directly engaged in. The fact that the President walked away from talks on negotiations on the debt ceiling tells you that he is not taking this in the serious way that he should. In fact, it also proves that the President wants to use the debt ceiling to threaten the default of the United States. That is irresponsible of any President. No President should have the option of defaulting or of even threatening default, and this bill takes default off the table as an option. Now, why would the President be opposed to that? I think it answers itself, Madam Speaker, because the President wants to threaten default and have that as a political weapon to try to scare the markets and to try to scare our seniors, who, by the way, are the largest holders of debt. Seniors shouldn't have to worry about whether or not that debt would be paid. Any creditor shouldn't be worried. If the United States is going to borrow money, we should first focus on getting to a balanced budget, which this President is opposed to. Once we get to a balanced budget, we should also be focused on making sure we are paying the debts that were incurred. The fact that the President wants to threaten default as an option shouldn't be available. This bill takes default off the table, and it makes the focus really clear that the United States is going to live within its means, uphold its obligations, and then go and focus on attacking the real root problems that got us into this debt in the first place. I urge all of my colleagues to vote for this piece of legislation. Let's send it over to the Senate, where they should pass it on to the President.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my friend from Texas for yielding, but also for his leadership in bringing this bill to the floor and building a strong bipartisan coalition to finally lift the ban on oil exports. Mr. Chairman, this is a relic of the 1970s that doesn't fit with today's world economy, but it also doesn't fit with the revolution that has happened in American energy because of American technology. We have an abundance of natural resources now and an abundance of oil. We literally could be the Saudi Arabia of energy. Yet, there is a law that is on the books that bans the ability of the United States to export its own oil. There is no other nation in the world that has that limitation on their ability to sell that natural resource. Mr. Chairman, at a time when the President is actually supporting this horrible deal with Iran that, among other things, allows Iran to export their oil to the world markets, the President at the same time is saying he opposes this bill that allows America to export its oil. What is at stake, Mr. Chairman? What is at stake under this bill, if this bill passes, is it will create over 800,000 American jobs, good American jobs, here at home. If this bill passes, Mr. Chairman, we can actually create over $800 million to reduce the deficit, deficit reduction, just by passing this bill. What is also at stake, Mr. Chairman, if we pass this bill? We can help our allies around the world who don't want to have to get their oil from countries like Russia, where Vladimir Putin is using energy as a weapon against our friends. They can now get that energy from us. Creating American jobs along the way, everything about this says yes. It is time to lift this relic of the 1970s. Let's finally allow American oil to be exported on world markets when we have such an abundance and we have the ability to create hundreds of thousands of new American jobs along the way. I urge my colleagues to support the bill.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. I thank the gentleman from Virginia for yielding. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act offered by my friend and colleague from Arizona, Trent Franks. Madam Speaker, this bill is about standing up for the sanctity of life. Specifically, this bill deals with babies that are born alive. Whether it was the result of an abortion or a normal birth, all people in this country deserve that same protection. Madam Speaker, why should a baby that is born alive be denied that same right? Our Founding Fathers, in the Declaration of Independence, made it crystal clear: ``We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.'' Madam Speaker, the first unalienable right mentioned by our Founders--and these were not rights given to us by our Founders; they were given to us by our Creator--that first right is life. If a baby is born alive, they ought to have that protection. That is what this bill is about. It is about giving that protection that is enumerated in the Constitution and in the Declaration of Independence itself to say they ought to have that protection in law, that if they are born alive, that they ought to have that same medical protection. So, Madam Speaker, when you saw the President come out yesterday and say that he would veto this bill, how extreme can somebody be to say they would not stand up for a baby that is born alive to have the same protection that the Declaration of Independence enumerates as an ``unalienable right''? This should be a place where we can all come together, a place where we can all agree that we, as a House, can come together and stand up and give that protection in law to those babies that are born alive. I would hope that all of my colleagues would join in, that we could send this bill over to the Senate, that they can have the same debate and agree to pass that on, and that, ultimately, the President would recognize that this is a bill that ought to become law.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, when the President started these negotiations with Iran, I think, when you look at the fatal flaw in the beginning of those negotiations, they should have started with one basic premise. That premise, Mr. Speaker, ought to have been to finally force Iran to dismantle their nuclear weapons program. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, that was not the objective of these negotiations. In fact, if you look, it seemed there was more interest on making sure that a deal could be reached that China and Russia and Iran could finally agree to. And the problem is, when you look at the fatal flaw of that negotiation, what has it yielded? And why is there such strong opposition across the country from members of both parties to this agreement? I think most Americans recognize that Iran cannot be trusted with a nuclear weapon. Just look at their own rhetoric. Just this week the Ayatollah himself led the chant ``death to America.'' These are the people that the President is negotiating with to ultimately end up at the end of this deal with the ability to develop not just a nuclear bomb, but a nuclear arsenal, Mr. Speaker. Just look at the tenets of the deal itself. One of the conditions in the deal actually allows Iran to have more than 5,000 centrifuges. If they comply with the deal, they can keep more than 5,000 centrifuges to enrich uranium. It took Pakistan about 3,000 centrifuges to develop their bomb, and Iran will have over 5,000 centrifuges if they comply with the deal, let alone if they cheat. And we know the history there. Let's look at other components of the deal, Mr. Speaker. In this deal, if there is a site that is undeclared and our intelligence along the way over these next few years exposes the fact that there is something there that we want to go look at, that we question whether or not they are cheating, Mr. Speaker, we have to get permission under this deal and wait over 24 days. Imagine all of the things that can be hidden in 24 days if we have the intelligence that they are cheating. How could this be part of a deal that we would agree to that is in the American best interest? Ultimately, what we have to come to an agreement on is what is in the best interest of the United States of America. Mr. Speaker, we also ought to be concerned about our allies, Israel, and the other Arab states in the region that have deep, grave concerns about this, others that are indicating that this will start a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. Within 10 years, you could have nearly a half a dozen states in the Middle East with nuclear arms. This isn't the way we ought to go. Then, of course, there are the secret side deals. We have seen evidence now that there are secret side deals that the President won't disclose.

