Austin Scott

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Collins, I had several parents in my office today. I thought I would talk about a couple of the meetings that I had. I had a father there talking about his son Gabe. He had a T-shirt on with ``H4G,'' which stands for ``Hope for Gabe.'' I listened to him talk about his son and the life-threatening disease that his son has and the threat that his son is under because of a U.S. pharmaceutical manufacturer named Marathon. I would like to read part of an email that I have from him: Hope you are well. I just wanted to let you know that my son Gabe takes a drug called Deflazacort. He has since he was 5 years old. He is now 11. We currently pay $116 for a 3- month supply of 15-milligram dose for Deflazacort. We were getting this drug from Europe, as it was not available here in the United States, and have had no problem with access to date. Now, many of you heard about this story. The FDA approved the same drug for sale in the United States. What did the drug manufacturer do with the price of it? Well, Marathon took the price from $116 a quarter to approximately $87,000 a year. Now, this is what is happening. For drugs that are available everywhere else in the world, it is not that they are being developed with extensive research and expensive research in our country. People are simply buying the right to sell the drug in the United States. As soon as approved and available in the U.S. marketplace, it is no longer legal for people to import that drug from Europe. Marathon priced the drug at $89,000 per year. Reading again from his email, in bold letters: It is the same drug we are getting today from Europe for $450 per year, the exact same drug. We need your help here. The Duchenne community needs your help, and specifically Gabe needs your help. As I sit here and look at the American flag, you know, there is no other country in the world that allows their citizens to be treated like this. None. I am embarrassed that this Congress hasn't done anything about this abuse to the American citizens from the pharmaceutical and the PBM industry. I know our President, and I am glad that we have a President with the courage and the boldness that our President has, had the executives to the White House. I would suggest that a good meeting also would be to have the parents--have the father of Gabe, have the mother of Gabe come to the White House. Sit down in the same room with the TVs on with the executives from those companies that are cheating these people. Let's let the executives explain on TV in front of the parents, in front of the child who needs that lifesaving drug why it costs $450 in another country but should cost $87,000 in America. Another group of parents that was in my office today was there representing juvenile diabetes. I had a heart-wrenching discussion with a mother in my office in Warner Robins about her daughter, insulin- dependent. She has got to have it or she dies. This mother had a job, actually, in another country and talked about what she paid in another country to receive that same drug, insulin, for her child. It cost a fraction of what it cost in America. I think it would be great for our President to have that mother and that daughter or the mother who was in my office today talking about her daughter come and sit down at the White House, and maybe the president of Eli Lilly could come and sit down. Maybe we could put the TV on, the cameras on so everybody in America could see the CEO explain why insulin, which has been around for decades, costs as much in this country as it does when it doesn't cost anywhere near that in any other country. Something has got to give. Something has got to give. The American families have given enough. I am hopeful that we will move sooner rather than later. American families can't take it anymore. A drug that costs $450, that can be imported from Europe, shouldn't cost $87,000 in America. On top of the issues with what is happening with the manufacturers, we have got the issue with the PBMs. Why shouldn't you know what the PBMs are getting in a kickback? Everywhere else you go, you get a price sticker. You know what the rebates are when you go to your local car dealer. They are readily advertised. Why shouldn't you know as the American citizen? My friend Mr. Collins and I have been working on it for years. We worked on it back in the State legislature. In fact, we passed a bill back in, I think, 1987, the first transparency act that we passed in the State legislature in Georgia. I hope that governors and members of the State legislatures will go back and address this issue as well. The transparency issues can be done at the State level. That bill came to the Georgia House floor, and it passed 150-0. Not a single Democrat, not a single Republican voted against that bill. Every single member who was there that day voted for the bill. Mr. Speaker, we know something has got to be done. I just hope that we take action sooner rather than later. I would just like to make one last request. Mr. President, I hope you will invite these parents and their children to the White House. I hope you will invite the CEOs of these companies to come and sit down at the same table, and I hope you will even invite the press to come and publicize the meeting. I thank Mr. Collins so much for standing up for the American citizens. I am honored to be a friend of his, and I thank him for allowing me to be in the fight.

