[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 18 (Thursday, February 2, 2017)]
[House]
[Pages H894-H907]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL OF A RULE SUBMITTED BY THE
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 71, I call
up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 40) providing for congressional
disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule
submitted by the Social Security Administration relating to
Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007,
[[Page H895]]
and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 71, the joint
resolution is considered read.
The text of the joint resolution is as follows:
H.J. Res. 40
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress
disapproves the rule submitted by the Social Security
Administration relating to Implementation of the NICS
Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (published at 81 Fed. Reg.
91702 (December 19, 2016)), and such rule shall have no force
or effect.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The joint resolution shall be debatable for
1 hour, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking
minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their designees.
The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) and the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Conyers) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
General Leave
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous materials to H.J. Res. 40.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Virginia?
There was no objection.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, today I rise in strong support of H.J. Res. 40, a joint
resolution providing for congressional disapproval of the rules
submitted by the Social Security Administration relating to
implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007.
On December 19, 2016, in the waning days of the previous
administration, the Social Security Administration published a rule
finalizing the criteria for sending the names of certain Social
Security beneficiaries to the National Instant Criminal Background
Check System, NICS.
Under the rule, an individual's name will be sent to the NICS if they
receive disability insurance or supplemental security income benefits
based on having a mental disorder, the person is between age 18 and the
full retirement age, and the SSA determines that the person needs a
representative payee to manage their benefits. Individuals who meet
these criteria would be prohibited from exercising their Second
Amendment right to possess firearms.
This rule is a slap in the face of those in the disabled community
because it paints all those who suffer from mental disorders with the
same broad brush. It assumes that simply because an individual suffers
from a mental condition, that individual is unfit to exercise his or
her Second Amendment rights. No data exists to support such an
egregious assertion. In fact, studies show that those who suffer from
mental disorders are more likely to be victims of crime rather than
perpetrators of crime.
Furthermore, there is a total absence of any meaningful due process
protections under the rule. Currently, citizens lose their right to
possess a firearm when they have been convicted by a judge or jury of a
felony or misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, when they have been
dishonorably discharged after given a hearing, or when they have been
deemed a fugitive after being given an option to appear and avail
themselves of their due process rights, among other reasons.
{time} 1345
All of these have one thing in common: they all provide due process
to the affected individual.
Under the SSA rule, the affected party has no ability to defend
himself or to even introduce evidence before the SSA denies his right
to possess a firearm. Additionally, at no time during the process
during which the SSA is seeking to deny someone his Second Amendment
rights must the Social Security Administration make a determination
that the individual poses a risk to himself or others. This is the
standard that has long been used to determine if the right to possess a
firearm should be prohibited.
Some may point to the rule's appeals process as providing a form of
due process. However, the appeals process is severely flawed because it
puts the burden on individuals to prove that restoring their Second
Amendment rights would not pose a danger to public safety or be
contrary to the public interest. In every other instance in which
someone is facing a loss of his ability to possess a firearm, the
burden is on the government to prove that the individual should have
his right taken away. Under this flawed system, the individual bears
the burden against the government. This is not what due process looks
like.
During debate on the rule for this joint resolution, I heard a number
of reasons from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle as to why
they opposed this joint resolution. Quite frankly, I am shocked at what
little regard they have for the disabled community. The gentleman from
Massachusetts claimed that this joint resolution was done at the
bidding of the National Rifle Association. Yes, the National Rifle
Association does support H.J. Res. 40. However, what my colleague from
Massachusetts failed to mention during the debate yesterday was who
else supports the joint resolution.
Supporters include the American Association of People with
Disabilities, the National Disability Rights Network, the Autistic Self
Advocacy Network, the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, the Arc of
the United States, the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities, the
Disability Law Center of Alaska, the National Council on Independent
Living, and the National Coalition for Mental Health Recovery. Even the
National Council on Disability--an independent Federal agency that
makes recommendations to the President and Congress to enhance the
quality of life for all Americans with disabilities and their
families--has called on Congress to utilize the Congressional Review
Act in order to repeal this rule.
It was also mentioned--and will, undoubtedly, be mentioned here later
today--that this rule received over 91,000 comments. What they didn't
tell you, and what I am guessing they won't tell you today, is that the
overwhelming majority of the comments opposed the rule. Opposition
wasn't based on small, technical issues. It was based on the
fundamentally flawed concept of the rule. Many of the organizations I
mentioned earlier provided comments to the agency. Rather than listen
to the organizations advocating for the rights of the disabled, the
previous administration decided to ignore them.
