Chris Van Hollen

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, this is the first time I have risen to speak on this Senate floor. I want to start by thanking my fellow Marylanders for the honor of representing them in this great United States Senate. I want to thank my colleague Mr. Cardin, the senior Senator from Maryland, for joining us. I thank the new Senator from California, Ms. Harris, for joining us as well. I want to say to my fellow Marylanders that I look forward to working every day for their benefit and for the benefit of our Nation. I want to say to my new colleagues in the Senate--Republicans and Democrats alike--I look forward to working with all of you in the years to come for the good of our Nation. I understand it is somewhat unusual for a new Member to speak so soon on the Senate floor, but what we are witnessing today in the Senate is not business as usual, and these are not ordinary times. Having served as the lead Democrat on the House Budget Committee, I know that never before has the Senate rushed out of the gate so quickly to enact a budget procedure to deny the minority party--and by extension, hundreds of millions of Americans--their rights in this United States Senate. Yet here we are, speeding to use the budget process to fast-track a so- called reconciliation bill that will destroy the Affordable Care Act and, in doing so, wipe out access to affordable care for over 30 million Americans and create total chaos throughout the American health care system. That is reckless. It is irresponsible, and it violates the traditions of this institution. I may be new to the Senate, but I am not new to the way this Senate has proudly been described by its Members, both Democrats and Republicans, both current and former Members. My colleague Senator Harris will attest that one piece of advice we all received from both Republican and Democratic Members of this Senate was to read the chapter in Robert Caro's book about Lyndon Johnson entitled ``The Desks of the Senate,'' where Robert Caro talks about the burnished mahogany tops, and he tells the story of the Senate through the Senators who were protagonists in great debates throughout our history. He highlights the idea that this Senate is supposed to be a deliberative body that reflects on issues with a thoughtful exchange of ideas. Unfortunately, that certainly does not describe the Senate of this moment. Having just arrived from the House of Representatives, what we are witnessing today is much more like the tyranny of the majority characteristic of that body. This Senate is supposed to be different, but at least for now it seems very much like the House I just left. As a result of the fast-track process in the Senate, we will be overriding and roughshodding over the will of a majority of the American population, and Americans are just now waking up to learn about the bait-and-switch scheme that has been perpetrated on them. For more than 6 years, Republicans in this Senate and in the House of Representatives have said repeatedly that they would repeal ObamaCare but replace it--replace it with something, they said, that will be much better. Now we know, as the clock ticks down, that has been a farce. There is no Republican replacement bill to provide the kind of coverage and benefits of the Affordable Care Act, and the consequences of that failure are going to be devastating for the country. Let us take a moment to look at the human toll. First, there are the 22 million Americans who previously had no health insurance before the Affordable Care Act but are now covered through the health care exchanges and through expanded Medicaid. These are people who have been denied access to coverage because they had preexisting conditions or their kids had preexisting conditions--whether it was asthma, diabetes, heart conditions--so they were either outright denied by insurance companies or priced out of the market. That 22 million may be a big number, hard to comprehend, but behind that number are many families like Carlos and Isabelle Martins, who live not far from where I live in Silver Spring, MD. They could no longer afford health insurance through their employer. Shortly before the Affordable Care Act was enacted, Carlos was told he needed a liver transplant to survive. His wife Isabelle said that without the Affordable Care Act, he would never have received that lifesaving treatment. There is the case of Diane Bongiorni, who now lives in Hyattsville, MD. She previously had open-heart surgery. When her Cobra expired, it was only because of the Affordable Care Act that she was able to get coverage and not be denied because of that earlier, relevant preexisting condition. Days after she was on the Affordable Care Act, a cardiologist told her one of her heart valves was failing and she would need another surgery immediately, and she has told us that she ``would have died'' had she not had that coverage. In addition to Diane and Carlos and the other 22 million Americans who would have been denied affordable health care before the Affordable Care Act and Medicaid expansion, there are an additional 7 million Americans on the health care exchanges today who are projected to totally lose that coverage if Republicans pull the plug on the Affordable Care Act. That is over 30 million Americans who will lose access to affordable care directly. There is no doubt that in those health care exchanges, we have seen increases in premiums and some of the copays, and we need to do something about it, which is why I and many of my colleagues have put forward ideas to address the increases we are seeing in the health care exchanges in terms of costs. We put those ideas on the table, and we would welcome our Republican colleagues to join us to improve the Affordable Care Act. You don't fix a health care system, you don't fix those problems by blowing up the entire Affordable Care Act. That is not a solution. I also want to focus for a moment on the tens of millions of Americans who are not included in that 30 million who benefit directly from the Affordable Care Act but who are benefitting right now from ObamaCare. They may not realize it now, but mark my word they are going to face very unpleasant and unexpected consequences if the Affordable Care Act is ripped apart. First, let us take a look at the overwhelming number of Americans who get their health care not on the health care exchanges but through their private employer--most Members of this body, most Americans. The premiums in those plans have actually risen much more slowly since the Affordable Care Act was enacted than before. The overwhelming number of Americans who are on those plans have benefited dramatically from the reduction of costs. Why did that happen? Because all those people who had been previously denied access to health care who are in the ObamaCare exchanges, they used to show up in the hospital as their primary care provider or, since they weren't getting any care at all because they couldn't afford the bill, they were showing up at those hospitals when there was an emergency, when cost was most expensive. We don't deny people care in an emergency, and then they get the bill and they can't pay the bill. That is why so many people were going bankrupt in America before the Affordable Care Act. But somebody pays. Who pays? Well, everybody else in the system pays. Everybody else who has private insurance through their employer pays or taxpayers in States pay for the uncompensated care that hospitals would otherwise have to carry. In the end, people's premiums