Rob Woodall

Mr. WOODALL

Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Speaker, it is going to be a good day. It is going to be a good day. I don't know if you came down to Washington as a young man. I remember sitting right up there on the second row of the gallery, and I came into the Chamber and I was so excited. It was my first visit to see the people's House. The Reading Clerk was standing there at that podium and read and read. I had absolutely no idea what was going on, and here nobody hands you a pamphlet or anything to tell you what is happening on the floor of the House. I thought the activity was going to happen down here, and it was all going on up there at the podium. That has been 40 years ago now. I now see that however long that conversation happens, it lays the groundwork for what is going to be an even greater conversation here on the floor of the House. Mr. Speaker, I am fond of saying that if you come to this institution on the right day, you are going to see a festival of democracy take place right here. Today is going to be one of those days. If you were on the House floor yesterday, you saw us take up the first of these divisions in this appropriations bill. Today, because of the work that my friend from New York and I did with the rest of the members of the Rules Committee right up there last night, we are bringing to the floor the remaining four divisions of H.R. 3354; 224 additional amendments. 224 additional amendments. Division A is the Interior section; division C is the Commerce, Justice, Science section; division D is the Financial Services section; division F is the Labor, HHS, and Education section. When I was on the floor yesterday, Mr. Speaker, I talked about how proud I was of the work that we have all done here together. This annual appropriations process has been conducted in a more comprehensive fashion this year than in any other year in my memory. When we get jammed, you end up with one of those long-term, yearlong continuing resolutions that shut out every Member's voice. In a good year, maybe, you end up with one of those giant leadership-negotiated White House and the leader of the House and the Senate omnibus appropriations bills that shut out all but two or three voices. This year, the Appropriations Committee, beginning its work way back in April, has worked through every single appropriations bill one by one at the committee level, and we are seeing the culmination of that effort here on the floor today. Mr. Speaker, it has been since 2010 that the House has finished its work before the September 30 fiscal year deadline. It was the 2009 calendar year. They were doing the work for the 2010 fiscal year. It is hard to get this done, and it doesn't happen because Democrats are successful or Republicans are successful. It happens because the collaboration that we have together is successful, and we are seeing the result of that today. If we pass the underlying rule, we will make in order those 224 amendments, we will begin that process of debating the last four divisions, and we will have the voices of this House heard. We went until midnight last night, Mr. Speaker. We went until midnight the night before that. I suspect midnight is going to seem early to us where we are headed over the next couple of days. But at the end of that process, Republicans, Democrats, folks from all regions of the country, are going to be able to look each other in the eye and know that--in a way that makes folks back home proud--we worked through each and every appropriations bill and we got our work done on time. That is why I ran for Congress, Mr. Speaker, to deliver results back home, and that is why I am proud to be standing with my friend from New York today delivering on those promises. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WOODALL. I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.

Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher), one of our leaders from the great State of California.