I thank the gentleman from the State of Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson) for
his hard work on this important issue that affects law-abiding citizens
in every congressional district in America.
I ask my colleagues to support this resolution--to stand with the
disabled community and to stand with the Constitution. Support H.J.
Res. 40.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time, and I ask unanimous
consent to yield the control of the balance of my time to the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson), the sponsor of this resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Virginia?
There was no objection.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise in opposition to H.J. Res. 40, a measure that would vacate an
important rule issued by the Social Security Administration to help
reduce gun violence.
This resolution of disapproval is particularly problematic because,
pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, it would not only invalidate
this rule but prohibit the agency from adopting substantially the same
rule in the future, even an improved version of the rule. How unusual.
As we consider this resolution today, I ask my colleagues to
consider, for just a moment, how we arrived at this point and, more
precisely, what is at stake.
In 1968, after a decade of assassinations and gun violence, Congress
worked to pass the Gun Control Act. That law lists certain categories
of individuals who are prohibited from purchasing and possessing
firearms, including felons, fugitives, those who
[[Page H896]]
have renounced their citizenship, those who have been dishonorably
discharged, and also those ``adjudicated mentally defective.'' Today,
we don't commonly use that outdated and unfortunate terminology.
Instead, we refer to the ``Federal mental health prohibitor,'' which
remains an important--although challenging--feature of our Federal gun
laws.
Because it was common sense that we needed a system to help prevent
guns from getting into the hands of those who were legally prohibited
from possessing them, Congress took bipartisan action to enact the
Brady Act in 1993. That statute established a National Instant Criminal
Background Check System--some call it NICS--and it requires federally
licensed gun dealers to conduct checks on prospective purchasers in
order to verify that they are not prohibited on the basis of the
statutory categories.
Although unwisely limited only to sales conducted by licensed gun
dealers, the NICS system is extremely beneficial as far as it goes.
Critically, however, this background check system is only as good as
the completeness of the records it includes. This fact was tragically
underscored in 2007, when a student on the campus of Virginia Tech shot
and killed 32 people. The shooter had a mental health record that was
serious enough that it should have been reported to the system, but it
was not.
As a result, Congress enacted the bipartisan NICS Improvement
Amendments Act that same year in order to provide incentives for States
to do a better job of submitting disqualifying mental health records to
the system. The law also requires Federal agencies to submit any such
information that they have. While some States have done a great job of
complying with the law, others have not, which remains a critical
challenge. As we expect States to do more to comply, we must also
ensure Federal agencies are doing their part.
The rule under consideration, which was finalized last December after
an extensive rulemaking process that considered more than 91,000
comments from the public, is intended to impact only a very narrow
range of individuals whom the agency determines should be prohibited
from possessing firearms under the statutory mental health prohibitor,
which has been the law for decades. The rule applies only to those
individuals who have a very severe, long-term mental disorder that
makes them unable to do any kind of work in the American economy,
including even part time or at very low wages.
These individuals must have been determined through an evaluation of
all of the evidence that they are not capable of managing their own
benefits and must be assigned a representative payee. This designation
is given only after an individual is notified orally and in writing at
the outset of the process that the gun eligibility determination would
be the result of the assignment of a representative payee. After the
determination is made, the affected individuals may appeal the decision
to the agency and then, ultimately, to a Federal court.
Of course, we must avoid taking actions that would unfairly
stigmatize individuals who suffer from mental illness or a disability.
This is true in many respects, but, with regard to issues of public
safety, we must recognize that people who suffer from mental illness
should not be assumed to be dangerous. In fact, they are much more
likely to be victims of crime than to be perpetrators. With those
considerations in mind, my colleagues, it can be difficult to apply the
mental health prohibitor, but, still, we must apply and enforce the
law.
If I were proposing such a rule, I cannot say whether this process
would be exactly what I would recommend. We have not held hearings on
this issue, and we have not had the chance to examine all appropriate
considerations. I can say that the agency has undertaken a commendable
effort in accordance with President Obama's directive to ensure that
the NICS background check system has the information that it believes,
after a thorough rulemaking process, corresponds to a longstanding
category of firearms prohibition.
Accordingly, we should not completely disregard the agency's efforts,
and I urge my colleagues to strenuously oppose H.J. Res. 40.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Former President Obama was never a champion of the Second Amendment
right to keep and bear arms. He fought to deny Americans their
constitutional rights throughout his whole 8 years in office. In fact,
on his way out the door, former President Obama finalized a rule that
discriminates against individuals with disabilities and that deprives
law-abiding Americans of their Second Amendment rights. Under this
rule, certain Social Security disability beneficiaries, who also need
help, would be stripped of their Second Amendment rights. More
specifically, their names would be reported to the National Instant
Criminal Background Check System.