were going up really fast, but by providing the health care system through ObamaCare for those exchanges, however imperfect, it has helped those other tens of millions of Americans. Let us look at Medicare beneficiaries, millions of seniors. Watch out. Their costs are going to rise in three and maybe four ways right away. First of all, their Part B premiums that every senior on Medicare pays are going to go up. Why is that? Because as part of the Affordable Care Act, we got rid of some of the overpayments, the excessive subsidies that were being paid to certain providers, including some of the managed care providers who were paid, on average, 115 percent more than fee for service. We said that makes no sense. That is a waste of Medicare beneficiaries' money. So we reformed that by saving the Medicare system money. We also save the Medicare beneficiaries money in their premiums because those premiums are set partly to the overall cost of Medicare. If you reduce the cost of Medicare in a smart way, you reduce those premiums. That is why seniors have seen such slow increases in their Part B premiums since the enactment of the Affordable Care Act. Those will go right back up. Second, seniors on Medicare no longer have to pay for preventive health screenings, cancer screenings, diabetes screenings, other kinds of preventive health care because we want to encourage them to identify the problems early and solve them for their own health care purposes but also because it saves money in the system. You get rid of the Affordable Care Act, those seniors are going to be paying premium copays for those preventive health services. Prescription drug costs. Seniors--and there are millions and millions of them who face high prescription drug costs--are benefiting today from the fact that we are steadily in the process of closing the prescription drug doughnut hole. We had an absolute crisis in this country where so many seniors were faced with the difficult choices of getting the medications they needed to live day-to-day and keep a roof over their head. That is why we are closing the prescription drug doughnut hole. You get rid of the Affordable Care Act, all those seniors who, on average, have saved thousands of dollars with the Affordable Care Act are going to see their costs go up. Finally, if you enact the plan that has been put forward by the Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, and by the person who President-Elect Trump has nominated to be his Secretary of Health and Human Services, Tom Price--I encourage every American to look at their plan because they want to voucherize Medicare, and they want to save the Medicare system money by raising the prices and the risks on every Medicare beneficiary. That is the result of that plan. The Affordable Care Act benefits 30 million people directly, and we need to make sure we don't put them in harm's way, but it also benefits all these other people in the system, the people on the employer- provided health plans who have seen historically low premium increases and seniors on Medicare. Rural hospitals will be particularly hard hit by repealing the Affordable Care Act. So the proposed Republican action is going to hit those 30 million Americans, including my neighbors in Silver Spring. It is also going to hit those other tens of millions of Americans who right now may not realize the extent to which they are benefiting from the Affordable Care Act. Yet our Republican colleagues have not put forward a single plan to help either the 30 million or all the other Americans who are benefiting from the Affordable Care Act. Instead, we see a rush to generate chaos throughout the health care system. That is counter to what the President-elect has said he wants. Here is what Donald Trump said on ``60 Minutes'': Everybody's got to be covered. Everybody. I am going to take care of everybody. Well, it is really important that the majority in the Senate and the House talk to the President--elect because they are not on the same road when it comes to that commitment. When the President-elect was asked about finding a way to keep the ObamaCare rules that prevent discrimination based on preexisting conditions, he said, ``I like those very much.'' When he was asked about the provision that allows children to stay on their parents' insurance plans until they are 26 years old, he said, ``We're going to very much try to keep that.'' Here is the dirty little secret. Many people--Republicans and Democrats in this Chamber--know there are only a very few ways you can design a health care system that meets those conditions. One way, which many Democrats have historically supported, is the idea of Medicare for all. The other way is the ObamaCare model. It was not always known as the ObamaCare model. The foundation for ObamaCare actually had its roots in the conservative Heritage Foundation think tank reports. It was an idea long promoted by Republicans, including many Republican Senators, some of them still here today. It is an idea rooted in the concept of personal responsibility, the idea that every American needs to do their part and help pay for their health insurance, otherwise, if they don't pay, they are going to force other people to pay when they go seek that care in the emergency room or wherever it may be. In order for that idea to work, the idea that was put forward by the Heritage Foundation, the idea in ObamaCare, everyone needs to have coverage because it would not make a lot of sense for us to be paying out all the time if we were able to wait until we got sick and then decide to pay. That is the idea of having everyone in the pool have insurance. The idea is, you don't want to use it, but you buy that protection. If other people don't buy the protection, then the rest of the folks feel like they are being taken advantage of, which is why everyone has to be in the pool, which is why it was an idea that came out of the Heritage Foundation. In fact, I have the Heritage official report right here: Critical issues--a national health care system. This was back in 1989. I want to read the three elements in the Republican plan. Element No. 1, every resident in the United States must by law be enrolled in an adequate health care plan that covers major health care costs. No. 2, for working Americans, obtaining health care protection must be a family responsibility. No. 3, the government's proper role is to monitor the health market, subsidize needy individuals to allow them to obtain sufficient services, and encourage competition. That sounds like a description of ObamaCare. It is--which is why, of course, it was dubbed ``RomneyCare'' when they adopted this model for the State of Massachusetts. He adopted it based on the Republican's Heritage model. So here is the problem: Republicans can't come up with an alternative. That is why it has not happened for 6 years, because if you are going to come up with an alternative, you have to go to either one of two models. One is Medicare for all. The other is the idea that every American has to be in the system and the idea based on personal responsibility, which at its start was a Republican idea. When President Obama adopted it, for many months, some Republican Senators were willing to go along, but then the politics overtook them, and since then, we have had the Republicans opposing their own proposed model for providing health care. So rather than repeal and replace, since there is no replace, it is repeal and run. Here is the problem for our colleagues politically, but more importantly, here is the