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, the assertion that removing this rule would allow for egregious, cruel, and unsporting hunting methods is just totally false. The people of Alaska, I trust them to manage the game of that State. The idea, the accusation that this rule allows for shooting of wolf pups in their den is totally false. Disturbing wolf dens for any reason--hunting, trapping, or for wildlife management--is illegal in the State of Alaska. The 2016-2017 Alaska Trapping Regulations state: The following methods are illegal for taking furbearers: You may not disturb or destroy beaver houses or any furbearer den. Again, the people of Alaska can be trusted to manage their game. Additionally, the claim that removing this rule would allow for the use of airplanes or helicopters to hunt is totally false. Using aircraft is illegal in the State of Alaska. The 2016-2017 Alaska Hunting Regulations state: You may not take game by driving, herding, harassing, or molesting game with any motorized vehicle such as an aircraft, airboat, snow machine, motorboat, et cetera. Finally, the claim that removing this rule would allow for trapping of grizzly bears and black bears with steel-jawed leghold traps, again, simply totally false. Trapping or snaring big game is illegal in the State of Alaska. The 2016-2017 Alaska Hunting Regulations state: You may not take game by using a trap or a snare to take big game, fur animals, or small game. As you can see, these claims are nothing but false rhetoric from antisportsmen that think they know better how to manage Alaska's wildlife than the good people of Alaska do. Alaska law already precludes these practices, yet they are being used as an emotional argument to hide what is clearly a bureaucratic overreach which unfairly targets the citizens of Alaska.

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of Scott Graves, Staff Director of the House Committee on Agriculture. After 10 years of dedicated service to agriculture policy on Capitol Hill, Scott is leaving his position on the Committee at the end of this month. As Staff Director of the House Committee on Agriculture, Scott has helped develop a strategic vision for the Committee and its forty-five Members that has directly shaped American agriculture policy. Working directly alongside Chairman Mike Conaway, Scott has also dedicated himself to working for the best interests of all members of the agriculture community. Having worked with Scott personally, I have seen firsthand the level of expertise and commitment that has made him an invaluable asset to the Committee. His hard work has benefited not only the staff he works with daily, but the Members on both sides of the aisle that he has loyally served. In today's age, it is a rarity to find the combination of character, ability, and professionalism that Scott exemplifies. On behalf of the House Committee on Agriculture, I would like to thank Scott for his service and wish him the best of luck in his future endeavors.

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop). I know he has had a busy week, as I have, with his district being affected by the storms. I certainly want to take a second to thank America for their prayers and their support. It has been overwhelming. A tremendous number of churches have opened their doors, and there are volunteers out there helping people. I thank all who have participated. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 538, the Ocmulgee Mounds National Historical Park Boundary Revision Act of 2017. I am happy this legislation is being considered before the full House in this Congress. I am hopeful we can reach an agreement with the Senate to pass this legislation and have it signed into law. For years, there has been a great effort to bring about increased recognition of the enhanced cultural preservation of the Ocmulgee National Monument. The Ocmulgee National Monument was originally authorized by Congress in 1934 to protect the Old Ocmulgee Fields, which includes a network of very well preserved Indian mounds of great historical importance. The history of the fields can be traced back to Native Americans who first came to the site during the Paleo-Indian period to hunt ice age mammals. The park is unique in that it vividly displays the story of many stages of prehistoric cultural development, including the Mound Builder period and highlights the important role of agriculture in the region. I am proud to represent this area of middle Georgia along with Congressman Sanford Bishop. Our offices have worked together, along with many regional community partners, to advance this goal. By expanding the current Ocmulgee National Monument area from 700 acres to just over 2,000 acres and redesignating the area as a national historical park, the legislation will provide significant economic, educational, and cultural benefits to middle Georgia. Additionally, H.R. 538 will authorize a resources study for future further expansions and include increased opportunities for hunting, fishing, camping, and other recreational activities. The expansion of the Ocmulgee National Monument area provides for critical preservation of additional archaeological locations throughout the Old Ocmulgee Fields. Because of its significant historical and archaeological importance, the future Ocmulgee Mounds National Historical Park must be preserved. The expanded park also will generate additional tourism in middle Georgia while educating visitors on the fascinating history of the many civilizations that have thrived in the region. It should be noted that the property in the proposed expansion area would be acquired only from willing donors or sellers, using private funds, and that no Federal dollars will be used to achieve the expansion. I want to take this time to thank Chairman Bishop and Ranking Member Grijalva as well as all members of the House Committee on Natural Resources for their work to bring this legislation to the floor today. I want to close by noting that this legislation is a true example of what can be achieved when a local community, State leaders, and the Federal Government collaborate toward a worthy goal. The Ocmulgee Mounds National Historical Park Boundary Revision Act was created from the ground up with many letters of support from the Macon-Bibb area and well over 3,000 comments from individuals and community groups in support of the expansion. Without this collaboration at every level, none of this would be possible. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 538, the Ocmulgee Mounds National Historical Park Boundary Revision Act of 2017.