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, under the law that President Obama himself signed, the law actually says the President has to disclose to Congress and the American people all information related to this deal, including ``side agreements.'' And now we are hearing at least two secret side agreements exist, one that allows Iran to actually do their own inspections. Mr. Speaker, these are the people that this deal is going to allow to inspect their own nuclear facilities. The President ought to release to the American people the details of these secret side agreements right now or withdraw this entire proposal. President Reagan said, ``Trust, but verify.'' Under this agreement, President Obama is saying trust Iran to verify. You cannot allow this to go through. I urge all of my colleagues to reject this deal. The President lays out a false premise that it is this deal or war. I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, there is a much different approach, a much better approach, and that is to go get a better deal that protects the interest of the United States of America for today and for decades to come.

Mr. SCALISE

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of this Special Order.

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, August 29 of this year will mark the 10- year anniversary that Hurricane Katrina struck ground, causing massive devastation throughout southeast Louisiana, as well as other parts of the Gulf Coast, Mississippi, and Alabama. Mr. Speaker, tonight, we are going to talk about the devastation that was caused by Hurricane Katrina, and of course, it starts with the more than 1,800 lives that were lost, people from Louisiana, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, and Georgia who all lost their lives through this devastating storm. Mr. Speaker, we are also going to talk about something else, and that is the strength and resiliency of the people of the Gulf Coast who persevered, who rebuilt. Ultimately, Mr. Speaker, we are going to talk about the recovery of the people of the Gulf Coast from this devastating storm. First, I will yield to my friend from the great State of Alabama, Mr. Robert Aderholt.

Mr. SCALISE. Thank you, Congressman Richmond. Of course, as the gentleman talked about, the devastation and those 1,833 lives that we lost throughout the Gulf Coast still live with us. We still remember the people who gave their lives, who lost their lives, in this devastating storm. But, Mr. Speaker, some of the things that you saw from the people of southeast Louisiana--I know I saw firsthand the strength, the resiliency, of the people back at a time not long after the storm hit when there were people questioning whether or not the city of New Orleans would be rebuilt or should be rebuilt. You saw that conversation start around the country. But, Mr. Speaker, that didn't last long before you saw the Nation come together and make a commitment, and you saw the people of New Orleans make a commitment that the city would be rebuilt. But I think this is where the story of recovery comes out so bright and strong, Mr. Speaker. That is how the people of the Gulf Coast, how the people of New Orleans, responded. People didn't say they were just going to rebuild what was broken. You saw people demanding, demanding, Mr. Speaker, that we rebuild better, stronger, more efficient. People started demanding that government work differently, that government work better. Those levees that failed, Mr. Speaker, caused so much of that devastation. People said: We need to reform the way that levees are built. You saw a citizen uprising, in fact, that led to dramatic changes in State law. I was a State representative at the time. We actually changed the constitution of Louisiana to require that people who serve on levee boards actually have experience in things like engineering, hydrology. You saw citizen groups like Women of the Storm emerge, where over 50,000 people signed a petition not long after that demanded that laws be changed, Mr. Speaker, to make those kinds of reforms in levee boards. And when you look at the levees that were rebuilt today with the help of our colleagues up here in Congress and the work of FEMA and other agencies--when you look at those levees, they are dramatically better. The flood protection systems are better in southeast Louisiana. That didn't happen by accident. That happened because the people demanded those kinds of changes. You look at the political reform. As we all know, every State has got its problems. But Louisiana had a bad history of political corruption going back over 100 years. The people of Louisiana demanded a better political system. You actually saw citizens picking up the telephone, calling the FBI if they saw an ounce of political corruption. There became a zero tolerance for political corruption in the city of New Orleans and the surrounding regions. People went to jail. But it was because the public said: We demand better. And, ultimately, that helped lead to the recovery that we see today 10 years later. Just look at the school system, Mr. Speaker. Before Katrina struck, New Orleans had one of the most failed and corrupt public school systems in the country. There were kids that were graduating--we had a high school valedictorian who couldn't pass the State exit exam. After Katrina, again people said: We are going to rebuild, but we are going to demand a better public school system. And you saw sweeping reforms move through the State legislature, setting up a system of charter schools in the New Orleans area that are now touted as the model for reform for urban education systems. That didn't happen by accident. That happened because the people demanded better from government. We saw government fail at every level, Federal, State, and local. It is well documented. The story of New Orleans today, 10 years after the storm, is the story of a strong and resilient people who said: We absolutely will rebuild, but we are not going to rebuild the same way that it was before with all of the flaws and problems that existed; we are going to demand better. You can see better today, you can see the recovery. It is not over. There are still some neighborhoods that are working to rebuild, but there are so many neighborhoods that are stronger today, that are more thriving today. Young people coming in from other States to be a part of this renaissance, to be a part of this recovery. It is an exciting time to be in the New Orleans region today; but obviously, as we reflect upon the devastation of Katrina 10 years ago, we know how far we have come and how much it took people pulling together, working with groups like the Pastors Resource Council, pastors from all around the country that came together to say that, while government had its failings, individuals, communities came together, churches came together, faith-based groups stood up like we have known that they do in so many other disasters to help get food to people, get shelter to people, and help people recover. We, obviously, reflect on and pray for the lives that were lost and remember the devastation that was so horrific, but we also celebrate the recovery that is still so evident in the people of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.