Mr. Speaker, just because someone has a disability does not mean he
is a threat to society. Furthermore, needing help to manage your
benefit does not make you dangerous; but you don't have to take my word
for it as the disability community has also raised serious concerns
with regard to this rule.
The National Council on Disability, which is the independent agency
that is charged with advising Congress and the President on disability
policy, said:
``There is, simply put, no nexus between the inability to manage
money and the ability to safely and responsibly own, possess or use a
firearm.''
In addition, Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record many letters of
support I have received for my bill from one of the disability
community's Second Amendment groups and civil rights groups and others.
National Council on Disability,
Washington, DC, January 24, 2017.
Hon. Mitch McConnell,
Majority Leader, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Paul Ryan,
Speaker of the House, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Majority Leader McConnell and Speaker Ryan: I write on
behalf of the National Council on Disability (NCD) regarding
the final rule the Social Security Administration (SSA)
released on December 19th, 2016, implementing provisions of
the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS)
Improvement Amendments Act of 2007, 81 FR 91702. In
accordance with our mandate to advise the President,
Congress, and other federal agencies regarding policies,
programs, practices, and procedures that affect people with
disabilities, NCD submitted comments to SSA on the proposed
rule on June 30th, 2016. In our comments, we cautioned
against implementation of the proposed rule because:
``[t]here is, simply put, no nexus between the inability to
manage money and the ability to safely and responsibly own,
possess or use a firearm. This arbitrary linkage not only
unnecessarily and unreasonably deprives individuals with
disabilities of a constitutional right, it increases the
stigma for those who, due to their disabilities, may need a
representative payee[.]''
Despite our objections and that of many other individuals
and organizations received by SSA regarding the proposed
rule, the final rule released in late December was largely
unchanged. Because of the importance of the constitutional
right at stake and the very real stigma that this rule
legitimizes, NCD recommends that Congress consider utilizing
the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to repeal this rule.
NCD is a nonpartisan, independent federal agency with no
stated position with respect to gun-ownership or gun-control
other than our long-held position that restrictions on gun
possession or ownership based on psychiatric or intellectual
disability must be based on a verifiable concern as to
whether the individual poses a heightened risk of danger to
themselves or others if they are in possession of a weapon.
Additionally, it is critically important that any restriction
on gun possession or ownership on this basis is imposed only
after the individual has been afforded due process and given
an opportunity to respond to allegations that they are not
able to safely possess or own a firearm due to his or her
disability. NCD believes that SSA's final rule falls far
short of meeting these criteria.
Additionally, as NCD also cautioned SSA in our comments on
the proposed rule, we have concerns regarding the ability of
SSA to fairly and effectively implement this rule--assuming
it would be possible to do so--given the long-standing issues
SSA already has regarding long delays in adjudication and
difficulty in providing consistent, prompt service to
beneficiaries with respect to its core mission. This rule
creates an entirely new function for an agency that has long
noted that it has not been given sufficient resources to do
the important work it is already charged with doing. With all
due respect to SSA, our federal partner, this rule is simply
a bridge too far. In fact, it is conceivable that attempts to
implement this rule may strain the already scarce
administrative resources available to the agency,
[[Page H897]]
further impairing its ability to carry out its core mission.
The CRA is a powerful mechanism for controlling regulatory
overreach, and NCD urges its use advisedly and cautiously. In
this particular case, the potential for real harm to the
constitutional rights of people with psychiatric and
intellectual disabilities is grave as is the potential to
undermine the essential mission of an agency that millions of
people with and without disabilities rely upon to meet their
basic needs. Therefore, in this instance, NCD feels that
utilizing the CRA to repeal the final rule is not only
warranted, but necessary.
Regards,
Clyde E. Terry,
Chair.
____
National Rifle Association
of America,
Fairfax, VA.
Hon. Paul Ryan,
Speaker of the House,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
House Minority Leader,
Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Ryan and Minority Leader Pelosi: I am writing
on behalf of the National Rifle Association Institute for
Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) to urge you to vote yes on H.J.
Res. 40. This measure is a joint resolution to disapprove,
under the Congressional Review Act, a Social Security
Administration (SSA) rule that would result in hundreds of
thousands of law-abiding Americans permanently losing their
Second Amendment rights.
SSA claims its rule was mandated by the NICS Improvement
Amendments Act of 2007 (NIAA), as interpreted by the Obama
administration's Department of Justice. The supposed intent
of the rule is for SSA to identify disability or
Supplementary Security Income beneficiaries who qualify as
prohibited ``mental defectives'' under the Gun Control Act
(GCA) and report them to the National Instant Criminal
Background Check System (NICS).
