W. Steube

Mr. STEUBE

Mr. STEUBE. Madam Speaker, let me address the complete misrepresentations of fact that we have been hearing from Democrats since Roe has been overturned. There has never been a constitutional right to end the life of an innocent, unborn child--never. It doesn't exist in the Constitution, and Congress has never passed a law allowing for the murder of the unborn. In fact, the opposite exists. In the Fifth and 14th Amendments to the Constitution, there is a constitutional right for any person to not be deprived of life, liberty, or property. Certainly, an unborn child is a person. What else could it be? Therefore, that person shall not be deprived of life pursuant to the Constitution, period. Finally, the U.S. Supreme Court got it right and made it clear that ``the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion.'' Over 63 million children have been murdered since Roe was decided. That is not freedom. That is genocide.

Mr. STEUBE

Mr. STEUBE. Madam Speaker, guns are not the cause of evil, just like the vehicle used by the domestic terrorist in Waukesha, Wisconsin, to mow down innocent people in a parade killing six was not the cause of that evil. The person driving it was. Why aren't the pictures of the victims of that heinous act being shown by the Democrats on the floor today, like those victims in Uvalde? Where was the left's cry to ban vehicles that killed those innocent lives in Waukesha? There are no cries to ban cars because that is not on the left's agenda. Banning guns is. And Democrats use these heinous crimes to further the long sought-after political objective of disarming America, and many Democrats in this Chamber have called for outright bans on certain firearms. There is a moral decay in our country that has been created by the left. They have torn down traditional institutions, taken God out of our classrooms, and systematically destroyed the notion of traditional families and values. Just look at these numbers in a recent article from The Christian Post: Seventy-five percent of most cited school shooters in America are fatherless; 60 percent of America's rapists grew up without fathers; 63 percent of teenagers who commit suicide don't have a father in their life; 72 percent of adolescent murderers are fatherless. The same was true for the murderer at Robb Elementary. And I could go on. Why isn't the majority talking about that? Why isn't the majority talking about solutions to have role models in children's lives? Because that doesn't accomplish a policy objective for them. This bill, nor any bill before us this week, will stop mass shootings. This bill won't even decrease gun violence, and the facts and evidence from the jurisdictions with similar policies make that clear. Just look at any holiday weekend in Chicago and see how many people have been shot with many of these policies already in place. This bill is simply a step further to restrict the ability of law- abiding citizens to own firearms and defend themselves while doing nothing to address the cultural rot that leads to these acts. This bill seeks to take the Second Amendment rights away from 18- to 20-year-olds by taking away their ability to purchase a firearm. Comparing Census data on the total 18- to 20-year-old population with Department of Justice data on violent crimes committed by that age group--and this includes violent crimes not involving guns--only 0.3 percent of 18- to 20-year-olds commit violent crimes in a year. Madam Speaker, when you look at murder, including murder without guns, only 0.013 percent of 18- to 20-year-olds commit murder in a year. So today Democrats are going to take away the lawful right for 99.7 percent of adult Americans between the ages of 18 and 20 for the acts of a few wicked people. Now, think about that, Madam Speaker. So the daughter off to college and living by herself can't buy a shotgun to keep in her home to protect herself against a rapist all because of 0.3 percent of that age group has committed a violent crime. The magazine limits in the bill are even more egregious because it affects all Americans and all firearms, not just rifles, and will effectively serve as a ban on most commonly used handguns. As I demonstrated in the Judiciary Committee last week, numerous firearms that millions of Americans use every single day to protect themselves and their families could be rendered useless by a 15-round magazine limit. And those 15-round magazine limits have absolutely no effect on solving mass shootings. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to stand for freedom, to stand for the Constitution, and to stand for the right of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves.

Mr. STEUBE

Mr. STEUBE. Madam Speaker, my colleague, Mr. Donalds from Florida, and I are grateful to recognize the Spring Swing Sun Safety partnership between Moffitt Cancer Center and Major League Baseball. This partnership works to prevent skin cancer by offering sun safety education and free skin cancer screenings at Spring Training baseball games. Such efforts are important here in Florida, the Sunshine State, where we see a high incidence of melanoma and other deadly forms of skin cancer. We are pleased, therefore, to join with Moffitt Cancer Center and Major League Baseball to raise awareness to combat this disease. It is important to limit sun exposure when possible, wear sunscreen if you are in the sun, and have your skin checked by a health care professional once a year. We hope all baseball fans safely enjoy Florida's sunshine and the great tradition of Spring Training baseball in our state.

Mr. STEUBE

Mr. STEUBE. Madam Speaker, this is a dangerous piece of legislation that comes at a time when our national security and our public health are being threatened by a dire crisis at our southern border. Only Democrats would bring a bill to the floor during a surge at our southern border that would make it easier for terrorists to enter our country. As someone who served in the war on terror and served in Operation Iraqi Freedom, the last thing we should be doing as a Nation is making it easier for terrorists in Iran, Iraq, Syria, and other terrorist-harboring nations to travel to the United States. Despite the harrowing statistics we see coming from the southern border with record-setting numbers of illegal crossings and unaccompanied minors, my colleagues on the left continue to ignore and downplay the actual facts, while terrorists and COVID-positive illegal immigrants are granted unprecedented access to our country. The Biden administration has driven illegal crossings up to historic highs by encouraging more illegal immigration and loosening restrictions to give criminals a free pass. These policy reversals, and now this legislation, will be directly responsible for what will go down in history as our biggest failure of border security in our lifetime. Now, rather than addressing the hundreds of thousands of illegal border crossings this year, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are still spending their time trying to attack the successful policies from the Trump administration that actually drove our border numbers down and kept Americans safe. Rather than attacking the Trump administration at the expense of the American people, my colleagues on the left should instead think about spending their time trying to reinstate some of his policies that were proven effective, like continuing border wall construction or ending chain migration. Even more hypocritical, while telling American citizens to stay home from work, school and to refrain from normal life due to a global pandemic, legislation like this keeps sending the message to illegal aliens, even those from dangerous countries, that the United States is open for them to flood our borders and be taken care of by our taxpayers. At a time when there is a border crisis, a global pandemic, and emerging national security threats, we should not be handicapping any current or future President from exercising their executive authority to keep our country safe. In fact, the Obama-Biden administration used this authority 19 times during their administration. The only reason why my colleagues are pushing this is because of their hatred for President Trump and his actions to restrict entry from certain countries that protected our national security.