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I have the great privilege of representing a beautiful part of this country. Many of you have seen it on the news lately. Cook County is ground zero for the storms that hit this past weekend. We have seven deaths in Cook County, two in Berrien, two in Brooks, four in Dougherty--outside of my district--and we have four lives lost in Mississippi as well. As I speak to you, the Georgia Forestry Commission is searching for five who are unaccounted for with cadaver dogs. I would ask that you pray for the families who have lost so much, and I would ask that we also pray that they find those who are unaccounted for. Mr. Speaker, I want to say one thank you as well to the first responders, the volunteers, those from other counties who have provided mutual aid, and the churches who have opened their doors to take care of those who have lost their homes. Thank you. And I also want to thank Governor Deal and President Trump, both of whom were available yesterday to offer their support and pledge to help our communities rebuild.

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, you have, I am sure, seen the devastation from the tornadoes on the TV. My district, Cook County, is the heart of ground zero. We had seven deaths in Cook County; two in Brooks County; two in Berrien County; four in my colleague's, Mr. Bishop's district in Dougherty County; and four in Mississippi. I want to say thank you to the many volunteers and first responders who have been there to provide aid. I want to say thank you to the Americans who have provided prayers. When I spoke earlier, we had five people unaccounted for. Four of the five are accounted for and alive today. We are thankful for that. We are still trying to account for one additional person. Recovery efforts are still going on. I ask that you continue to keep these families who have lost so much and the first responders in your prayers. I would like to say thank you to Governor Deal for his speedy response and President Trump and his administration for their quick response to the tragedy. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Palazzo).

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop).

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 238, the Commodity End-User Relief Act. It is simply good governance to reauthorize the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which has been operating without authorization since 2013. I think this legislation represents the kind of thoughtful and bipartisan approach to policymaking that is often lacking in this place. In the 114th Congress, I served as chairman of the Subcommittee on Commodity Exchanges, Energy, and Credit, and during several of the hearings on this reauthorization, we heard diverse perspectives from end users, from market participants, and from regulators. That testimony, coupled with the testimony from numerous other hearings at the subcommittee and full committee level in past Congresses, was instrumental in drafting the legislation before us today, which is the same legislation that passed the House of Representatives last Congress in June 2015. This bill includes needed reforms to clarify congressional intent, minimize regulatory burdens, and, most importantly, preserve the ability of necessary risk management markets to serve those who need them. Time and again we have heard how end users--who, I want to point out, were not the cause of the financial crisis--have been the collateral damage of Dodd-Frank reforms. These end users are our farmers, ranchers, manufacturers, and electric and gas utilities, and they rely on the derivatives markets to manage their risk, thereby helping to keep consumer costs low. It is essential that we provide end users with much-needed relief and clarity in order to prevent the cost of unnecessary regulatory burdens that lead to increased costs and uncertainty being shouldered by the American citizens in my district and across the country. I want to note that this legislation in no way undermines the goals of Dodd-Frank. Instead, it simply eases the regulatory burden on those who use the derivatives markets not so they can speculate, but so they can hedge risk. Ultimately, this bill is about protecting the American producer and the American consumer. I want to close by thanking Chairman Conaway for his strong leadership on the House Committee on Agriculture, and the ranking member of the Commodity Exchanges, Energy, and Credit Subcommittee and my colleague from Georgia (Mr. David Scott), who has been a steady partner throughout this effort. We have worked diligently to produce legislation that provides needed reforms to ensure our regulatory framework protects the integrity of our markets, while not limiting the ability of end users to access those tools to conduct their business. Mr. Chairman, I believe the CFTC should be reauthorized, and I am proud to support H.R. 238, the Commodity End-User Relief Act, and I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for this legislation.