problem for all Americans and all our constituents: No one is going to be able to hide from the devastating consequences of undoing the Affordable Care Act, which is going to hurt not just the 30 million Americans who are directly benefiting through the exchanges and the Medicare expansion, the Medicaid expansion, but also all those seniors on Medicare and the others getting health care through their private employers. As I said at the outset, it is truly sad to see the Senate at this point and in this state, especially because of the terrible consequences it is going to have on the American people. You know, the very first time I was ever on the floor of the Senate was in 1985. I was not thinking of running for office myself at that time. It was the farthest thing from my mind. I was actually working-- it was in the middle of the Cold War. I was working on national security and foreign policy issues for a moderate Republican Senator by the name of ``Mac'' Mathias from the State of Maryland. I talked about the desks of the Senate at the outset of my remarks. Senator Mathias sat right there, one seat behind the seat Senator Booker is sitting in right now. Great to see you. That is where Senator Mathias sat. The reason I happened to be sitting next to him that day is he was working with Senator Kennedy that day. Senator Kennedy was at a desk back there, I believe. It was the second from the aisle. It had been his brother Jack Kennedy's desk in the Senate before him. Even though there were many desks between the desk of Senator Kennedy and the desk of Senator Mathias and the center aisle between them, they were able to work together for the good of the country, just as many Senators from both parties have done since. That is the way the Senate is supposed to work. That is the way the Senate was described in the Robert Caro book that Republicans and Democrats alike told us to read as new Members before we came here. I am really glad to be here. I am excited to get to work on behalf of Marylanders and work for the good of our State and the country. I wish it could have been at a moment when the Senate was not hellbent on breaking the very traditions that have made it great, the tradition of being a deliberative body and not using right out of the gate, the very first thing, a process to short-circuit the will of the minority party. That is not what any of us were taught the Senate was about. It is particularly troubling that the Senate is engaged in breaking that tradition in order to undermine affordable health care for tens of millions of Americans and generate chaos in our health care system. I will fight every day to prevent that from happening. I will also fight every day to try to live up to the true tradition of the Senate, which is people trying to work together for the good of the country. It is disappointing to be here at a time when the Senate is embarked on violating that tradition in order to strip Americans of their health care. I hope we will not let that happen. I will fight every day to prevent that from happening and then work with my colleagues to try to make sure we address the real priorities and concerns of the American people. I thank my colleagues for joining me on the floor.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Survivorship, Treatment, Access, and Research (STAR) Act. As the most comprehensive way to address childhood cancer, the bill advances research, treatment, and quality of life for pediatric cancer survivors here in Maryland and across the nation. Each year, nearly 16,000 children in the United States are diagnosed with cancer. While there have been advances made in childhood cancer research, too many young people and their families continue to suffer. And for the kids who survive, the battle is not over. Ninety-five percent of survivors will suffer serious health complications as they age. To give pediatric cancer patients and their families hope, I spearheaded the STAR Act with Congressman Mike McCaul and Congresswoman Jackie Speier. By the bill's several provisions, including improving efforts to identify and track childhood cancer incidence and establishing a pilot program to explore innovative models of care to enhance the quality of life for survivors, the STAR Act will provide our researchers with the necessary resources to work towards cures and less toxic treatments that will help our children live longer, healthier lives. With the majority of this chamber as co-sponsors, this bill shows that Congress can come together to make progress for the most vulnerable in our society--the thousands of children and families impacted by cancer. It is also a testament of passionate advocacy-- those who fight hard so another child's life is not robbed too early from cancer or so survivors do not have to live with physical and psychological effects of harmful treatments. I want to thank all the advocates who have been working tirelessly behind the scenes and who have helped us get this vital bill to the House floor today. Lastly, it has been an honor serving as the Co-Chair of the Childhood Cancer Caucus with Congressman Mike McCaul and want to welcome the new Co-Chairs for next Congress: Congresswoman Jackie Speier, Congressman G.K. Butterfield, and Congressman Mike Kelly. I strongly support passage of the STAR Act and urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the bill.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a great man who has made a positive impact in the life of every American--Leon Billings. Today, the air we breathe and the water we drink is cleaner and healthier because of Leon Billings. He may not be known to many, but his work as an architect of key environmental laws has saved countless lives. Leon's instinct to stick up for the underdog was undoubtedly shaped during his years growing up as the son of two journalists in Big Sky country in Missoula, Montana. His parents were editors for a weekly newspaper, The People's Voice, which was owned by a farmer-labor cooperative that provided the counterpoint to the daily papers controlled by the Anaconda Mining Company. Above his father's column was the quotation: ``The hottest place in hell is reserved for those who, in a time of moral crisis, refuse to take a stand.'' Leon lived by that creed; it was in his DNA. In my time serving with Leon, he was always a crusader for justice; always speaking out for the public interest against excessive corporate greed and unchecked power; standing up against bigotry and hate. I first got to know Leon Billings through Maryland politics, when we served together in the Maryland House of Delegates. By that time, Leon was already a legend in the national environmental community. As a top staffer to Senator Ed Muskie, he had helped craft the landmark Clean Air and Clean Water Acts. That legislation was forged through constant clashes with powerful special interests that wanted to put their profits over the public health. Leon, a brilliant strategist, is credited with working across party lines to erect the pillars of many of our key environmental laws. Leon Billings brought that same passion for taking on powerful special interests to the Maryland legislature, where he stood up for consumers in battles with the utility industry and fought for state environmental and consumer protections. I will fondly remember the many battles we waged together in the Maryland legislature. Leon's successes were due in large part to a special mixture of passionate advocacy and a no-nonsense manner that was sometimes unsettling to the uninitiated, but always deployed for a good cause. Those who knew Leon understood that his sometimes gruff exterior was primarily reserved for the big shots who tried to enrich themselves by stomping on others. At his core, Leon was a very gentle soul; a plain speaking, compassionate man with a heart as big as Montana. As we confront an incoming Administration that is looking to turn back the clock on Leon's work and erode the laws that have protected clean air, clean water, and public health for a generation, we must govern by Leon's example and stand up for the little guy against the special interests. We must be fierce defenders of the American public and its resources, and protect the right to clean air and healthy waterways. Leon Billings waged battles on behalf of every American. I will miss my friend Leon, but pledge to continue his good work on behalf of all Americans.