Mr. STEUBE

Mr. STEUBE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of our Nation's law enforcement. Blessed are the peacemakers for they will be called children of God. Mr. Speaker, since last summer, members of law enforcement have faced attacks and dangerous rhetoric, even from Members of this body. As officers put their lives on the line to protect all of us, our communities, and our families, we have seen nothing but dangerous attempts from the left to defund, dismantle, and disband the police even as we stand here today, surrounded by razor wire, the National Guard and increased police presence to protect you, but you don't want them to protect our citizens. Mr. Speaker, this bill would end qualified immunity. Qualified immunity is only applicable when they follow their training and protocol and protects officers from being personally sued for official actions. If we repeal qualified immunity, we will not find anyone willing to serve as police officers because they can be sued out of everything they own for doing their jobs. Mr. Speaker, if that is not enough, this bill would threaten our officers' physical safety by denying them protective gear and equipment. The Democrats and radical left are going to defund and dismantle departments and take away officers' liability protection for doing their job. Then they are going to take away their physical protection from harm. We will be lucky to have a police force in America in 10 years.

Mr. STEUBE

Mr. STEUBE. Mr. Speaker, unlike most speeches you will hear on this floor today, I am going to start with the truth. Deuteronomy 22:5 states: A woman must not wear men's clothing, nor a man wear women's clothing, for the Lord your God detests anyone who does this. Now, this verse isn't concerned about clothing styles but with people determining their own sexual identities. It is not clothing or personal style that offends God but, rather, the use of one's appearance to act out or take on a sexual identity different from the one biologically assigned by God at birth. In his wisdom, God intentionally made each individual uniquely either male or female. When men or women claim to be able to choose their own sexual identity, they are making a statement that God did not know what he was doing when he created them. I am going to quote directly from Dr. Tony Evans' commentary Bible on this passage of Scripture: ``Men and women equally share in bearing the image of God, but he has designed them to be distinct from and complementary toward one another. The gender confusion that exists in our culture today is a clear rejection of God's good design. Whenever a nation's laws no longer reflect the standards of God, that nation is in rebellion against him and will inevitably bear the consequences.'' Mr. Speaker, I am going to read that line again. ``Whenever a nation's laws no longer reflect the standards of God, that nation is in rebellion against him and will inevitably bear the consequences.'' I think we are seeing the consequences of rejecting God here in our country today, and this bill speaks directly against what is laid out in Scripture. Our government, through this bill, is going to redefine what a woman is and what a man is. It can be anyone who identifies in that gender at any time. You are going to singlehandedly end women's sports and all the gains for women's rights contained in Title IX that was passed in this body since 1972. Singlehandedly destroying women's sports in the name of equality, how ironic. If biological men compete in women's sports, then it is no longer women's sports at all. We might as well just have one sports team per event, and women, transgender women, men, transgender men can all compete against each other. How is that for equality? If biological differences didn't matter, we would never have created and funded separate teams for men and women. We know that science supports the idea that there are performance differences between biological men and women in competitive sports, and it is just common sense to the vast majority of Americans, just not common sense to this Democratic majority. In Connecticut, three high school female track runners have had to file a lawsuit because their Title IX protections were violated by biological male athletes competing against them. They had no choice but to file suit after they were forced to compete against biological male athletes, and after those biological male athletes brought home 15 women's State championship titles. I could stand up here and give you example after example of this happening throughout our country in all sports categories, but I don't have near the time. Mr. Speaker, if you want to protect women's sports, then vote against this bill.

Mr. STEUBE

Mr. STEUBE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. For 3 years, Democratic Members of this body and the mainstream media lied to the American people that the Trump campaign colluded and conspired with Russia--for years--after an exhaustive investigation was found that there was no evidence that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. Should Democratic Members of this body resign for lying to the American people repeatedly and sowing division and dissension all across America? And it was all a lie. Madam Speaker, you have brought one Article of Impeachment to the floor, and your one allegation alleges: ``Donald John Trump engaged in high crimes and misdemeanors by inciting violence against the Government of United States.'' In D.C., it is a crime to ``intentionally or recklessly act in such a manner to cause another person to be in reasonable fear and to incite or provoke violence when there is a likelihood that such violence will ensue.'' There was no language in the President's speech that incited or provoked violence. In fact, at around the 18-minute mark, he stated: ``Peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.'' You may think that he is inciting violence because he believes there was election fraud. That is his opinion, and he is entitled to that opinion, just like all of you were entitled to your false and fraudulent opinion that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. The legal elements of incitement are based on the Supreme Court case Brandenburg v. Ohio, in which the Supreme Court set the standard for speech that could be prosecuted without violating the First Amendment. Brandenburg's speech called for violence against groups of Americans, and the Court found that Brandenburg's comments were not directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action. The Court found that it was protected speech, and he was calling for violence. That is the current law of the land. The President didn't even mention violence last Wednesday, much less provoke or incite it. There was no crime committed; therefore, no basis for impeachment, as you need a high crime or misdemeanor for a basis. You have created a mockery out of the impeachment process, and I urge all my colleagues to stand against it and fight the latest fraud being perpetrated against the American people by the radical left.