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Yes, Mr. Chair.

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I would point out that there is over $200 million in the account. If somebody were going to make $200 million subject to the appropriations process, I imagine any bureaucrat would object if that was going to happen to their agency. But the fact of the matter is, that is one of the ways that we as Members of Congress are able to make sure that taxpayer funds are spent where we expect them to be spent. This does not in any way, shape, or form hinder the ability to pay out to whistleblowers. I firmly believe we should be paying whistleblowers. If the fund needs additional resources, we have the ability to appropriate it, but it would prevent the agency from maintaining balances well in excess of what was anticipated in the Dodd-Frank legislation. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, there is something I very much want to speak on. I rise today on behalf of my many constituents back in Georgia's Eighth Congressional District who have been negatively impacted by ObamaCare. It is pretty clear to the vast majority of us that the attempt to fix our Nation's healthcare problems by inserting more Federal control into the system has simply failed. There are some counties in the district that I represent in middle and south Georgia that are down to just one--maybe two--insurance providers that people can choose from. That is not competition, and that is not affordable. It is not even a choice really, and it is certainly not ``if you like your plan you can keep it.'' My colleagues and I on the Republican Study Committee have worked for a couple of years, and we have offered a plan to repeal ObamaCare and replace it with patient-centered reforms and free-market solutions for American citizens. The American Healthcare Reform Act is not just about repealing ObamaCare. It is about fixing problems that existed in the healthcare system before ObamaCare and problems that, quite honestly, were made worse by ObamaCare. There is a lot of talk about what is in the bill that is a problem. I would like to talk just a second today about what is not in the bill that is a problem. Mr. Speaker, the President, by leaving the health insurance industry exempt from the antitrust laws of the country, created a bigger problem than we had prior to the healthcare bill going in place. That's right. I want you to hear what I said. Under ObamaCare, health insurance providers are exempt from the antitrust laws. These are the very laws that are designed to promote competition for the benefit of the consumer. How is it that ObamaCare can mandate that Americans purchase a product from an industry that that very bill left exempt from playing by the rules? Why did the President and the Democratic leaders leave the health insurance industry exempt from the antitrust laws in the bill? I have asked these questions over and over. It is baffling to me. It means the big boys can play and the little man has to pay. I wish somebody from the press would ask that question. I don't understand why the press doesn't ask the Democratic Party: Why did you leave the health insurance industry exempt from the antitrust laws of the country? It is a question the President should answer. The American Healthcare Reform Act reverses that. Our legislation injects much-needed competition into the health insurance marketplace by eliminating the antitrust exemptions for the insurance providers. By applying the antitrust laws to the insurance industry, we are making the market more competitive which, in turn, will drive down premium cost, increase choice, and does so without adding any new taxes. I hope the American Healthcare Reform Act will serve as the baseline for discussions on how to repeal and replace ObamaCare, bring about debate on how to lower healthcare costs, and allow for input from both sides of the aisle, which is something ObamaCare did not do. Along the way, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Speaker, I sure do wish the press would ask the President and the Democratic leadership: How could you do that to the American citizens?