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, long before the last ``Star Wars'' movie came out, I said: When Senator Mikulski is with you, the Force is with you. Senator Mikulski has been a powerful force for good in Maryland and throughout the Nation. She has been a fierce fighter for American workers, for our veterans, for our seniors, and for people from all walks of life. Her leadership on the Appropriations Committee brought vital investments to the thriving Port of Baltimore and to the Social Security Administration. She has supported security missions in places like Fort Meade, investments in lifesaving research at the NIH, and discoveries at NASA. She authored the very first bill that was signed by President Obama, the Lilly Ledbetter law, to give women who faced pay discrimination their day in court. Barbara Mikulski started in politics by fighting a plan to build a highway through her beloved neighborhood of Fells Point. She won that fight, and, 40 years later, she is still waging and winning fights for working families. A few years back, when NASA's scientists discovered a new supernova, they named it Supernova Mikulski, and I know her legacy will always burn bright for Maryland and for our country. Thank you, Senator Barb.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the 21st Century Cures Act. The bill is not perfect, but it makes important progress on key health and addiction treatments that will help people in Maryland and across the country. Maryland's drug poisoning death rate is higher than the national average, with both urban and rural areas facing the scourge of opioid addiction and death. This bill will provide $1 billion in funding to states for new programs to combat the opioid and heroin epidemic. It also takes critical steps to improve our nation's mental health system by reauthorizing several grant programs aimed at crisis response, behavioral health integration in pediatric primary care, and diversion from the criminal justice system to community-based services. Additionally, the 21st Century Cures Act aims to improve the discovery, development, and delivery of medical treatments. It creates incentives for new scientists to begin their career in research, requires more input from patients, and modernizes clinical trials--all of which will help advance treatments for rare diseases such as childhood cancer. The bill allocates over $6 billion in new investments to implement vital health priorities such as the President's Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) Initiative that will help us to better understand the human brain and could lead to cures to diseases such as Alzheimer's. Additionally, the funding will go towards the President's Precision Medicine and the Vice President's Cancer Moonshot Initiatives by dedicating $4.8 billion to the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The inclusion of $500 million for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will help make its approval process more efficient and accelerate treatments to patients. Maryland is proud to be home to so many federal agencies that are leading the fight to improve the health of all Americans, and I will keep fighting to provide the resources they need in this effort. Furthermore, the package includes legislation I authored--Advancing Research for Neurological Diseases Act. It will create a neurological disease surveillance program at the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), which would provide a foundation for evaluating and understanding factors of neurological diseases like Multiple Sclerosis and Parkinson's. While the bill includes important bipartisan provisions, I am concerned that this bill includes far less funding than what was included in the Cures package considered by the House last year. Additionally, Congressional Republicans refused to allow for the funding in this bill to be mandatory. Instead, Congress will have to vote annually to make the funding available as part of the appropriations process--the American people must hold us accountable to deliver on this promise. Finally, I still have concerns with some provisions that might impact patient safety, but I understand that FDA worked with Congress on the provisions that relate to their agency to provide feedback--much of which was incorporated. I look forward to continuing to work with the FDA through implementation to safeguard patients. As a country, we must work together to combat drug addiction and prioritize medical research. The Cures Act moves this effort forward, but we are far from finished.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I submit this statement in support of H.R. 5047, the Protecting Veterans' Educational Choice Act of 2016. I will be unable to submit my recorded vote but I fully support this legislation that ensures that veterans will not be unwittingly exploited by deceptive recruiters. H.R. 5047 is a bipartisan bill that reinforces our commitment to the success of our service members, on and off the battlefield. The bill requires the Department of Veterans Affairs to supply all information regarding articulation agreements to service members who wish to use their VA education benefits. The bill will inform service members, in advance, if and how they can transfer credits and avoid unwittingly misusing their VA education benefits. In 2010, Congress passed the Post-9/11 Veterans Education Assistance Improvements Act which expanded educational benefits to include more service members and allows them to use their benefits to receive not only traditional degrees but also apprenticeships, vocational training certifications, and on-the-job training. This expansion was vital in providing access to a variety of educational platforms but some for- profit institutions focused on recruiting and scamming service members out of their benefits. H.R. 5047 provides education career counseling to make sure service members are informed of their options.