Mr. STEUBE

Mr. STEUBE. Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss if I didn't address the atrocities occurring right here on the House floor today. A week ago, this building was attacked; and instead of working with Republicans to attempt to prevent that from ever happening again, the Speaker and her Democratic colleagues think an appropriate response is to prevent Members from exercising their Second Amendment constitutional rights in the very place that wasn't secure a week ago. This attack didn't come from the inside. It came from the outside. And to respond by restricting Members' Second Amendment rights in the very institution that is supposed to uphold those rights is appalling. Take note, America. This is what you have to look forward to in a Joe Biden administration. If they can do it right here in the people's House, they will attempt to do it across the country. The plain language of the 25th Amendment is abundantly clear. Although I am an attorney, you don't have to be an attorney to understand that the Vice President is the principal required to invoke the amendment. The beginning of Section 4 states: ``Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide . . . declare that the President is unable to discharge. . . . '' You must have the Vice President invoking this, and you don't. The Vice President has been clear, he is unwilling to invoke the 25th Amendment. It is not Congress' role to override him. It doesn't state in the amendment that Congress makes that determination. The Vice President does. But my Democratic colleagues will stop at nothing to remove this President, even a week before his term expires. The plain reading of the 25th Amendment demonstrates that this is the wrong approach. An understanding of last week's events demonstrates this is the wrong approach. And a consideration of the political tactics that we have seen in recent days, months, and years tells you that this is a disingenuous approach at best and 100 percent politically motivated. I was elected in 2018. My entire congressional career has been consumed by impeaching or removing President Trump. After the Russia collusion hoax and a phone call to the Ukrainian President, and then a failed impeachment attempt that resulted in an acquittal, here we are, a little more than a week away from a new President being sworn in, attempting this travesty both to the Constitution and to America as a whole. This is dangerous, unconstitutional, and does nothing to heal this country and move this country forward.

Mr. STEUBE

Mr. STEUBE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Miss Emma Vana for her outstanding efforts to show appreciation to our law enforcement officers. Emma is a 9-year-old resident of Punta Gorda, Florida. Since July, Emma has handed out over 250 homemade blue line flags to law enforcement officers across Florida to thank them for their service to our community. She has passed out flags in Alachua, Charlotte, Collier, Columbia, DeSoto, Hamilton, Hendry, Lee, Levy, Madison, Manatee, Polk, Sarasota, and Suwanee Counties so far. However, this is only the start for her efforts to give our members of law enforcement the appreciation and support they deserve. When asked why she appreciates law enforcement officers, Emma explains that they ``put bad people in jail and protect our communities.'' As Emma understands, Florida is home to some of our nation's finest law enforcement officers who risk their lives every day to ensure our communities and families are safe. Emma's effort to show appreciation comes during a time when law enforcement officers across the country face threats and physical attacks from those calling to defund the police. Emma should be a role model for all Floridians and Americans in standing up to defend the police, not defund them. I am honored to have the privilege to represent outstanding constituents such as Emma. Her selfless acts of kindness inspire all of us as she continues to go above and beyond for Floridians. It is individuals like her who make Florida and America great.

Mr. STEUBE

Mr. STEUBE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert).

Mr. STEUBE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, today, we are here to waste time on an unnecessary resolution to commit to a peaceful transfer of power. To be clear, President Trump and House Republicans are committed to ensuring Americans receive a free and fair election. Republicans are also committed to peaceful transitions of power. Democrats have been the ones to contest Presidential elections. They contested the 2000 election, they contested the 2004 election, and Democrats still refuse to believe that President Trump won the 2016 election fair and square. So ahead of November 3, 2020, the Democrats are using floor time for partisan smear tactics to undermine the President. The administration has been clear. On September 24, 2020, Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany stated: ``The President will accept the results of a free and fair election. He will accept the will of the American people.'' The real question today is: Will the Democrats accept the results of the election? They are already questioning the legitimacy of this election. Hillary Clinton, the Democrats' nominee in 2016, has advised: ``Joe Biden should not concede under any circumstances.'' A senior House Democrat stated that President Trump is not going to win fairly. Democrat Presidential nominee Joe Biden has said that his ``single greatest concern'' is that the President is ``going to try and steal this election.'' This resolution is just another attempt by the Democrats to instill fear within the American people, just one more hoax for them to perpetrate upon the American people. Not only have Democrats prematurely questioned the results of the election; they have proactively sought to erode basic election security safeguards as States move toward all mail-in voting, universal mail-in ballots. This is the concern that President Trump has been warning about. In several States, Democrats are trying to eliminate absentee ballot witness and notary requirements, expanding ballot harvesting, and extending deadlines for States to receive mail-in ballots for up to a week after the election. If successful, Democrats will inevitably open the door to election crimes and administration errors. So while making baseless accusations about President Trump stealing the election, Democrats are also undermining the integrity of the electoral process by pushing for less accountability. On top of that, we are here today to consider a resolution to chastise the President for raising policy concerns about the process. This is ridiculous, and it needs to stop. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. STEUBE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Gaetz).

Mr. STEUBE. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close.

Mr. STEUBE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr Speaker, let's be clear: The real threat to our democracy are the attempts to undermine the election process. Universal mail-in voting is not the same as absentee ballots like we do in Florida. When a voter requests an absentee ballot, she knows to expect it. Universal mail-in voting is when States mass mail ballots to voters, whether or not a voter has moved, has died, or is otherwise no longer eligible to vote or is even a citizen of our country. Universal mail-in voting increases the risk of election crime or administrative error because States are providing prepaid return envelopes for election ballots. The U.S. Postal Service does not typically postmark premarked mail, and although it has a policy to postmark election-related mail, its policy is not foolproof, as we have seen in some primary elections over the summer. All of these last-minute changes will harm the integrity of the election process and risk chaos in the general election. We are already seeing the disastrous results of the Democrats' last-minute process changes. Last week, the Justice Department found that several military ballots were discarded in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania. Seven of the nine ballots were cast for President Trump--not surprising. This month, the Georgia Secretary of State revealed that at least 1,000 Georgians voted twice in the June 2020 primary, once via mail-in balloting and once in person. In New York, Governor Cuomo's last-minute shift to all-mail voting cost thousands of ballots in Chairwoman Maloney's primary to be discarded for lacking postmarks. Election officials took 6 weeks to certify the results of the primary. In a New Jersey municipal election, a last-minute shift to all-mail voting resulted in the Postal Service still delivering ballots to election officials weeks after the election. If these problems occurred in local primary elections, the risk to a national general election is even greater. The President is right to highlight these problems, and I fail to understand why Democrats won't. The best and surest guarantee of electoral integrity is for Americans to vote in person where safe and possible, with absentee ballots available for those who legitimately cannot make it to the polls or have voter ID safeguards in places like we have in Florida. This resolution is nothing but political messaging and creating a narrative without any facts to base it, just like the Russia collusion hoax. There is no question that every single American, including President Trump, wants a peaceful transfer of power after a free and fair election, but this rhetoric and fear-mongering by our friends across the aisle must end. The liberal mainstream media and Democrats should stop this nonsense and let the American people speak. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. STEUBE