Mr. WOODALL

Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I don't think my colleague is confused about where he is on this issue, and I don't think any amount of talking on the floor is going to change his mind on this issue. I would say that the underlying bill, which makes in order over 140 amendments so that we can have a conversation about different ideas and different outcomes and lets the people's voice be heard, is the right way to craft legislation. With the support of this body and this bill, we will move on to that underlying debate, and we will have that voice heard. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to thank you for that admonition. Mr. Speaker, these are very serious issues that my friends on the other side were trying to have a debate on the appropriations bills. My friends have a very legitimate concern about an immigration issue, characterized with terms like ``cruel'' and ``nasty'' and ``rotten'' and ``no courage.'' I would say to my friends we can try to belittle each other into a compromise. I have not seen that work before. We can try to insult each other into a solution. I have not seen that work before. I have seen my colleagues coming down the other side of the aisle, Mr. Speaker, one after the other to tell a compelling story about a man or a woman they know who they believe would make an amazing United States citizen, who they believe would add value to our communities, and who they believe is serving admirably in our church and is working admirably in our community. They have a story to tell, and they should tell it. Guess what? I have got a few of those stories to tell myself. But I would say to my friends, I don't believe, Mr. Speaker, that the insults and the acrimony are going to get us where any of us wants to be. For my friends who believe differently, I would tell you I think we have tried that path before, and it didn't take us where we want to go. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Speaker, I would say to my friend from Massachusetts I am prepared to close when he is. I have no further speakers remaining. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I fear you are going to have to use that admonition a great deal in the coming days, and I regret that. I regret that folks have begun to confuse civility with weakness. My experience is, when you are strong, you don't have to insult the people around you. When you are strong, you don't have to call folks around you names. Civility and weakness are confused. In fact, more often than not, there is a loss of civility when folks feel at their weakest. My friends on the other side of the aisle right now, Mr. Speaker, with good reason, feel very restricted. Being in the minority in the House of Representatives is a hard place to be. For my friend from Massachusetts, Mr. Speaker, being in the minority on the Rules Committee is among one of the hardest places to be. So I don't fault him for his frustration one little bit. If I was in his shoes, I would be frustrated as well. Let me be clear: we are in this position with DACA today for one reason and one reason only, and that is because instead of leading the Congress and leading the Nation, President Obama chose to act alone in a way that he knew would not be permanent. The instability that you see today is the result of folks acting in a way that was not stable. The confusion that you see today is the result of an administration that committed itself to that confusion instead of committing itself to consensus. I have been in this Congress for 7 years, Mr. Speaker. That is 7 years. For 4 of those 7 years, the United States Senate was led by the Democratic Party. Not once in those 7 years has an immigration bill come to my desk from the United States. Not once. I know, as we sit here right now, the House Judiciary Committee has acted on immigration bill after immigration bill after immigration bill. Let's be clear, Mr. Speaker: the situation that the DREAMers find themselves in today is the symptom of a Nation that does not have the security of its borders. Had America had security for its borders, we would not have allowed these families to put their children in these positions. Today, we have an amazing opportunity to have this debate. I tell you that our President is in a unique position to lead us. It frustrates me so much, Mr. Speaker, that folks want to assume the worst about one another and that the media is all too anxious to report the worst about one another. The President could have just canceled the DACA program. He could have instructed DHS to start proceedings today. He didn't. It wouldn't have been the right thing. It wouldn't have been the prudent thing to do. He didn't do it. What did he do? He said: I have read this thing called the United States Constitution. It turns out that only one group in the land has the opportunity to write the laws. It is me and my friend from Massachusetts. It is the majority leader from Kentucky and the minority leader from New York across the way. He said: Congress, there is only one way this should have even been done. It should have been done in the Halls of Congress. That is not the way President Obama chose to do it. He should have done better. He didn't. We can do better. Let's do. Now, to the sky-is-falling reports that came out one right after the other almost with glee from the fourth estate, the President spoke again to say: Listen, you know what? If Congress doesn't get it right, I may have to act myself. I hope he doesn't. I think that folks have too little confidence in what we can do together when we set our minds to it, but we do have to ask ourselves, watching the display here on the floor today, watching the displays we have had here on the floor in the past: Do we have a serious group of men and women here who want to work together on solutions? Or do we have a group of men and women here who want to just get the next headline, who want to just send out that next tweet, who just want to just make that next front page story of hysteria? I believe the former is true. I know the men and women on this floor, Mr. Speaker, not the caricature of the men and women that you read in the newspaper, but the real men and women on this floor, who each come here every single day to diligently serve the almost 700,000 men and women that they report to back home. And I am proud to do it. I plea, Mr. Speaker, for you to use your leadership to not allow us to devolve into the name calling and the acrimony that the fourth estate would like to suggest characterizes this Chamber, but to lead us to the sincere debate of caring about people, caring about the rule of law, caring about families. Let me just say, the best part of this job is the casework that each one of us does back home. You all know it. People think the job happens in Washington, D.C. It doesn't. It happens one family at a time back home. You have heard the comments on the floor of the House today, Mr. Speaker. I have families in my district separated from one another. You want to talk about uniting families? I have families separated from one another standing in line to come to this country legally. I ask you, Mr. Speaker: How many folks have you heard standing up for my constituents whose families have been separated because they have been standing in line to get here for more than a year? How many folks have stood up for them? Not one. What about those families standing in line 2 years, Mr. Speaker? I have got them in my district, too. What about those families who have been separated for 3 years and standing in line trying to get to America the right way? Who is standing up for them? I don't hear those calls on the floor of the House. I have got them in my district, too. What about 4 years, Mr. Speaker; 5 years, Mr. Speaker; 6 years, Mr. Speaker? If you wanted to bring your adult child in from Mexico, you had to file in the 1990s for their number to be coming up today. That is crazy. It is crazy. Where is the conversation about reforming the system that got us here to begin with? I applaud my friend for trying to solve the symptom. I beg my friend to work with me to cure the disease. We have a President who can lead us in that direction, Mr. Speaker. He has the credibility of being tough on borders and he has the heart of someone who wants to keep families united. We have an opportunity, Mr. Speaker. We can take it or we can reject it. I believe we are going to take it. But that is not for the business today. The business today is an appropriations process. My friend from Massachusetts called it unprecedented. He is right. I take no small amount of pleasure in talking about how right he is. I have been in this body for 7 years and we don't generally get the appropriations bills done before the end of the year, Mr. Speaker. Deadlines don't tend to mean anything to us. We are about to make that happen. Mr. Speaker, 1997 was the last time Congress funded the government ahead of schedule, before the deadline. It has taken a continuing resolution every other year since 1997. We have an opportunity this year to do it. I don't know if we will take it or not. I hope that we will. We can't solve everything every day, but we can solve something every day. We can make something better for someone every day. If you support this rule, we will bring to the floor four appropriations bills and 119 amendments, give or take. We are up in the Rules Committee right now making even more amendments in order, Mr. Speaker, to have even more voices be heard, to have even more opportunity to make a difference for the families that we all represent back home. Support this rule. Be proud of this rule. Be proud of the work the Appropriations Committee did. Mr. Speaker, you don't hear it on the floor of the House, but it so frustrates me. If you had been in the Rules Committee last night, you would have seen Democrats and Republicans sitting side by side talking about the amazing work they did together on the appropriations process in the Appropriations Committee, talking about the great admiration and respect that they had for one another because of the work they do together on the Appropriations Committee. We don't hear that here on the floor of the House, and we should. We should hear more of that. We should hear more about the good work we are doing together. If we support this rule, Mr. Speaker, we will get a chance not to hear about it, but to experience it, to do it. I know my colleague from Massachusetts and I have another 6, 7, 8 hours of Rules Committee work to do together tonight. I know my colleague is going to challenge us to do even better than what we are doing. I am prepared to accept that challenge. But for today, Mr. Speaker, for this moment, I urge my colleagues to come to this floor; support this rule; move the appropriations process forward; finish the appropriations process before the September 30 deadline; and serve your constituents back home, like I know every man and woman in this Chamber does. Mr. Speaker, I urge support for the rule and support for the underlying bill.