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the 50-year career of an extraordinary leader in our community--Chief Arthur ``Artie'' Hawkins, Kensington, Maryland Volunteer Fire Department's most senior operational member. Chief Hawkins has been instrumental in developing the Kensington VFD into one of the most outstanding Departments in the region. A third-generation firefighter, Chief Hawkins began serving the Department at the age of 12 and has dedicated his life to service. Rising through the ranks, he has served as both Department Chief and as President. As a leader and a colleague, Chief Hawkins provided the start for hundreds of volunteers who have continued serving the public through the fire service, Armed Forces, and police and medical fields. Thanks to his outstanding guidance and mentorship for so many leaders, Chief Hawkins' imprint is on the work of people who are saving lives all over the globe each and every day. Chief Hawkins is more than a leader. He has played countless roles in the lives of the Department members, whether it be as a father, a brother or a friend. He has been there for them during the happiest moments of their lives as well as the saddest. Chief Hawkins truly embodies the meaning of ``brotherhood'' within the fire service. Chief Hawkins has also been a pillar of strength during critical times in our nation's history. He has played important roles in the Department's response to numerous emergencies, including the D.C. race riots of the 1960s, the 9/11 attacks on the Pentagon, and the sniper attacks that paralyzed the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area in 2002. On November 20, 2016, Chief Hawkins will lead his final regular shift on a special day--the 50th anniversary of his very first shift with the Department. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to recognize the lifetime achievements of Chief Arthur Hawkins I ask my colleagues to join me in expressing gratitude and appreciation to him for his outstanding service to our nation.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3590, which repeals one of the funding mechanisms for the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that this bill would add $33 billion to the nation's deficit. House Republicans have once again created a double standard, asking Congress to add $33 billion to the national deficit with unpaid tax cuts while insisting on offsets for public health emergencies like the Zika virus, opioid epidemic, and crisis in Flint, Michigan. H.R. 3590 has made House Republicans' priorities very clear--to dismantle the ACA. This is the latest effort to undermine the ACA, which provides affordable health care to millions of Americans. I have put forward a proposal to provide tax relief to working Americans with a Paycheck Bonus Tax Credit and updates to the tax code to benefit those who earn their paychecks through hard work instead of those who make money off of money. If Republicans are serious about tax reform to help American workers they would support my proposal to limit tax breaks that encourage corporations to move American jobs overseas. Rather than work on behalf of our constituents who are counting on Congress to pass common sense laws on logical tax reform and to address public health emergencies, House Republicans have chosen to fight old battles by once again introducing legislation which would undermine the ACA. I oppose this bill and urge my colleagues to vote no.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, today, the House voted on another unpaid-for tax cut by approving H.R. 5719, which would increase the deficit by more than $1 billion. I believe the bill's purpose has merit. It can encourage companies to share more profits with their employees and help create more new businesses. If we could vote on the fully-offset Senate version, it would certainly have my support. But I opposed this bill because Republicans have our priorities backwards. While Republicans refuse to provide aid to national emergencies--like helping stop the spread of the Zika virus, or providing funds for the people of Flint, Michigan--unless every dollar is offset by cuts in other parts of the budget, we continue to vote on more billion-dollar tax cuts without offsetting a single penny.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise regarding H.R. 5461, the Iranian Leadership Asset Transparency Act and H.R. 5931, the misleadingly named Prohibiting Future Ransom Payments to Iran Act. Regional stability in the Middle East and ensuring that Iran is prevented from acquiring a nuclear weapon are top national security priorities of the United States and they are the reasons that, after very careful consideration, I chose to support the JCPOA. That agreement has already dramatically reduced Iran's stockpile of enriched nuclear material and subjects the country to a strenuous verification regime. For all these reasons, I will support the Iranian Leadership Asset Transparency Act and oppose H.R. 5931. Iran's hugely wealthy and powerful Revolutionary Guard has been identified by leading international institutions, including the State Department, as a driving force behind Iran's sponsorship of terrorism around the world. The Los Angeles Times estimated in 2007 that the IRGC, which was tasked with rebuilding the country after the Iran-Iraq War, ``now has ties to more than one hundred companies that control roughly $12 billion in construction and engineering capital.'' In a 2012 country report on terrorism, the State Department noted ``a marked resurgence of Iran's state sponsorship of terrorism, through its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps--Quds Force, its Ministry of Intelligence and Security, and Tehran's ally Hezbollah.'' H.R. 5461 will help illuminate the IRGC's control of a wide array of Iran's assets. The Treasury Secretary will be required to develop and post online in English, and the three main languages used in that country, a list of assets held by Iran's political and military leaders. The list will include a description of how these assets were acquired and how they have been employed. The bill will not only help make Iran's citizens more aware of how corrupt their government is, the reporting requirements may help to shed additional light on the ways Iran's Revolutionary Guard funds terrorism. By contrast, H.R. 5931 would provide Iran with an excuse to abandon its JCPOA obligations and resume its nuclear enrichment activities. The bill purports to codify the long held position of the U.S. not to pay ransoms to terrorists, but the bill is much more than that. H.R. 5931 would prohibit the U.S. Government from making cash payments of any kind to Iran, even ones the U.S. is legally obligated to make. The most recent payment made to Iran by the U.S., for example, was owed to it as a result of a weapons sale that occurred in the days before the revolution. The U.S. was certainly not going to fulfill this obligation by sending Iran weapons, so the U.S. agreed to fulfill the contract instead with cash. Additionally, because the U.S. is a signatory to the Algiers Accords, there will be more payments in the future. Under that agreement, the U.S. is legally obligated to comply with the determinations of the Iran/U.S. Claims Tribunal. The recent payment made to Iran was a part of the settlement reached by that body. There are over a thousand more claims pending before the Tribunal. The JCPOA is not based on trust. It is based on verification. According to the IAEA, Iran has, so far, complied with its obligations under the JCPOA. Faithfully observing the obligations of that agreement, especially the verification protocols, are in the national security interest of the United States and we must avoid providing the Iranians with an excuse not to uphold their side of the bargain. For that reason, I cannot support this bill.