NICS came online nearly 20 years ago, but at no point
before this new regulation did SSA consider its own
operations or decisions as somehow implicated by the
prohibitions in the GCA. Clearly this was not provoked
because of the NIAA or because of changes in the SSA's own
procedures, but because of the antigun politics of the Obama
administration. President Obama made clear that if Congress
would not support his desire for increased gun control, he
would act on his own. That's why he issued this proposal in
the final days of his administration.
The SSA received over 91,000 comments in response to its
proposed rule, the overwhelming majority of them in
opposition. Comments submitted by NRA-ILA explained in detail
how the rule misread the underlying statutes; ignored binding
case law; targeted harmless individuals who do not pose a
risk of harm; violated due process; and hijacked the SSA's
legitimate functions for political purposes.
Our opposition was joined by mental health professionals
and advocates for the mentally ill, who argued that the
proposal was not supported by evidence or science; added to
the stigma of mental illness; and created disincentives for
mentally ill persons to seek help and benefits to which they
are entitled.
Reporting law-abiding, non-dangerous individuals to NICS
and forcing them, as a condition of removal, to prove they
are not a threat to society is inconsistent with the GCA, the
Second Amendment and basic due process.
For these reasons, the NRA strongly supports H.J. Res. 40.
Because of the importance of this issue to NRA members and
gun owners throughout the country, votes on H.J. Res. 40 will
be considered in future candidate evaluations and we will
notify our members accordingly.
Sincerely,
Chris W. Cox.
____
National Coalition for
Mental Health Recovery,
Washington, DC, January 29, 2017.
Hon. Paul Ryan,
Speaker of the House,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
Office of the Democratic Leader,
Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: I write on
behalf of the National Coalition for Mental Health Recovery
(NCMHR) regarding the final rule the Social Security
Administration (SSA) released on December 19th, 2016,
implementing provisions of the National Instant Criminal
Background Check System (NICS) Improvement Amendments Act of
2007, 81 FR 91702.
NCMHR submitted comments to SSA on the proposed rule in
June 2016. In our comments, we cautioned against
implementation of the proposed rule because there is no
causal connection between the inability to manage money and
the ability to safely and responsibly own, possess or use a
firearm. This arbitrary linkage not only unnecessarily and
unreasonably deprives individuals with disabilities of a
constitutional right, it increases the stigma for those who,
due to their disabilities, may need a representative payee.
Despite our objections and that of many other individuals
and organizations received by SSA regarding the proposed
rule, the final rule released in late December was largely
unchanged. Because of the importance of the constitutional
right at stake and the very real stigma that this rule
legitimizes, NCMHR recommends that Congress consider
utilizing the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to repeal this
rule.
NCMHR is a nonpartisan, is a nonpartisan, nonprofit with no
stated position with respect to gun-ownership or gun-control
other than our long-held position that restrictions on gun
possession or ownership based on psychiatric or intellectual
disability must be based on a verifiable concern as to
whether the individual poses a heightened risk of danger to
themselves or others if they are in possession of a weapon.
Additionally, it is critically important that any restriction
on gun possession or ownership on this basis is imposed only
after the individual has been afforded due process and given
an opportunity to respond to allegations that they are not
able to safely possess or own a firearm due to his or her
disability. NCMHR believes that SSA's final rule falls far
short of meeting these criteria.
The CRA is a powerful mechanism for controlling regulatory
overreach, and NCMHR urges its use advisedly and cautiously.
In this particular case, the potential for real harm to the
constitutional rights of people with psychiatric and
intellectual disabilities is grave as is the potential to
undermine the essential mission of an agency that millions of
people with and without disabilities rely upon to meet their
basic needs. Therefore, in this instance, NCMHR feels that
utilizing the CRA to repeal the final rule is not only
warranted, but necessary.
Sincerely,
Daniel B. Fisher, M.D., Ph.D.,
Chair NCMHR.
____
Consortium for
Citizens with Disabilities,
Washington, DC, January 26, 2017.
Hon. Paul Ryan,
Speaker of the House,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
Office of the Democratic Leader,
Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: The Co-
Chairs of the Rights Task Force of the Consortium of Citizens
with Disabilities (CCD) urge you to support a Congressional
Review Act (CRA) resolution to disapprove the Final Rule
issued by the Social Security Administration (SSA) on
December 19, 2016, ``Implementation of the NICS Improvement
Amendments Act of 2007.'' This rule would require the Social
Security Administration to forward the names of all Social
Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental
Security Income (SSI) benefit recipients who use a
representative payee to help manage their benefits due to a
mental impairment to the National Instant Criminal Background
Check System (NICS).
The Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD) is the
largest coalition of national organizations working together
to advocate for Federal public policy that ensures the self-
determination, independence, empowerment, integration and
inclusion of children and adults with disabilities in all
aspects of society.
Prior to the issuance of the Final Rule, the CCD Rights
Task Force conveyed its opposition to the rule through a
letter to the Obama Administration and through the public
comment process. We--and many other members of CCD--opposed
the rule for a number of reasons, including:
The damaging message that may be sent by a SSA policy
change, which focused on reporting individuals who receive
assistance from representative payees in managing their
benefits to the NICS gun database. The current public
dialogue is replete with inaccurate stereotyping of people
with mental disabilities as violent and dangerous, and there
is a real concern that the kind of policy change encompassed
by this rule will reinforce those unfounded assumptions.
The absence of any data suggesting that there is any
connection between the need for a representative payee to
manage one's Social Security disability benefits and a
propensity toward gun violence.
The absence of any meaningful due process protections prior
to the SSA's transmittal of names to the NICS database.
Although the NICS Improvements Act of 2007 allows agencies to
transmit the names of individuals who have been
``adjudicated'' to lack the capacity to manage their own
affairs, SSA's process does not constitute an adjudication
and does not include a finding that individuals are broadly
unable to manage their own affairs.
Based on similar concerns, the National Council on
Disability, an independent federal agency charged with
advising the President, Congress, and other federal agencies
regarding disability policy, has urged Congress to use the
Congressional Review Act to repeal this rule.
We urge Congress to act, through the CRA process, to
disapprove this new rule and prevent the damage that it
inflicts on the disability community.
On behalf of the CCD Rights Task Force, the undersigned Co-
Chairs,
[[Page H898]]
Dara Baldwin,
National Disability Rights Network.
Samantha Crane,
Autistic Self-Advocacy Network.
Sandy Finucane,
Epilepsy Foundation, Law.
Jennifer Mathis,
Bazelon Center for Mental Health.
Mark Richert,
American Foundation for the Blind.
____
American Civil Liberties Union,
Washington, DC, February 1, 2017.
Vote YES on the Resolution of Disapproval, H.J. Res. 40
(Social Security Administration NICS Final Rule)
Vote NO on the Resolution of Disapproval, H.J. Res. 37
(Federal Acquisition Regulation/Fair Pay and Safe
Workplaces EO)
Dear Representatives: On behalf of the American Civil
Liberties Union (ACLU), we urge members of the House of
Representatives to support the resolution disapproving the
final rule of the Social Security Administration which
implements the National Instant Criminal Background Check
System Improvement Amendment Acts of 2007.
Additionally we urge members to oppose the resolution of
disapproval of the rule submitted by the Department of
Defense, the General Services Administration, and NASA
relating to the Federal Acquisition Regulation that implement
the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Executive Order 13673.
Social Security Administration (SSA)'s Implementation of the NICS
Improvement Amendment Acts of 2007 Harms People with Disabilities
In December 2016, the SSA promulgated a final rule that
would require the names of all Social Security Disability
Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI)
benefit recipients--who, because of a mental impairment, use
a representative payee to help manage their benefits--be
submitted to the National Instant Criminal Background Check
System (NICS), which is used during gun purchases.
We oppose this rule because it advances and reinforces the
harmful stereotype that people with mental disabilities, a
vast and diverse group of citizens, are violent. There is no
data to support a connection between the need for a
representative payee to manage one's Social Security
disability benefits and a propensity toward gun violence. The
rule further demonstrates the damaging phenomenon of
``spread,'' or the perception that a disabled individual with
one area of impairment automatically has additional, negative
and unrelated attributes. Here, the rule automatically
conflates one disability-related characteristic, that is,
difficulty managing money, with the inability to safely
possess a firearm.
The rule includes no meaningful due process protections
prior to the SSA's transmittal of names to the NICS database.
The determination by SSA line staff that a beneficiary needs
a representative payee to manage their money benefit is
simply not an ``adjudication'' in any ordinary meaning of the
word. Nor is it a determination that the person ``[l]acks the
mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs'' as
required by the NICS. Indeed, the law and the SSA clearly
state that representative payees are appointed for many
individuals who are legally competent.