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on Roll Call Number 613 on suspending the rules and passing H.R. 5143, the Transparent Insurance Standards Act, I am not recorded because I was detained. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA.

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, Representative Crawford and I would like to recognize Mr. David Wildy of Manila, Arkansas for being selected as the 2016 Swisher Sweets/Sunbelt Expo Southeastern Farmer of the Year. Receiving the award over nine other state finalists, Mr. Wildy was honored at the Willie B. Withers Luncheon on October 18, 2016, the opening day of the Sunbelt Ag Expo in Moultrie, Georgia. Upon graduating from the University of Arkansas in 1975, Mr. Wildy became the fifth-generation Wildy to take over the family's century old farm, where he oversees the farm's cotton, corn, soybean, wheat, peanut and potato production. Throughout his career, Mr. Wildy has found success not only in developing his family farm but also in strengthening agriculture in his home state of Arkansas. In farming communities across the Southeast, Mr. Wildy is known as a generous man who shares his farm's resources with agricultural scientists and researchers from private industries, public universities, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Mr. Wildy has also achieved distinction as a hard-working public servant and philanthropist in his community. He has served as President of the Mississippi County Farm Bureau, member of the USDA-Farm Service Agency in Mississippi County, member of the University of Arkansas Agriculture Development Council, member of the Arkansas Northeastern College Foundation Board of Governors, board member of the St. Francis Levee District of Arkansas, and board member of the Arkansas Certified Crop Advisor. Mr. Wildy has also championed education in his community, providing scholarships to local high school graduates and giving books to elementary school students. Through his actions, service, and devotion to his farm and his community, Mr. Wildy has demonstrated profound leadership and dedication to the agriculture industry. On behalf of the House Agriculture Committee, we would like to thank David Wildy for his service and congratulate him on the honor of being the 2016 Swisher Sweets/Sunbelt Expo Southeastern Farmer of the Year.