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to HR 5226, the Regulatory Integrity Act of 2016. The Regulatory Integrity Act seeks to bar a federal agency from promoting or soliciting public support for its actions, such as proposed regulatory rules. Under current law, agencies are already prohibited from spending funds on publicity or propaganda lobbying, but in some cases agencies may communicate with the public regarding the benefits of a rule. If this bill becomes law, any such action could be interpreted as illegal. Further troubling, the bill requires an agency to report each of its communications with the public on the rules about which the Agency has been most vocal. Such an effort will dramatically increase the cost of Federal rulemaking to the public. In my opposition to this bill, I associate myself with the remarks of Ranking Member Elijah Cummings who said, ``Agencies already are barred from engaging in `substantial grassroots lobbying campaigns' when those campaigns are aimed at encouraging members of the public to pressure Members of Congress to support the Administration or department legislative or appropriation proposals. The bill would require agencies to report to Congress every communication to the public--including every oral communication from an agency official--about the five regulatory actions the agency issued the most communications on in the previous year. This would be unnecessarily burdensome and likely would not be workable for agencies.'' The Administration also opposes the bill, threatening a veto on the grounds that the measure is ``duplicative, vague, costly and puts unnecessary procedure requirements on agencies that would prevent them from efficiently performing their statutory responsibilities and potentially lead to a less informed public.'' The public has a right to know how a proposed regulation will affect them personally and the agency issuing that regulation is uniquely qualified to offer the data necessary to make that determination. In the absence of such information, the public will be at the mercy of any well-funded special interest or high priced lobbyist who might want to defeat regulations that protect the public interest, but not their profits.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chair, it is with great reluctance that I rise in opposition to H.R. 5620. I am disappointed that my Republican colleagues have missed the opportunity to pass legislation that immediately reforms the Department of Veterans Affairs' disability claim appeals backlog. Instead they are determined to push through a bill that they know deprives VA employees, many of whom are veterans, of due process and abridges their constitutional rights. Our veterans deserve better than the current disability appeals claim backlog system which currently has almost half a million claims. It is a system that has not been updated since the 1930s. My colleague, Representative Dina Titus, has introduced legislation that would decrease wait times and save the VA over $2.6 billion. Without this legislation our veterans may soon have to wait over a decade for their appeal to process. That is unacceptable. I fully support Representative Titus's comprehensive solution to provide our veterans with expeditious and accurate service and I am pleased that it is included in this bill. However, I cannot support Sections 2 through 8 and 10 of H.R. 5620 which are partisan and unconstitutional attempts by Republicans to punish VA employees. Republicans claim that their goal is to help veterans but they seemingly ignore that one-third of VA employees are veterans themselves. They have tried to pass this so-called `administrative reform' before and faced the same constitutional challenges. It is incomprehensible that Republicans are wasting taxpayer time and resources pushing through this legislation. While accountability and reform at the VA are necessary, constitutional rights cannot be abrogated or dismissed simply because Republicans do not think that particular right is important. I am fully supportive of Ranking Member Takano's amendment which adds accountability at the VA but still protects the rights of VA employees. Republicans cannot claim that Democrats are against accountability because numerous amendments to H.R. 5620 adding accountability measures were introduced by Democrats, were unopposed by Republicans and passed with bipartisan support on the House floor. I sincerely hope my Republican colleagues will introduce bipartisan legislation that they know can pass to give our veterans the service they deserve.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the remarkable service of Burr Gray to our community. Burr has served as the President of the Cabin John Citizens Association in Cabin John, Maryland for 20 years. He was elected to lead the Association in 1997 and has served the Cabin John community with vision and distinction ever since. Burr is an exemplar of what it means to be engaged in a community. In 1997, at the beginning of his first term, Burr encouraged members of the Cabin John community to become volunteers, to be active in its Citizens Association, and to participate in the first Cabin John Stream Cleanup. Thanks to Burr's leadership, the Cabin John Stream Cleanup is now a community tradition that keeps this waterway to the Potomac River and, ultimately, the Chesapeake Bay, clean. Burr also encouraged community members to support Friends of Cabin John Creek, a coalition of neighborhood community organizations working to curb stormwater runoff. Burr brought the community's love for the Potomac River to a new level when he began the Cabin John Regatta in 1999. This annual canoe trip has increased respect for the River within the community and allows members of the community to enjoy the natural beauty of Cabin John. Burr's other endeavors are numerous and include an annual community blood drive, plans for a playground at the Clara Barton Community Center, and formation of Friends of the Clara Barton Community Center. The list goes on and on. In 2008, Burr spearheaded the neighborhood effort to celebrate the 400th Anniversary of Captain John Smith's voyage on the Potomac River in 1608. This event brought the community together and led the Citizens Association to publish Cabin John: Legends and Life of an Uncommon Place. Burr has served on the Boards of the Potomac Conservancy and Glen Echo Park. He also spearheaded efforts to preserve Gibson Grove, a cemetery for freed slaves. These efforts led to the restoration of the area and a historical panel to highlight the significance of the site. Over the last two decades, Burr has put the needs of the Cabin John community first and has personified Cabin John's traditions of service and leadership. I ask my colleagues to join me in expressing our deepest gratitude and appreciation to Burr Gray for his 20 years of creative and visionary service to the community.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in reluctant opposition to S. 764. Although I support a uniform national set of standards relating to GMOs and food labels, I do not believe that this legislation adequately balances the competing interests at stake. On the one hand, most scientists agree that GMO seeds and foods are safe for consumption. At the same time, a majority of Americans have consistently stated that they want to know if their food contains GMOs. Supporters of more comprehensive food labeling have argued that this bill contains large loopholes that would keep many consumers in the dark. Unfortunately, not a single hearing was held on this bill to listen to the competing perspectives and recommendations. I am also disappointed that on such a controversial and important subject, members were not given the opportunity to offer any amendments. I am concerned that a hastily written and passed federal bill will now preempt state laws that seek to provide their consumers with more comprehensive and readily accessible information. While I do not believe that an inconsistent patchwork of individual state regulations is the long term answer, I do believe we could improve on the provisions of this bill.