Mr. WOODALL. I appreciate the gentleman yielding. I was not here for opening statements. I imagine that all time was yielded for the purpose of debate only.

Mr. WOODALL. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. WOODALL

Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I am one of those authorizers. I sit on the Transportation Committee, so I will make myself available to anyone who has questions about the intent of the Transportation Committee on that measure. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart).

Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Chairman, this is an amendment to provide the maximum flexibility to States that are being asked, under this bill, to rescind $800 million in an obligated budget authority. As you know, Mr. Chairman, we put money in a lot of different pots and send it out to a lot of different places to do a whole lot of good for a whole lot of people, but when you have a bill that is going to ask the States to pull back some of that money, historically, we have limited the ability of States to make those decisions. With all due respect to anyone's hometown team, I will tell you no one knows more about how to take care of the safety of the citizens of Georgia than do the citizens of Georgia and our local elected officials. What this amendment would do is allow our local Departments of Transportation, our State Department of Transportation, maximum flexibility in meeting this Federal mandate to rescind those $800 million worth of unobligated funds. I ask my colleagues for their support in providing that maximum flexibility, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for those comments. Again, I want to provide maximum flexibility to what is a very difficult job, and that is reclaiming those obligated funds from each one of our districts back home. The question is: Will we trust our local officials to make the best decisions or will we structure how those decisions are made here? I trust our local engineers, our local builders, and our local folks in charge of our public safety. Mr. Chairman, I encourage my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. WOODALL

Mr. WOODALL. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the chairman for yielding me the time, and I want to thank him for his leadership. Madam Speaker, the amendment that you mentioned, the bill as amended, was actually an amendment from the chairman to perfect the bill. I want to thank the ranking member for her support on the committee, and I want to thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Brownley) for her work on the amendment. Madam Speaker, I wish more high schoolers were in the Capitol today, I wish there were more American Government students in the Capitol today, because this amendment is exactly the way that the American people expect the process to work. As the ranking member pointed out, we made a great step in the FAST Act to try to put more veterans to work, to try to fill more empty spots in commercial truck driving. We did a great job together in a bipartisan way. A lot of folks do a job, and then they are embarrassed to admit that they didn't get it done 100 percent. We have had folks come into our offices who said: Listen, you have made a great step to help our veterans access these certifications, but you could do more, and let us tell you how. As the ranking member pointed out, as the chairman pointed out, before the FMCSA has even finished the original regulations, we are back at work perfecting this, adding more healthcare providers to the rolls so that more veterans can get to work faster--not because we are particularly brilliant folks up here, but because folks who do this every single day as a job back home noticed it, told us how we could do it better, and then we created the partnerships up here to make it happen. Madam Speaker, it makes me so proud to be associated with folks like the chairman, like the ranking member, the Transportation Committee in general, showing up every single day to see what we can do to make a difference. It is not a difference for 300 million Americans at the time, but if you were that one veteran who is trying to feed your family, who is trying to get your certification, who is trying to get yourself back to work, this bill could make all the difference; this amendment could make all the difference. I am grateful to the entire committee team of members and team of staff for making that possible.