Mr. STEUBE. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues in the House to vote in favor of my bill, H.R. 1702, the Free Veterans from Fees Act of 2019. To help foster a culture in America in which all veterans are valued for their service to our nation, we need to do our part to assist those who have served in our military. One way we can honor our nation's heroes is to assist them when they visit national war memorials as they remember all those who fought and are not here today. Throughout the year, several veterans' groups and Gold Star Families visit national war memorials here in Washington, D.C. by honor buses and honor flights through various veterans' organizations. To obtain a permit for their visit, oftentimes veterans' groups must pay administrative fees and other processing costs related to visiting memorials that have been built not only as a testament of their sacrifice, but also to honor those who paid the ultimate sacrifice for our nation. This common sense bill would waive the application fee for any special use permits for veterans' demonstration and special events at war memorials on land administrated by the National Park Service in the District of Columbia. The Free Veterans from Fees Act has bipartisan support and has been endorsed by AMVETS, a veteran organization that represents 250,000 members nationwide. I thank the House Committee on Natural Resources for holding a hearing on this bill and I am pleased to see it on the legislative calendar. You may also remember this bill was passed through the Committee and through suspension on the House floor last Congress, and we hope that we can get this bill passed under suspension this Congress.

Mr. STEUBE

Mr. STEUBE. Madam Speaker, I missed votes due to family obligations. Had I been present, I would have voted NAY on Roll Call No. 179--PQ H. Res. 1092; NAY on Roll Call No. 180--Rule H. Res. 1092; YEA on Roll Call No. 181--MTR H.R. 8015, and NAY on Roll Call No. 182--H.R. 8015.

Mr. STEUBE

Mr. STEUBE. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in opposition to this bill and House Democrats' completely partisan attempt at actual law enforcement reform. They call it the Justice in Policing Act, but this legislation would not achieve justice for anyone. Instead, it would promote anarchy and put our law enforcement officers' lives at risk. It would end legal protection for our officers who actually follow their training and protocol. It would take essential weapons and protective equipment away from our police. In a time like today where law enforcement officers are ambushed and targeted just because of their profession, we are going take away their ability to receive protective equipment? So not only do the Democrats want to take away an officer's legal protection if they follow their training and protocol, then they want to take away their protective vests, protective shields, and protective vehicles they get in military transfers that physically protect our officers from bullets--none of which has anything to do with George Floyd's death. How does this make any sense? I can tell you it doesn't make any sense to the mass majority of Americans who trust that someone will be there when they call 911. This legislation comes from the same party who has been calling to defund the police. Members of this very body have called to defund our police officers and our police departments. I have to ask my colleagues how they think that would help. Defunding the police won't solve any problems and only poses an extraordinary risk to our citizens who depend on society's most basic governmental service of protecting life and property. This is nothing more than an outburst of political emotion and a willingness to take advantage of civil unrest. This civil unrest is not constructive; it is anarchy. It also does not take into account the hundreds of thousands of good police officers risking everything to keep us safe, officers like Julian Keen, Jr., from my State of Florida. Unfortunately, you will never hear about the tragic death of this Black officer in the mainstream media. It doesn't fit the left's narrative, so they ignore it. However, in Florida, we will never forget Officer Keen, who was laid to rest this week, and the positive influence that he had on our community. After the criminal who killed him found out that he was a police officer in plain clothes, he pulled out a gun and killed him. So it begs the question: Who is really responsible for the flaws in law enforcement protocols? All of these departments with all of these problems and issues are all run by Democratic commissions and Democratic city councils. This is not a Federal issue. This is a Minneapolis police issue or an Atlanta police issue or a Ferguson issue or a Chicago issue, where just this past weekend they had one of the most violent weekends over Father's Day weekend. This is an issue with Democratic leadership in these cities that have failed to keep up with standards, training, and protocol. Some of these departments have training standards dating back to the eighties. ``Why?'' you ask. Because their Democratic leadership has failed to make necessary reforms in their departments. And now it is the Federal Government's role to police local police departments run by a Democratic city council or commission? Will those commissions and leaders ever be held accountable? Everyone in this Chamber wants justice for George Floyd and his family, and they will get that in a court of law, where justice belongs. If the Democratic majority truly wants to reform our police departments and if they truly want to fix the problems, then the focus should be on the agencies with the problems and their leadership, not passing a progressive messaging bill in an election year that they know has no chance of becoming law. This legislation doesn't get justice for anyone. Instead, it fails to address the real underlying problems, while attempting to vilify our law enforcement officers. It won't go anywhere in the Senate, and it certainly won't go to the President's desk. So let's call it what it is: a political messaging bill. The longer we spend on this, the more time we waste not working on actual, tangible solutions. Time to put politics aside and work on real solutions where the problems are actually located.

Mr. STEUBE

Mr. STEUBE. Madam Speaker, I thank Mr. Budd for yielding. Madam Speaker, I am honored to have the opportunity to stand for justice with the victims of sanctuary cities. It is completely offensive to me as an American that we have cities and, in some cases, entire States declaring themselves sanctuaries for illegal immigrants who are mercilessly committing crimes in our Nation. American citizens are being assaulted, raped, and murdered at the hands of illegal immigrants who should have been deported by ICE, but due to the blatant disregard of Federal law, cities are giving sanctuary to criminals and rapists while actual American citizens can do absolutely nothing about it. Just last year, two illegal immigrants committed a horrific gang- related murder in the Seattle area. One took a baseball bat to the head and body of a high school student, killing him. Another took a machete to the teen, chopping off an arm and a leg and hacking at his neck. This followed another gang-related murder in King County, Washington, that also involved an illegal immigrant that local authorities refused to turn over to ICE for deportation. In the wake of the killings, King County officials have defended their policies and complained that ICE is harassing the county. Apparently, officials in King County, Washington, would rather have Americans be murdered by machete-wielding illegal immigrants than deport noncitizens who pose a risk to those who actually call America home. Ken Cuccinelli, Acting Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security, stated at the time: ``You're talking about literally crimes that never should have happened in this country because they're people who, upon their first interaction with the justice system, should have been deported.'' Therefore, if cities are going to blatantly ignore the law of the land and provide sanctuary to illegal immigrants that commit crimes in our country, then those cities should be held financially accountable to the families of the victims, and those cities should be stripped of Federal funding until they comply with Federal law. I will take a step further. It should be a criminal offense for elected officials to blatantly ignore Federal immigration law, and they should be held accountable for denying ICE the ability to protect our country. I encourage all of my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mr. STEUBE

Mr. STEUBE. Mr. Speaker, I missed this vote due to overlapping schedules. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 81.