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the three bills designed to weaken or undermine the nuclear agreement with Iran. According to the IAEA, which conducts thorough, systematic and regular evaluations of Iran's nuclear energy activities, Iran is complying with its obligations under the JCPOA. The core of the Arak plutonium reactor was dismantled and destroyed, 19,000 centrifuges were put under close IAEA surveillance and 98 percent of Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium was removed out of the country. As long as Iran continues to fulfill its commitments, it is important that the U.S. not jeopardize the accord by abandoning its own. That is why these bills are so reckless. H.R. 5631 requires the re-imposition of sanctions on individuals and entities that were delisted on Implementation Day; H.R. 4992 reapplies secondary sanctions on Iran's financial sector by prohibiting permissible financial transactions between Iran and the international community that are outside the U.S. financial system; and, H.R. 5119 prevents the U.S. from procuring heavy water from Iran. The United States does not produce heavy water so American industries and labs which need nuclear material for research must seek out international sources. This bill will cut American companies off from that important resource while also forcing Iran to sell its heavy water on the international market, where it can fall into dangerous hands. The JCPOA is working. It has disassembled key elements of Iran's nuclear program and subjects the Iranians to unprecedented verification and monitoring requirements. As a result, all of Iran's pathways to a weapon have been blocked and the U.S. and our allies are safer. Taken together, these bills will require the U.S. to re-impose sanctions on Iran in violation of our obligation under the agreement to ``refrain from any policy specifically intended to directly and adversely affect the normalization of trade and economic relations with Iran.'' The JCPOA does not threaten U.S. foreign policy objectives. It does not require the U.S. to abandon its sanctions on Iran for its human rights abuses or terrorist activities. Those sanctions were not affected by the JCPOA in any way. The U.S. also retains its right to target Iran's ballistic missiles activities and to penalize Iran for its destabilizing regional activities. Before the U.S. signed the agreement, the world was a significantly less safe place. Iran had thousands of centrifuges spinning to increase its large stockpile of enriched uranium and Iran was only two to three months away from developing a bomb. When the JCPOA was signed, Iran agreed to ship tens of thousands of pounds of enriched uranium out of the country, two-thirds of Iran's centrifuges were dismantled or removed, and the international community was provided unprecedented access to Iran's nuclear facilities and supply chain. These bills are not tough; they are foolish. They could recklessly endanger the security gains we have made as a result of the JCPOA.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the so- called Conscience Protection Act, S. 304, which is simply another unacceptable attack on women's reproductive health. The sole purpose of this bill is to deny access and create additional barriers for women seeking safe and constitutionally protected medical procedures. After relentless attempts in this Congress and in the courts to curtail a women's right to choose, this bill is yet another measure designed to make it harder for women to get medical information critical to their health and safety. This bill bypassed regular order and was rushed to the House floor days before Republican leadership plans to leave town for seven weeks. Yet, House Republicans are refusing to vote on--or adequately fund responses to--the many crises that endanger our public's health, from the Zika virus to gun violence to the epidemic of opioid addiction. Instead, House Republicans are choosing to vote on this bill to limit a woman's right to choose--the 13th vote in this Congress that undermines a woman's ability to make informed decisions about her own personal health and family. I strongly oppose this bill and urge my colleagues to vote no.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the misnamed Restoring Access to Medication Act of 2015, H.R. 1270. Once again, the Republican leadership has decided to bring a bill to the House floor that is harmful to Americans instead of doing the people's business and voting on a life saving bill that would decrease the ever-rising toll of gun violence. Our constituents are urging and counting on Congress to pass commonsense laws to establish universal criminal background checks and prevent terrorists from buying guns. Instead, Republicans have scheduled a vote for the 64th time to undermine the Affordable Care Act (ACA)--a law that has given 20 million additional Americans access to health care, eliminated discrimination based on pre-existing conditions, and reduced health care spending. This bill repeals funding mechanisms that help pay for the ACA. Defunding these provisions would have devastating effects and put millions of Americans at risk of losing access to affordable health coverage. Rather than considering commonsense gun legislation or raising the minimum wage, House Republicans choose to fight old battles by once again voting to repeal the ACA. I oppose this bill and urge my colleagues to vote no.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the election of Reverend Dr. Harry L. Seawright as Bishop of the African Methodist Episcopal Church. Rev. Seawright is the longtime pastor of the Union Bethel A.M.E. Church in Brandywine, Maryland. A fourth-generation A.M.E., Rev. Seawright's first pastoral appointment was with the Payne Memorial A.M.E. Church in Jessup, Maryland, followed by service to the Hemingway Temple A.M.E. Church in Washington, D.C. In 1986, Rev. Seawright assumed his position at Union Bethel A.M.E. Church, which he has served longer than any other pastor in the congregation's history. During his three decades of service, Union Bethel has expanded dramatically and has a significant presence in the community. In addition to serving as Union Bethel's pastor, Rev. Seawright is the author of several books, including More Than Bricks and Mortar: Building a Church without Losing Your Mind, and Don't Faint: Help for Hurting Pastors and their Families. He earned his Bachelor's degree from Benedict College in Columbia, South Carolina and his Master and Doctor of Ministry degrees from the Howard University School of Divinity. Rev. Seawright has long been deeply involved in the community. In addition to serving as a spiritual leader, he is an entrepreneur, community leader, world traveler, author and family man. I ask my colleagues to join me in expressing to him our congratulations on his election to this distinguished position and our gratitude for all he has done to touch the lives of others.