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I want to thank Mr. Collins and I want to thank my colleague from Iowa. This is a bipartisan issue. Before I speak on behalf of the community pharmacists, I want to just take a second and speak on behalf of the taxpayers, the hardworking men and women in this country. Free markets are transparent markets, and if we had transparency in the system, we probably wouldn't be here today because the American public wouldn't stand for what is going on. Unfortunately, we haven't seen any news reports or any reporting to inform the public of all of the things that have happened over the last couple of years, but we saw it on the EpiPen just a couple of weeks ago. You saw what happens when the press reports, the public finds out what is going on: pressure is put on, and then a response comes--maybe not the response that would have been what we would call equitable for the patients that need the treatment, but at least a response came. It is not just EpiPens, though. It is not just multihundred-dollar drugs and multithousand-dollar drugs. When we talk about drugs as simple as nitroglycerin tablets, again, you, as the taxpayer, are the largest purchaser of this through the government. Nitroglycerin tablets have gone from 5 cents apiece to $5 apiece. Doxycycline tablets, an antibiotic that has been on the market for many, many years--again, another generic drug. It has gone from pennies apiece to dollars apiece. I know my colleague, Buddy Carter, could probably name more drugs for you than I can where we have seen those same type of hundredfold increases in the price of drugs. I can tell you that the hardworking taxpayers of this country, in the end, pay that bill. One of the best things that we can do for you is make sure that we are trying to shed light on and bring transparency to this system and to make sure that we are keeping that small-business owner in business so that we are able to get the information that we need to do a better job for you from them. That is where our Nation's community pharmacists come in. I know for me, I walk into my local pharmacist, and they can tell me right offhand what the most egregious price increases were of the past week, and they are happening every single week, ladies and gentlemen. These independent businesses operate in underserved rural areas, like many of the counties that I represent in Georgia's Eighth District. Access to care is already an issue in these areas, and it would certainly be much worse if our community pharmacies didn't exist. In these areas, doctors are many miles away. Local pharmacists deliver the flu shots. They give advice on everything from over-the-counter drugs to drug interdictions, and if you have got a sick child, most of them will meet you at the store after hours to help your child get the medication that they need. Try that with somebody who is not a small- business owner. It is crucial that these pharmacies have a level playing field to stay in business against large-scale competitors and the middlemen, if you will, the pharmacy benefit managers, when trying to run a successful business in such a challenging and complex environment as the U.S. healthcare system. Where I am from, these local pharmacists are fixtures in their communities. They have known their customers most of their lives, and it instills a level of trust in those patients that is rarely seen in today's day and time. I have made some stops at these local community pharmacies: some to get my own prescriptions filled, some to see how things are going with the small-business owners, some to see how other things are going in the community. I never fail to appreciate the unique value that the men and women that work in these local pharmacies add to their customers' lives and to our communities. Unfortunately, on these visits, I am also troubled because I continue to learn, as I have mentioned before, just how much more difficult it is becoming for those men and women to serve the people who have depended on them for years and to compete with some of the larger entities in the healthcare marketplace. Imagine a situation where your competitor's company gets to come in and audit your books. That is exactly what happens. That is exactly what happens when one of the big-box retailers who owns a PBM goes in and audits the local community pharmacy. Take, for example, one of the other problems that we have: the increased prevalence of preferred networks in Medicare part D plans. Currently, many Medicare beneficiaries are effectively told by pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs, which pharmacy to use based on exclusionary agreements between those PBMs and, for the most part, big-box pharmacies. Most people don't recognize that the big-box owns the PBM. Patients pay for this. They pay for this in lower customer service and higher copays. When their pharmacy of choice is excluded from the preferred network, it creates undue stress on the patients and forces them to do business where they may not want to do business. The majority of the time, your local pharmacy is never given the opportunity to participate in the network. That is an unfair business practice. Another issue I often hear about from community pharmacies is the burdensome DIR fees. We as Americans, we pretty much assume that when you go in and you buy something and you leave with what you pay for that the transaction is over. But with medicine at your local pharmacy, it is a lot different. That transaction is anything but clear and simple for the pharmacist. Pharmacy benefit managers use so-called DIR fees to claw back money from pharmacies on individual claims long after the claim has been resolved. It can be a typographical error and the pharmacy benefit manager will call back 100 percent of what was paid to the pharmacist. That means the pharmacy doesn't know the final reimbursement amount they will receive for a claim for weeks or even months; and even more so, they are not even reimbursed for the wholesale cost of the drugs that they dispense. In 2014, CMS issued proposed guidance that would provide some relief to our pharmacies struggling to deal with the increasing and opaque DIR fees imposed on them. As I said, anyone who runs a business knows you can't operate when you don't know what your costs are or what your reimbursements are. That is why I have led over 30 of my colleagues in sending two separate letters to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services urging them to move forward and finalize proposed guidance on this issue. Unfortunately, they have yet to move on that guidance. I and, I know, many of my colleagues, in a bipartisan manner, are going to continue to advocate for CMS to use their authority to ensure a level playing field for all Medicare part D participants. When competition is stifled and our small businesses suffer, so do the customers of our local community pharmacies. I hope the committees of jurisdiction will consider these bipartisan bills. Madam Speaker, I want to thank you for your time. I want to thank Mr. Collins for hosting this Special Order today.