Mr. STEUBE

Mr. STEUBE. Madam Speaker, I was absent for votes due to a personal family matter out of state. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 55, and YEA on Roll Call No. 56.

Mr. STEUBE

Mr. STEUBE. Madam Speaker, in light of how the House concluded 2019 with the passage of Articles of Impeachment, and the current state of the process, the constituents of Florida's 17th Congressional District and all Americans must be informed about the truth of this process as accurately conveyed in this letter from President Trump to Speaker Pelosi. The White House, Washington, December 17, 2019. Hon. Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Madam Speaker: I write to express my strongest and most powerful protest against the partisan impeachment crusade being pursued by the Democrats in the House of Representatives. This impeachment represents an unprecedented and unconstitutional abuse of power by Democrat Lawmakers, unequaled in nearly two and a half centuries of American legislative history. The Articles of Impeachment introduced by the House Judiciary Committee are not recognizable under any standard of Constitutional theory, interpretation, or jurisprudence. They include no crimes, no misdemeanors, and no offenses whatsoever. You have cheapened the importance of the very ugly word, impeachment! By proceeding with your invalid impeachment, you are violating your oaths of office, you are breaking your allegiance to the Constitution, and you are declaring open war on American Democracy. You dare to invoke the Founding Fathers in pursuit of this election-nullification scheme--yet your spiteful actions display unfettered contempt for America's founding and your egregious conduct threatens to destroy that which our Founders pledged their very lives to build. Even worse than offending the Founding Fathers, you are offending Americans of faith by continually saying ``I pray for the President,'' when you know this statement is not true, unless it is meant in a negative sense. It is a terrible thing you are doing, but you will have to live with it, not I! Your first claim, ``Abuse of Power,'' is a completely disingenuous, meritless, and baseless invention of your imagination. You know that I had a totally innocent conversation with the President of Ukraine. I then had a second conversation that has been misquoted, mischaracterized, and fraudulently misrepresented. Fortunately, there was a transcript of the conversation taken, and you know from the transcript (which was immediately made available) that the paragraph in question was perfect. I said to President Zelensky: ``I would like you to do us a favor, though, because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it.'' I said do us a favor, not me, and our country, not a campaign. I then mentioned the Attorney General of the United States. Every time I talk with a foreign leader, I put America's interests first, just as I did with President Zelensky. You are turning a policy disagreement between two branches of government into an impeachable offense--it is no more legitimate than the Executive Branch charging members of Congress with crimes for the lawful exercise of legislative power. You know full well that Vice President Biden used his office and $1 billion dollars of U.S. aid money to coerce Ukraine into firing the prosecutor who was digging into the company paying his son millions of dollars. You know this because Biden bragged about it on video. Biden openly stated: ``I said, `I'm telling you, you're not getting the billion dollars' . . . I looked at them and said: `I'm leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you're not getting the money.' Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.'' Even Joe Biden admitted just days ago in an interview with NPR that it ``looked bad.'' Now you are trying to impeach me by falsely accusing me of doing what Joe Biden has admitted he actually did. President Zelensky has repeatedly declared that I did nothing wrong, and that there was No Pressure. He further emphasized that it was a ``good phone call,'' that ``I don't feel pressure,'' and explicitly stressed that ``nobody pushed me.'' The Ukrainian Foreign Minister stated very Clearly: ``I have never seen a direct link between investigations and security assistance.'' He also said there was ``No Pressure.'' Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, a supporter of Ukraine who met privately with President Zelensky, has said: ``At no time during this meeting . . . was there any mention by Zelensky or any Ukrainian that they were feeling pressure to do anything in return for the military aid.'' Many meetings have been held between representatives of Ukraine and our country. Never once did Ukraine complain about pressure being applied--not once! Ambassador Sandland testified that I told him: ``No quid pro quo. I want nothing. I want nothing. I want President Zelensky to do the right thing, do what he ran on.'' The second claim, so-called ``Obstruction of Congress,'' is preposterous and dangerous. House Democrats are trying to impeach the duly elected President of the United States for asserting Constitutionally based privileges that have been asserted on a bipartisan basis by administrations of both political parties throughout our Nation's history. Under that standard, every American president would have been impeached many times over. As liberal law professor Jonathan Turley warned when addressing Congressional Democrats: ``I can't emphasize this enough . . . if you impeach a president, if you make a high crime and misdemeanor out of going to the courts, it is an abuse of power. It's your abuse of power. You're doing precisely what you're criticizing the President for doing.'' Everyone, you included, knows what is really happening. Your chosen candidate lost the election in 2016, in an Electoral College landslide (306-227), and you and your party have never recovered from this defeat. You have developed a full-fledged case of what many in the media call Trump Derangement Syndrome and sadly, you will never get over it! You are unwilling and unable to accept the verdict issued at the ballot box during the great Election of 2016. So you have spent three straight years attempting to overturn the will of the American people and nullify their votes. You view democracy as your enemy! Speaker Pelosi, you admitted just last week at a public forum that your party's impeachment effort has been going on for ``two and a half years,'' long before you ever heard about a phone call with Ukraine. Nineteen minutes after I took the oath of office, the Washington Post published a story headlined, ``The Campaign to Impeach President Trump Has Begun.'' Less than three months after my inauguration, Representative Maxine Waters stated, ``I'm going to fight every day until he's impeached.'' House Democrats introduced the first impeachment resolution against me within months of my inauguration, for what will be regarded as one of our country's best decisions, the firing of James Cormey (see Inspector General Reports)--who the world now knows is one of the dirtiest cops our Nation has ever seen. A ranting and raving Congresswoman, Rashida Tlaib, declared just hours after she was sworn into office, ``We're gonna go in there and we're gonna impeach the motherf****r.'' Representative Al Green said in May, ``I'm concerned that if we don't impeach this president, he will get re-elected.'' Again, you and your allies said, and did, all of these things long before you ever heard of President Zelensky or anything related to Ukraine. As you know very well, this impeachment drive has nothing to do with Ukraine, or the totally appropriate conversation I had with its new president. It only has to do with your attempt to undo the election of 2016 and steal the election of 2020! Congressman Adam Schiff cheated and lied all the way up to the present day, even going so far as to fraudulently make up, out of thin air, my conversation with President Zelensky of Ukraine and read this fantasy language to Congress as though it were said by me. His shameless lies and deceptions, dating all the way back to the Russia Hoax, is one of the main reasons we are here today. You and your party are desperate to distract from America's extraordinary economy, incredible jobs boom, record stock market, soaring confidence, and flourishing citizens. Your party simply cannot compete with our record: 7 million new jobs; the lowest-ever unemployment for African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Asian Americans; a rebuilt military; a completely reformed VA with Choice and Accountability for our great veterans; more than 170 new federal judges and two Supreme Court Justices: historic tax and regulation cuts; the elimination of the individual mandate; the first decline in prescription drug prices in half a century; the first new branch of the United States Military since 1947, the Space Force; strong protection of the Second Amendment; criminal justice reform; a defeated ISIS caliphate and the killing of the world's number one terrorist leader, al-Baghdadi; the replacement of the disastrous NAFTA trade deal with the wonderful USMCA (Mexico and Canada); a breakthrough Phase One trade deal with China; massive new trade deals with Japan and South Korea; withdrawal from the terrible Iran Nuclear Deal; cancellation of the unfair and costly Paris Climate Accord; becoming the world's top energy producer; recognition of Israel's capital, opening the American Embassy in Jerusalem, and recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights; a colossal reduction in illegal border crossings, the ending of Catch-and-Release, and the building of the Southern Border Wall--and that is just the beginning, there is so much more. You cannot defend your extreme policies--open borders, mass migration, high crime, crippling taxes, socialized healthcare, destruction of American energy, late-term taxpayer-funded abortion, elimination of the Second Amendment, radical far-left theories of law and justice, and constant partisan obstruction of both common sense and common good. There is nothing I would rather do than stop referring to your party as the Do-Nothing Democrats. Unfortunately, I don't know that you will ever give me a chance to do so. After three years of unfair and unwarranted investigations, 45 million dollars spent, 18 angry Democrat prosecutors, the entire force of the FBI, headed by leadership now proven to be totally incompetent and corrupt, you have found NOTHING! Few people in high position could have endured or passed this test. You do not know, nor do you care, the great damage and hurt you have inflicted upon wonderful and loving members of my family. You conducted a fake investigation upon the democratically elected President of the United States, and you are doing it yet again. There are not many people who could have taken the punishment inflicted during this period of time, and yet done so much for the success of America and its citizens. But instead of putting our country first, you have decided to disgrace our country still further. You completely failed with the Mueller report because there was nothing to find, so you decided to take the next hoax that came along, the phone call with Ukraine--even though it was a perfect call. And by the way, when I speak to foreign countries, there are many people, with permission, listening to the call on both sides of the conversation. You are the ones interfering in America's elections. You are the ones subverting America's Democracy. You are the ones Obstructing Justice. You are the ones bringing pain and suffering to our Republic for your own selfish personal, political, and partisan gain. Before the Impeachment Hoax, it was the Russian Witch Hunt. Against all evidence, and regardless of the truth, you and your deputies claimed that my campaign colluded with the Russians--a grave, malicious, and slanderous lie, a falsehood like no other. You forced our Nation through turmoil and torment over a wholly fabricated story, illegally purchased from a foreign spy by Hillary Clinton and the DNC in order to assault our democracy. Yet, when the monstrous lie was debunked and this Democrat conspiracy dissolved into dust, you did not apologize. You did not recant. You did not ask to be forgiven. You showed no remorse, no capacity for self- reflection. Instead, you pursued your next libelous and vicious crusade--you engineered an attempt to frame and defame an innocent person. All of this was motivated by personal political calculation. Your Speakership and your party are held hostage by your most deranged and radical representatives of the far left. Each one of your members lives in fear of a socialist primary challenger--this is what is driving impeachment. Look at Congressman Nadler's challenger. Look at yourself and others. Do not take our country down with your party. If you truly cared about freedom and liberty for our Nation, then you would be devoting your vast investigative resources to exposing the full truth concerning the FBI's horrifying abuses of power before, during, and after the 2016 election--including the use of spies against my campaign, the submission of false evidence to a FISA court, and the concealment of exculpatory evidence in order to frame the innocent. The FBI has great and honorable people, but the leadership was inept and corrupt. I would think that you would personally be appalled by these revelations, because in your press conference the day you announced impeachment, you tied the impeachment effort directly to the completely discredited Russia Hoax, declaring twice that ``all roads lead to Putin,'' when you know that is an abject lie. I have been far tougher on Russia than President Obama ever even thought to be. Any member of Congress who votes in support of impeachment--against every shred of truth, fact, evidence, and legal principle--is showing how deeply they revile the voters and how truly they detest America's Constitutional order. Our Founders feared the tribalization of partisan politics, and you are bringing their worst fears to life. Worse still, I have been deprived of basic Constitutional Due Process from the beginning of this impeachment scam right up until the present. I have been denied the most fundamental rights afforded by the Constitution, including the right to present evidence, to have my own counsel present, to confront accusers, and to call and cross-examine witnesses, like the so-called whistleblower who started this entire hoax with a false report of the phone call that bears no relationship to the actual phone call that was made. Once I presented the transcribed call, which surprised and shocked the fraudsters (they never thought that such evidence would be presented), the so-called whistleblower, and the second whistleblower, disappeared because they got caught, their report was a fraud, and they were no longer going to be made available to us. In other words, once the phone call was made public, your whole plot blew up, but that didn't stop you from continuing. More due process was afforded to those accused in the Salem Witch Trials. You and others on your committees have long said impeachment must be bipartisan--it is not. You said it was very divisive--it certainly is, even far more than you ever thought possible-and it will only get worse! This is nothing more than an illegal, partisan attempted coup that will, based on recent sentiment, badly fail at the voting booth. You are not just after me, as President, you are after the entire Republican Party. But because of this colossal injustice, our party is more united than it has ever been before. History will judge you harshly as you proceed with this impeachment charade. Your legacy will be that of turning the House of Representatives from a revered legislative body into a Star Chamber of partisan persecution. Perhaps most insulting of all is your false display of solemnity. You apparently have so little respect for the American People that you expect them to believe that you are approaching this impeachment somberly, reservedly, and reluctantly. No intelligent person believes what you are saying. Since the moment I won the election, the Democrat Party has been possessed by Impeachment Fever. There is no reticence. This is not a somber affair. You are making a mockery of impeachment and you are scarcely concealing your hatred of me, of the Republican Party, and tens of millions of patriotic Americans. The voters are wise, and they are seeing straight through this empty, hollow, and dangerous game you are playing. I have no doubt the American people will hold you and the Democrats fully responsible in the upcoming 2020 election. They will not soon forgive your perversion of justice and abuse of power. There is far too much that needs to be done to improve the lives of our citizens. It is time for you and the highly partisan Democrats in Congress to immediately cease this impeachment fantasy and get back to work for the American People. While I have no expectation that you will do so, I write this letter to you for the purpose of history and to put my thoughts on a permanent and indelible record. One hundred years from now, when people look back at this affair, I want them to understand it and learn from it. so that it can never happen to another President again. Sincerely yours, Donald J. Trump, President of the United States of America.