Mr. WOODALL

Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak after my friend from Texas. He is absolutely right. We have an incredibly vibrant fabric of folks across this country. My district looks very much like his district. I appreciate him recognizing those things that unite us and bring us together. You know, it hasn't been much over a week, Mr. Speaker, since we committed ourselves to changing the discourse here, and just in the last 5 minutes of listening to speakers on this floor, I have heard sinister accusations of what our healthcare bill will do, of mean bills and meaner bills, of cruel bills. Mr. Speaker, there is not a man or woman in this Chamber who doesn't work every day to serve their constituents better than they did yesterday. There is not a man or woman in this Chamber who doesn't want to do better for America tomorrow than we did yesterday. And I promise you that that pathway is not paved with accusations of ``sinister,'' ``cruel,'' and ``mean.'' It is paved with confessions of common ground, common goals, and common opportunity. I urge my colleagues to remember our commitment that we made to one another last week.

Mr. WOODALL

Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave

Mr. WOODALL. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. WOODALL. I appreciate that. I would like to inquire of the Speaker: Is my friend from Massachusetts working on my yielded time or is he working on his time?

Mr. WOODALL. I thank my friend.

Mr. WOODALL. If my friend would yield, I was advised that I had yielded an abundance of time. I just wanted to make sure that I was not being more generous than you and I would have intended.

Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Speaker, I would advise my friend from Massachusetts I do not have any speakers remaining, and I reserve the balance of my time to close.

Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. Parliamentary Inquiry

Mr. WOODALL. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.

Mr. WOODALL. Reclaiming my time, I will tell my friend two things that he already knows. Number one is we do accept amendments from the entire Congress. That is the purpose of the Rules Committee being in existence, and we have added two amendments to this bill for consideration. When the gentleman supported it in the 112th Congress, we considered no other amendments. That is a change this time. We are going to do that. When it passed the last time we did a rule, no one offered any amendments. This is a change from that time. When we passed it in the Agriculture bill, no one offered any amendments. So it is a change this time. We absolutely are opening up the process more and more with every time the House considers this bill. But I would also tell my friend something that we are going to have to grapple with as an institution, and that is that I don't need a Rules Committee if what we are going to do is make every amendment that comes to this institution in order. The only reason we have a Rules Committee is to pick and choose. The only reason we have a Rules Committee is to set up a timetable on which we can debate and consider things in a reasonable manner. The only reason we have a Rules Committee is because we are not operating under unanimous consent as our friends in the Senate do, though we absolutely could. And I would refer him to my friend, Daniel Webster, who has some marvelous ideas about how we might do that. But, Mr. Speaker, I think it is legitimate for folks back home to wonder what is going on in that United States House. They passed it in a bipartisan way once. They passed it in a bipartisan way twice. They passed it in a bipartisan way three times, and here it is on the floor today, and it is as if the sky is falling and going to open up and swallow everything that is good and decent about this land. Why is that, Mr. Speaker? Why is that the conversation we are having today instead of the one we had not once, not twice, but three times about how we could use this legislation to improve the lives of citizens across this country? Perhaps that is just the environment we are in. Perhaps that is just the cards we have been dealt in politics across America today, Mr. Speaker, but we have a chance together as an institution to stand up and say it does not have to be that way. We have a chance together to stand up and say that we can do better than those partisan shenanigans. We can get together on things that are going to make a difference, and the first opportunity you are going to have after this speech, Mr. Speaker, to do that, is in supporting the rule for this bill. The first opportunity we are going to have to do that is in supporting this rule, and then supporting the underlying legislation and sending it back to the Senate one more time. It is the right thing to do, Mr. Speaker, and we have the opportunity to do that together. Mr. Speaker, I urge strong support for the rule and the underlying bill.