We recognize that enacting new regulations relating to
firearms can raise difficult questions. The ACLU believes
that the right to own and use guns is not absolute or free
from government regulation, since firearms are inherently
dangerous instrumentalities and their use, unlike other
activities protected by the Bill of Rights, can inflict
serious bodily injury or death. Therefore, firearms are
subject to reasonable regulation in the interests of public
safety, crime prevention, maintaining the peace,
environmental protection, and public health. We do not oppose
regulation of firearms as long as it is reasonably related to
these legitimate government interests.
At the same time, regulation of firearms and individual gun
ownership or use must be consistent with civil liberties
principles, such as due process, equal protection, freedom
from unlawful searches, and privacy. All individuals have the
right to be judged on the basis of their individual
capabilities, not the characteristics and capabilities that
are sometimes attributed (often mistakenly) to any group or
class to which they belong. A disability should not
constitute grounds for the automatic per se denial of any
right or privilege, including gun ownership.
Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Regulations Advance Worker Safety and
Rights
The rules implementing the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces
Executive Order take an important step towards creating more
equitable and safe work conditions by ensuring that federal
contractors provide workplaces that comply with federal labor
and civil rights laws.
Employers that have the privilege of doing business with
the federal government must meet their legal obligations. The
Fair Pay and Safe Workplace regulations are crucial because
they help ensure that federal contractors behave responsibly
and ethically with respect to labor standards and civil
rights laws and that they are complying with federal labor
and employment laws such as the Fair Labor Standards Act
(which includes the Equal Pay Act), Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and
the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and their state law
equivalents. The Executive Order also bans contractors from
forcing employees to arbitrate claims under Title VII of the
Civil Rights Act as well as claims of sexual harassment and
sexual assault.
Congress should stand with workers, increase the
accountability of federal contractors and oppose any attempts
to undo the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces regulations. These
rules will help ensure that the federal government does not
contract with employers that routinely violate workplace
health and safety protections, engage in age, disability,
race, and sex discrimination, withhold wages, or commit other
labor violations.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact
Vania Leveille, senior legislative counsel.
Sincerely,
Faiz Shakir,
Director, Washington Legislative Counsel.
Vania Leveille,
Senior Legislative Counsel, Washington Legislative Office.
____
The Judge David L. Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law,
Washington, DC, January 30, 2017.
Hon. Paul Ryan,
Speaker of the House,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
Office of the Democratic Leader,
Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: The Bazelon
Center for Mental Health Law urges you to support a
Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to disapprove the
Final Rule issued by the Social Security Administration (SSA)
on December 19, 2016, ``Implementation of the NICS
Improvement Amendments Act of 2007.'' The Center is a
national legal advocacy organization that protects and
advances the rights of adults and children with mental
disabilities.
This rule would require the Social Security Administration
to forward the names of Social Security Disability Insurance
(SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit
recipients who use a representative payee to help manage
their benefits due to a mental impairment to the National
Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
The rule is inconsistent with the statute it implements,
has no evidentiary justification, would wrongly perpetuate
inaccurate stereotypes of individuals with mental
disabilities as dangerous, and would divert already too-
scarce SSA resources away from efforts to address the
agency's longstanding backlog of unprocessed benefits
applications toward a mission in which the agency has little
expertise.
First, there is no statutory basis for the rule. The
National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS)
statute authorizes the reporting of an individual to the NICS
database on the basis of a determination that the person
``lacks the capacity to contract or manage his own affairs''
as a result of ``marked subnormal intelligence, or mental
illness, incompetency condition or disease.'' The appointment
of a representative payee simply does not meet this standard.
It indicates only that the individual needs help managing
benefits received from SSA.
Second, the rule puts in place an ineffective strategy to
address gun violence, devoid of any evidentiary basis,
targeting individuals with representative payees and mental
impairments as potential perpetrators of gun violence. In
doing so, it also creates a false sense that meaningful
action has been taken to address gun violence and detracts
from potential prevention efforts targeting actual risks for
gun violence.
Third, the rule perpetuates the prevalent false association
of mental disabilities with violence and undermines important
efforts to promote community integration and employment of
people with disabilities. The rule may also dissuade people
with mental impairments from seeking appropriate treatment or
services, or from applying for financial and medical
assistance programs.
Finally, the rule creates enormous new burdens on SSA
without providing any additional resources. Implementation of
the rule will divert scarce resources away from the core work
of the SSA at a time when the agency is struggling to
overcome record backlogs and prospective beneficiaries are
waiting for months and years for determinations of their
benefits eligibility. Moreover, SSA lacks the expertise to
make the determinations about safety that it would be called
upon to make as part of the relief process established by the
rule.