Mr. STEUBE

Mr. STEUBE. Madam Speaker, this impeachment charade did not start with the whistleblower complaint. The campaign to impeach a duly elected President and overturn the will of 63 million Americans started 19 minutes after the President took the oath of office. Nineteen minutes after the inauguration, The Washington Post published a story, headline, ``The Campaign to Impeach President Trump Has Begun.'' The first day of this Congress, on day one, a Democratic member of my class called for the impeachment of the President long before the call to Ukraine. Then it was the Russia collusion hoax, then obstruction of justice, then bribery, then quid pro quo--none of which are included in these articles before us today. The first Article of Impeachment crafted as a fiction is not an enumerated basis in the Constitution for impeachment. The Democratic majority would have you believe that abuse of power is a high crime or misdemeanor. It is not. It is an opinion. It is not even a crime that can be charged in a court of law. Unlike Presidents Nixon and Clinton who were tried for actual crimes, this President is being impeached on vague phrases that appear nowhere in our Constitution. The second article, obstruction of Congress, again, doesn't exist in the Constitution as a basis for impeachment and is attempting to impeach a duly elected President for asserting constitutionally based privileges that have been asserted on a bipartisan basis by administrations of both political parties throughout our Nation's history. This House is impeaching a President over a phone call to another world leader, a few lines in a phone transcript that have been completely and utterly misrepresented by the majority. The process that ensued was anything but open, transparent, bipartisan, or equitable. Abandoning all past historical due process afforded the minority and the President, the Democrats ran a partisan investigation, refusing rights of the minority, refusing the ability of the President's counsel to call witnesses, refusing to allow the President's counsel to cross- examine fact witnesses, and refusing a minority hearing day, just to name a few. The majority waves around a report drafted that the Democratic staff concocted as a matter of fact. When they needed backup for their approach, they paraded out liberal professors with animus against the President who gave them license to impeach the President for any reason they wish. House Democrats are making themselves kings in a manner far worse and more obvious than what they are accusing the President of doing. The only abuse of power here is by the Democratic-led Congress.

Mr. STEUBE

Mr. STEUBE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, Florida, which I have the privilege of representing, relies on trade with Canada and Mexico to survive and thrive. From transportation equipment to machinery to agricultural products, in 2017 alone, Florida exported $6.7 billion in goods to Canada and Mexico. We are not alone. Canada was the leading market for United States goods exported, followed closely by Mexico in 2017. These allies account for 34 percent of U.S. exports and 35 percent of U.S. imports. They are our strategic partners and an important part of our successful economy here in the United States. Continuing the long history of our successful trade relationship is essential to bringing the United States economy into the 21st century. That is why Congress should pass the USMCA. By implementing the USMCA, we would be creating 176,000 additional American jobs and continuing to grow our economy by over $68 billion. This agreement will protect American intellectual property, update our digital trade rules, enable data to be transferred cross-border, and expand markets for American agricultural products. USMCA maintains the successful duty-free access for American farmers in Mexico and opens the Canadian market up for the first time to American dairy, wheat, chicken, egg, and turkey products. American dairy producers alone would grow their access to up to 3.59 percent of the Canadian dairy market, and the dairy farmers in my district in the 17th District of Florida can use every little bit of an opportunity to sell their products. Improving USMCA will ease the uncertainty facing Florida farmers and ranchers, allowing them to make new investments to grow operations. This deal is a good deal for Florida and America, and it is time that the majority bring this important measure to the floor.