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 40th anniversary of the World Absolute Speed Record flight by the Lockheed SR-71 `Blackbird,' one of the greatest achievements in aviation history. Even today, the 2,193 mph record set by the SR-71 `Blackbird' is still recognized by the World Air Sports Federation as the fastest humans have travelled during a sanctioned world record flight. As the Representative from Georgia's Eighth Congressional District, I am deeply honored that a machine as magnificent as this aircraft rests alongside the Global Hawk and the U2 at the Museum of Aviation in Warner Robins, Georgia. The SR-71 `Blackbird' flew for the first time on December 22, 1964. This aircraft, which could fly faster than the speed of a bullet at altitudes greater than 80,000 feet, remained the fastest and highest flying aircraft for the duration of its thirty five year career. The SR-71 `Blackbird' served crucial roles in the areas of combat, reconnaissance, and research for the United States. Due to its unmatched speed, altitude, and state-of-the-art stealth capabilities, the SR-71 `Blackbird' was integral in providing strategic advantages during the Vietnam War, the Yom Kippur War, and the Cold War. It also enabled the United States to conduct vital surveillance missions over countries such as Libya, Lebanon, Yemen, North Korea, and China during periods of unrest. I would like to thank the crew of the record breaking flight, Captain Eldon Joersz and Major George Morgan Jr., for their service to the United States and their role in marking the SR-71 `Blackbird's' place in history. I would also like to thank the Museum of Aviation in Warner Robins, Georgia for making it possible for visitors from around the country to see this great symbol of American innovation.

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize Lieutenant General James ``JJ'' Jackson today in honor of his retirement as Chief of the Air Force Reserve and Commander of the Air Force Reserve Command and thank him for his many years of dedicated service to our country. A 1978 graduate of the United States Air Force Academy, Lt Gen Jackson completed fourteen years of active duty, flying tours in Europe and the Pacific before joining the Air Force Reserve in 1992. During his years of service, Lt Gen Jackson held numerous wing leadership and command positions as well as staff assignments at the Eighth Air Force and Headquarters U.S. Strategic Command, Headquarters Pacific Air Forces, Headquarters U.S. Pacific Command, and Headquarters U.S. Air Force. Lt Gen Jackson also earned major decorations and awards including the Distinguished Service Medal with oak leaf cluster, Legion of Merit with oak leaf cluster, Meritorious Service Medal with three oak leaf clusters, Aerial Achievement Medal with oak leaf cluster, and the Air Force Commendation Medal with two oak leaf clusters. As a career instructor pilot and evaluator, Lt Gen Jackson was a command pilot, logging more than 3,600 hours in the F-4 Phantom II, F-16 Fighting Falcon, and KC-135R Stratotanker. Through his years of service and leadership, Lt Gen Jackson demonstrated his unwavering loyalty and dedication to our country and commitment to protecting our freedom. On behalf of the House Armed Services Committee and the people of Georgia's Eighth Congressional District, I would like to thank Lt Gen Jackson for his service and wish him the best in his retirement.

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time is remaining?

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5525) to prohibit universal service support of commercial mobile service and commercial mobile data service through the Lifeline program.

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material in the Record on the bill.