Based on similar concerns, the National Council on
Disability, an independent federal agency charged with
advising the President, Congress, and other federal agencies
regarding disability policy, has urged Congress to use the
Congressional Review Act to repeal this rule. We urge
Congress to act, through the CRA process, to disapprove this
new rule and prevent the damage that it inflicts on the
disability community.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Mathis,
Director of Policy and Legal Advocacy.
[[Page H899]]
{time} 1400
Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, we need to put a stop to this
rule now. That is why I introduced H.J. Res. 40, along with Congressman
Abraham, to overturn this rule and make sure the constitutional rights
of individuals with disabilities are protected.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' and pass this resolution.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Thompson).
Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.J.
Res. 40. This resolution undermines our NICS background check system.
I am a gun owner and a strong supporter of the Second Amendment, but
this isn't about denying people the right to own a gun. It is about
upholding the law, and the law is very clear on who should be reported
to the NICS system.
The law was passed more than a decade ago to keep guns out of the
hands of people who can't responsibly own them. These are not people
just having a bad day. These are not people simply suffering from
depression or anxiety or agoraphobics. These are people with a severe
mental illness who can't hold any kind of job or make any decisions
about their affairs. So the law says very clearly that they shouldn't
have a firearm.
The Supreme Court in the Heller decision recognized that the Second
Amendment grants Americans the right to own firearms, but they also
stated that reasonable restrictions to that right can apply, such as
when a person is diagnosed with a severe mental illness.
The Social Security Administration is simply obeying the law.
So what exactly is the objection here?
Passage of this resolution puts Americans at risk. It would prevent
the Social Security Administration from reporting the names of those
who should not have a gun and prohibit that indefinitely.
If there are concerns about the rules, let's revise it. But the CRA
process is not a revision. It would ban Social Security from even
amending their rule. This is a dangerous overstep, and I urge Members
to consider the safety of our districts. No one wants another Virginia
Tech. No one wants another Newtown.
Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Abraham).
Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to introduce this resolution
with my good friend, Representative Sam Johnson of Texas, one of the
greatest patriots I have had the honor to come in contact with and a
lifelong defender of our freedoms in America.
This resolution can be boiled down to one point: no bureaucrat should
be able to deny an American his or her constitutional rights just
because someone else handles their finances.
In the midnight hour of President Obama's last days in office, the
Social Security Administration finalized a rule that would allow it to
send the name of any beneficiary to the FBI's criminal background check
system if they are assigned a representative payee due to mental
impairment.
Allowing bureaucrats at the Social Security Administration to
determine whether or not a beneficiary is fit to exercise their Second
Amendment rights is a clear violation of due process that every
American is afforded.
When this awful rule was proposed in 2015, both Representative Sam
Johnson of Texas and I introduced legislation to prevent the Social
Security Administration from carrying it out. With the introduction of
this joint resolution, I am pleased that Congress and the President
will now have the opportunity to review and to reverse this terrible
rule.
That is why I strongly urge my colleagues, in both the House and the
Senate, to pass this resolution and keep the government bureaucracies
from putting themselves before the Constitution.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Doggett).
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, at a time here in America when mass
shootings have become all too frequent, at a time when bullets
literally rip apart human bodies and human families and cause so much
pain, at a time when effective groups like Moms Demand Action for Gun
Sense and Texas Gun Sense and the P.E.A.C.E. Initiative are asking this
Congress to act to reduce gun violence, this Congress has committed
itself to doing absolutely nothing about that violence.
If you are on the terrorist watch list and you cannot fly, not to
worry about buying a gun. It's ``No fly,'' but you can still buy.
Today we are told the problem isn't that there are too many guns out
there causing too much harm to American families. There are not enough.
A group is being left out, omitted from access to guns.
There are a group of Americans, who either from birth or by
contracting some mental disability later in life, have a mental
impairment that is so significant that we ask taxpayers across America
to provide them support through the Social Security disability system.
They are declared to be disabled.
And within that group that is taxpayer funded, there is a much
smaller group whose disability is so severe that they can't handle
their own affairs. They can't receive a check. But these folks say
don't worry that you can't place a check in their hand and you have to
give it to someone else, it is okay to put a gun in their hands. That
is what this proposal does.
Now, we have, as they have failed to point out, a system in place at
the Veterans' Administration so that if someone is a veteran and they
are disabled, there is a process by which they are included within this
system.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). The time of the gentleman has
expired.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the
gentleman from Texas.
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, but these folks, instead of reaching out to
do something about gun violence in America, propose to make them more
accessible to individuals that are so impaired they cannot take care of
themselves in many ways and cannot even accept a check and are saying:
Give them a gun.