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the recent election as Bishop of the African Methodist Episcopal Church of the Rev. Dr. Frank Madison Reid III, the longtime pastor of the historic Bethel A.M.E. Church of Baltimore. Dr. Reid is a beloved member of the Baltimore community who has faithfully led his congregation for more than 28 years. Dr. Reid's elevation to Bishop in the year of the Church's 200th anniversary follows the tradition of his father and grandfather, who were elected Bishop in 1972 and 1940, respectively. This is the first time in the denomination's history that members of three generations have been elected to the position. Before his appointment, Dr. Reid earned a Bachelor's degree in History and African American studies from Yale University in 1974 and a Doctorate from the Harvard Divinity School in 1978. He has previously served congregations of the A.M.E. Church in Los Angeles, California and Charlotte, North Carolina. This past February, Dr. Reid was one of the faith leaders from Baltimore who met with Pope Francis and received his blessing for their work to bring peace and healing to their communities in the wake of the death of Freddie Gray and the ensuing turmoil. Dr. Reid will serve as Bishop with great devotion and distinction. I ask my colleagues to join me in expressing to him our congratulations on his election to this esteemed position and our appreciation for the tireless work he has done on behalf of congregations in Baltimore and throughout our nation.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chair, this evening I inadvertently voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 451. As an opponent of seismic airgun testing, I duly intended to vote ``yea.'' Stated against:

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to the Goodlatte amendment, which would jeopardize state efforts to clean up the Chesapeake Bay. Mr. Chair, in my home state of Maryland, at the center of the Bay watershed, there's a lot of concern about pollution behind the Conowingo Dam. The sediment and nutrients there don't just materialize out of nothing. They come from Pennsylvania, down the Susquehanna River, and are caught by the dam in Maryland. Pennsylvania's water, and pollution, doesn't stop at the Mason-Dixon line. The Bay states have recognized the need to work together to protect the Chesapeake for three decades. But for most of that time, we haven't made the progress we need because there was no way to make sure that every state was keeping its commitment. That's why the states asked for federal assistance in 2008 and the federal government agreed to act as a backstop, giving every state the confidence to take action because they know they and their partners will be held accountable. This has been working and has been upheld by the federal courts. The states are not asking for repeal. But this amendment would remove the accountability provisions that have been critical to the plan's success. If Pennsylvania doesn't meet its responsibilities, Maryland sees the consequences at the Conowingo Dam. If Maryland doesn't do its job, it jeopardizes Virginia's oyster populations. We have a collaborative process in place, and our states have made significant investments and important progress. I urge my colleagues to respect the states' partnership and oppose the Goodlatte amendment.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of Leisure World of Maryland's 50th anniversary. Leisure World was founded in 1966 by Ross Cortese, who observed that the population of older citizens was growing and thought that their special needs were not being met. His vision was ``gracious, carefree, secure living for adults in a self-contained community that provides all the facilities but none of the drudgery of home ownership.'' His innovative dream created self-contained senior communities, offering rewarding living for older people still interested in leading active and enriched lives. The first residents of Leisure World of Maryland moved into their new ``manors'' in August 1966. The available housing options at the time were townhouses called ``Berkeleys'' and one-story duplexes called ``Carvels'' near the first Clubhouse and across the street from the 18th hole of the golf course. Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, Cortese continued developing single family homes, townhomes and duplexes, along with the community's golf course, administrative facilities and medical center, and investing in the community's physical and social infrastructure. Over the years, Leisure World continued to expand and provide seniors with additional housing options and facilities. In 1980, Cortese teamed up with renowned Watergate developer Giuseppe Cecchi and his company, The IDI Group Companies, to complete the development of the community. IDI reconfigured the site plan in a way that increased density through luxury multifamily condominium structures while preserving parkland, improving the golf course, and adding a second community clubhouse. The final condominium units were completed in 2013. Today, Leisure World of Maryland continues to be a model for active living. Home to more than 8000 residents aged 55+ and including three voting precincts, Leisure World offers its residents a wide variety of services and amenities, including restaurants, clubhouses, a medical center, an interfaith chapel and an 18-hole golf course. Residents participate in an extensive program of fitness classes, lectures, concerts, trips, and nearly 100 clubs and organizations. Miles of walking trails lead through a beautiful blend of pristine landscapes and natural settings. Leisure World is a rare gem in Montgomery County and in the State of Maryland. Its residents enjoy an outstanding quality of life and are active and engaged members of both the Leisure World community and the greater community outside its gates. I urge my colleagues to join me in extending our congratulations to Leisure World of Maryland as it celebrates its 50th anniversary and our gratitude and appreciation for its residents' contributions to our community.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the conference report of S. 524, the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act (CARA). Families devastated by opioid addiction deserve action, and this legislation will take some important steps to reduce the toll on our communities. None of our districts is immune to this epidemic that is causing so much death and heartache. The conference report includes elements from both the bipartisan House and Senate versions of their respective opioid measures recently approved almost unanimously. It includes provisions that incorporate prevention tactics and expanded access to treatment, recovery support services, and overdose reversals. Additionally, the report encourages criminal justice agencies to integrate and sustain Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT) programs. Although this report includes vital and much needed measures, we cannot pretend that it will solve the problem. I am disappointed that this legislation does not include adequate funding to fully help us get ahead of this crisis. During conference, my Democratic colleagues from both chambers offered amendments that would provide funding for the authorizations within the package. Unfortunately, they were turned down, so we must continue to fight for the resources necessary to meaningfully implement this package. I request my colleagues to support this report and to continue to work on a bipartisan basis to provide the resources needed to save lives.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, on July 6, 2016, I was unavoidably detained and missed one vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on Roll Call No. 368.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, in honor of the memory of Mercy Cordova, a victim of gun violence who never received a moment of silence here on the House floor.