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5525, the End Taxpayer Funded Cell Phones Act of 2016, which would prohibit universal service fund support through the Lifeline program to commercial mobile and data service carriers. This legislation would restore the Lifeline program to its original intent of providing access to telecommunication services for eligible individuals via landline phones. Many of us in this body and many of our constituents have witnessed tents and stands outside of our grocery stores or on the street corner giving away so-called free phones. At a time when everyday Americans are working harder and harder to make ends meet and when government spending is out of control, our constituents don't understand why this is still going on. And, Mr. Speaker, neither do I. Before I go further, I want to be clear. These Americans who accept these free phones are not the ones who are taking advantage of this system. It is the carriers who stand to benefit from the system that are taking advantage of our citizens, and the program is systemically unable to stop the cycle of waste, fraud, and abuse. When offered something for free with little or no verification and with little or no knowledge about who is paying for that item, I believe you would be hard pressed to find someone who wouldn't, at least, consider taking the item. The problem is that there is a financial incentive for the carriers to expand the number of Lifeline users, and there is far less incentive to diligently verify the eligibility of the individuals who apply. The Lifeline program, created under President Reagan to serve a legitimate need, has largely gone unchecked and has ballooned since 2005, when it was expanded to include mobile phone services. While the FCC has implemented reforms aimed at rooting out the waste, fraud, and abuse in the program, serious issues remain to this day. For example, the National Lifeline Accountability Database was created to help carriers prevent duplication of service. However, certain carriers use the independent economic household override to easily circumvent the one-phone-number-per-household rule by merely checking the box on a form without any supporting documentation. Data recently obtained by the FCC reveals that between October of 2014 and April of 2016, carriers enrolled 4,291,647 duplicate subscribers to the Lifeline program by widespread use of this targeted exception to the program's one-person household rule. When skirting the rules is so easy, fraud becomes rampant. Additionally, Mr. Speaker, in April of this year, the FCC fined a carrier, Total Call Mobile, for overbilling the Lifeline program for millions of dollars by fraudulently enrolling duplicate and ineligible consumers. Again, the carrier, Total Call Mobile, was able to do this by circumventing the National Lifeline Accountability Database and manipulating customer information. These reports come on the heels of the FCC's recent announcement to increase the so-called budget for Lifeline by $725 million, a tax increase on Americans which is neither subject to congressional oversight nor approval. While the widespread fraud is not hindering eligible recipients from receiving phones, it is costing taxpaying Americans money. In order to increase the Lifeline budget, if you will, the FCC must increase the universal service fee. I bet most Americans don't know what fee I am talking about. The universal service fee is a tax on the bottom of your phone bill right here. That so-called fee is what pays for the FCC's Universal Service Fund, which includes the Lifeline program. When the costs of the Lifeline program go up because of waste, fraud, and abuse, you know who pays for it? Everyday Americans, who are already struggling to make ends meet, get a tax increase on their phone bill. The FCC is asking for Americans to shoulder the cost of this increase without fully addressing the fraud, waste, and abuse within the program. It is clear that this lack of accountability and rampant fraud is systemic to the Lifeline program, and the price of this continues to be paid by Americans across the country. American taxpayers are already overburdened, Mr. Speaker, and should not be forced to pay for a program that is unquestionably riddled with waste, fraud, and abuse. It is simple good governance to rein in programs like Lifeline that have vastly expanded in scope and have done so with an ever-increasing share of Americans' hard-earned dollars. Congress must act to impose fiscal discipline to ensure increased costs are not shouldered by Americans. I do not stand here today and say that there is not a need for Lifeline, nor do I deny the fact that there are a good number of people in this country who are eligible for this program. We should continue to ensure that the Lifeline program exists to provide those people with access to critical telecommunications services, but we should also remember the many people making just barely enough not to be eligible for assistance through Lifeline who would be hurt by any increase in the taxes on their phone bill: an increase caused by a government that won't deal with the crisis of waste, fraud, and abuse. The original intent of the Lifeline program was pure: provide access to telecommunications services to consumers, including low-income consumers at reasonable and affordable rates. My legislation aims to restore that original intent. We can provide for people in need without taking from those who have nothing left to give. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions).

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Allen).

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to correct a couple of things that were said from the start. First of all, this piece of legislation does not eliminate the Lifeline program. It does move it back to land lines and away from the cellular services. I would also, respectfully, submit that multiple pieces of legislation have been introduced in an effort to address the waste, fraud, and abuse in this program. The number that I mentioned earlier-- 4,291,647--is cases where we believe there has been an abuse of the system. The phone companies get approximately $10 a month per phone that they hand out. That is a tremendous amount of waste, fraud, and abuse. It is almost $500 million. So when we see that much waste, fraud, and abuse in the system, we as a Congress have a responsibility to put the integrity back into that system. There have been a tremendous number of pieces of legislation that have been introduced. They have all not been able to come to the floor. I want to thank our leadership for putting a bill on the floor that does the one thing in attempting to eliminate that waste, fraud, and abuse of this system. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I, again, want to reiterate that this bill does not eliminate the Lifeline program. It takes it back to the original intent. I appreciate the newfound commitment to deal with the waste, fraud, and abuse, and I look forward to working with you on that legislation, if this one should not pass. We have a responsibility to make sure that, when we are creating access to any program, we have integrity in this program. This is not in any way, shape, or form intended to do anything but to bring that integrity back. Again, Mr. Speaker, this is about eliminating approximately $500 million a year worth of waste, fraud, and abuse. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.