Mr. STEUBE

Mr. STEUBE. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and rise in opposition to the bill. Despite months of opportunities for Congress to intervene in the border crisis and actually fix our laws, the Democrat majority has done nothing except stand by, at first denying that there was a crisis, and then watching as a chaotic and dangerous situation developed. The administration repeatedly warned us that the unprecedented migrant flow was overwhelming the government's ability to adequately respond and that the facilities were overcrowded because they were not designed as long-term holding facilities. Yet the Democrat majority brought forth no legislation to fix the problems. Instead, they passed the Dream Act, a bill which will only incentivize more illegal immigration. So, aside from the Dream Act, what is the majority's next idea? H.R. 3239, the Humanitarian Standards for Individuals in Customs and Border Protection Custody Act, a bill that will not solve the border crisis and, in fact, will make the crisis worse. H.R. 3239 does nothing to address the root causes of this crisis: It does nothing to address the push-and-pull factors that drive illegal immigration, including loopholes in our own laws; It does nothing to fix the Flores settlement agreement's guarantee of catch and release for almost all family units; It does nothing to fix the provision in the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act that prevents the safe repatriation of children from noncontiguous countries; It does not introduce reasonable reforms to our asylum laws. Instead, it imposes onerous and burdensome requirements on the hundreds of CBP facilities at a time when the government is already overwhelmed. Of course, CBP should always strive to comply with their custodial care standards, and I know that the men and women of CBP are treating migrants with respect. But H.R. 3239 does not address the root causes of the conditions at CBP facilities: that ICE and HHS do not have enough space available to take custody of these individuals. The bill does not increase funding for ICE detention beds to ensure single adults do not have to be in CBP custody beyond 72 hours. It does not fund additional permanent HHS shelter capacity for unaccompanied children. Instead, in the midst of a chaotic situation, H.R. 3239 imposes extensive medical screening, medical care, and facilities requirements on to CBP that are, in many cases, simply unworkable. This bill's onerous requirements significantly impact CBP's mission and ignore the reality that CBP is confronting an influx of migrants that has overwhelmed the system and caused a crisis. H.R. 3239 requires a fully documented medical screening of each and every person entering CBP custody, to include a full physical exam, risk assessment, interview, medical intake questionnaire, and taking of all vital signs. In addition, the bill requires CBP to require additional follow-up medical care, including psychological and mental health care. The bill even requires that CBP shall have onsite, to the extent practicable, in addition to the medical professionals employed to conduct the initial medical screenings, `` . . . licensed emergency care professionals, specialty physicians (including physicians specializing in pediatrics, family medicine, obstetrics and gynecology, geriatric medicine, internal medicine, and infectious diseases), nurse practitioners, other nurses, physician assistants, licensed social workers, mental health professionals, public health professionals, dieticians, interpreters, and chaperones.'' If it is impracticable to have them onsite, CBP must have them on call. May I remind you that our own veterans do not have access to the same list of healthcare specialists at an initial request at their clinics. I offered an amendment that was not made in order that stated that this bill would not go into effect until the VA confirms that medical care that meets the standards listed in this bill for detainees is made available to every veteran seeking medical care at a facility of the Department of Veterans Affairs. CBP personnel should be interdicting narcotics, preventing illegal immigration, stopping child trafficking, and facilitating lawful trade and travel, yet H.R. 3239 would have them, instead, setting up full- service hospitals at hundreds of facilities. The requirements of H.R. 3239 apply not only to border patrol stations, but also to ports of entry, including land, sea, and air ports of entry, checkpoints, forward operating bases, and secondary inspection areas. As if the current crisis weren't enough of a challenge, the bill requires updates to hundreds of CBP facilities, requisition of personnel and equipment, and training for all CBP personnel at covered facilities, all at an immense cost. May I mention again, I offered an amendment that would require the DHS Secretary to also report on the cost of implementation of this legislation. My amendment would have also delayed the 6-month implementation requirement if Congress does not appropriate sufficient funds to carry out the requirements of this bill, yet H.R. 3239 does not authorize any appropriations. The requirements apply to facilities no matter the size, the location, or even the amount of traffic. So it applies equally to a very busy airport, processing millions of passengers a year, just as it would to an extremely remote port of entry or to an isolated checkpoint. Under this bill, there could be more medical personnel working at the facility than aliens on any given day. H.R. 3239 will also weaken border security at a time when we should be enhancing CBP's ability to respond to the surge. The bill would limit CBP's ability to house migrants that come during a surge, while simultaneously limiting the number of people that could be housed in existing CBP processing facilities, yet CBP cannot simply process those individuals out to ICE custody, because, again, H.R. 3239 does not fund any additional ICE detention beds. The practical effects of H.R. 3239 are simply more catch-and-release. The majority has made no secret that CBP will be forced to release even more people into the United States. This is not a design flaw; it is a feature of the bill. H.R. 3239 also increases the incentive to exploit children to gain entry into the United States. Smugglers know migrants will be released into the U.S. interior if they bring a child, because of a legal loophole created by the Flores settlement agreement preventing those family units from being detained for a sufficient amount of time to complete their immigrant court proceedings. DHS continues to see adults fraudulently posing as a parent. This loophole is exploited by smugglers and human traffickers on a daily basis, as children are being rented and purchased like chattel. H.R. 3239 broadens this loophole even further, extending it beyond parents to any adult relative of a child. The incentive to bring a child will be even greater, and human traffickers would now be able to pose as a child's distant relative to evade detection and take advantage of the Flores loophole. CBP is already confronting a crisis that is worsening by Congressional inaction to fix the loopholes in our laws that fuel illegal immigration. Congress shouldn't make the crisis worse by passing H.R. 3239. Mr. Chair, I oppose the bill and urge my colleagues to do the same. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. STEUBE. Mr. Chair, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. I want to bring attention to page 8 of the bill, line 16. I am going to read it verbatim: ``The Commissioner or the Administrator of General Services shall ensure that each location to which detainees are first transported after an initial encounter has onsite at least one licensed medical professional to conduct health screenings. Other personnel that are or may be necessary for carrying out the functions described in subsection (e), such as licensed emergency care professionals, specialty physicians (including physicians specializing in pediatrics, family medicine, obstetrics and gynecology, geriatric medicine, internal medicine, and infectious diseases), nurse practitioners, other nurses, physician assistants, licensed social workers, mental health professionals, public health professionals, dieticians, interpreters, and chaperones, shall be located onsite, to the extent practicable, or if not practicable, shall be available on call.'' In the medical field, ``on call'' means 30 minutes or closer. So this bill absolutely requires that all of these specialty physicians are available either onsite or within 30 minutes or closer to being able to be at the location, any of these CBP locations, and they have to be provided this healthcare within 12 hours of manifesting themselves at these facilities. Right now our veterans don't have access to this healthcare that is ensured in this bill for illegal immigrants coming into our country. If you go to a clinic at a VA facility, they don't have specialty physicians. You have to wait 30 to 60, maybe 90 days to get an appointment with a specialty physician in order to get the care that that veteran wants or needs, not 12 hours. So we are providing through this bill better healthcare opportunities for illegal immigrants showing up at the border than we are for our veterans who have served our country, who have raised their right hand to swear an oath to our Constitution, who have service-connected disability, and have the ability to use Veterans Affairs facilities. They only get 30 to 60 days to get those medical needs taken care of; illegal immigrants get it in 12 hours, according to this bill. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.