There are already safeguards in this Rule. Someone can appeal being
listed and say: You know, I can't accept a check, but I do have the
ability to own a gun. And they can do that through the Social Security
Administration, as soon as they see their name on the list. Or if they
are denied a purchase at a later time and they are someone who doesn't
belong on this list, there is a way for them to get off the list.
In short, there is due process to ensure they are not unfairly denied
gun access. But the American people and the families that are being
hurt day after day by gun violence, they deserve some due process, too.
Let's uphold this Rule and reject this giant step backward that will
only produce more gun violence and more families torn asunder.
Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Smith).
Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this
resolution to repeal a rule which would arbitrarily revoke the Second
Amendment rights of certain Social Security beneficiaries. The
inability to manage one's Social Security benefits does not correlate
with the capacity to judiciously use firearms.
By adding Social Security beneficiaries to the NICS list with no
judicial review and forcing them to go through an appeals process to be
removed, this rule would also violate the due process rights of these
Americans.
I would also like to focus on the component of this rule which would
inhibit the ability of Social Security disability beneficiaries to be
approved by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to
work with or around certain materials.
Mr. Speaker, there is bipartisan agreement we should be investing in
and rebuilding our infrastructure. There is also bipartisan agreement
we should be empowering people receiving benefits, like disability
insurance, to return to work if they are able to do so.
However, this rule will create a new barrier for beneficiaries
seeking to return to work in industries like construction by forcing
them to navigate a complex appeals process before they can be
reemployed.
Let me say again, if we do nothing about this rule, it will prevent
law-
[[Page H900]]
abiding Americans who are able to do so from getting off the disability
rolls and returning to work.
We can work together on constructive ways to prevent those who would
do us harm from having access to firearms and explosives. This rule is
not the way to do so.
I urge support for the resolution.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Higgins).
Mr. HIGGINS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.J.
Res. 40 with a message, and that is: Do not repeal this rule.
The Social Security Administration rule is intended to promote and to
preserve the integrity of gun ownership in America.
I have heard it said by gun owner advocates that a steady hand is the
best gun control. I believe that, but a steady hand requires a
rationale mind.
The Social Security Administration rule that my colleagues on the
other side want to eliminate is written carefully and narrowly,
affecting a very small group of people with a very severe, long-term
mental disorder that makes them unable to do any kind of work in the
U.S. economy, even part-time or with very low wages and, also, people
not mentally capable of managing their own benefits.
The Social Security Administration rule ensures that individuals, who
are already prohibited from having guns under existing Federal law,
have their names included on the National Instant Criminal Background
Check System.
Mr. Speaker, 93 percent of Americans support background checks and
believe that systems should be in place to ensure that guns are not in
the hands of individuals who have been determined already by Federal
law to be unable to use them safely.
I urge my colleagues to reject H.J. Res. 40.
Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may
consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Renacci).
Mr. RENACCI. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Sam Johnson of Texas for
his work on this important resolution and his many years of service to
our country.
Mr. Speaker, in the final weeks of President Obama's final term, the
Social Security Administration finalized a rule that flat out
discriminates against millions of individuals with disabilities by
denying them their Second Amendment rights.
But it gets worse. Not only does the rule place these innocent
individuals' names in the National Instant Criminal Background Check
System, it does so in a way that strips them of their due process.
Specifically, it would subject these people to a very timely appeals
process requiring them to prove their own innocence before their name
could be removed.
In other words, this rule turns due process on its head by shifting
the burden of proof from the government to the individual to ensure
their constitutional right is not stripped away.
Moreover, as a member of the Social Security subcommittee, I am very
concerned that this rule falls way outside the bounds of the Social
Security Administration's mission. Instead of using the Social Security
administrator's field office staff to help Ohioans manage and
understand their benefits, this rule diverts resources away from that
core mission toward one that is constitutionally suspect.
That is why I am proud to be an original cosponsor of Chairman Sam
Johnson of Texas' resolution that protects Americans' Second Amendment
rights and protects Americans with disabilities, their constitutional
right, to due process under the law.
I urge my colleagues to support this joint resolution of disapproval.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Members of the House, we have some organizational support for
opposing this resolution. The first is the AFL-CIO, one of our largest
unions in the country. The second is the Consumer Federation of
America, and then there is this great organization, Everytown for Gun
Safety across the country.
In addition, the Americans for Responsible Solutions organization is
opposed to H.J. Res. 40. Finally, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun
Violence is also opposed to this measure, as is the Consumer Federation
of America.
{time} 1415
If Members believe this rule needs further refinement or that it does
not afford adequate due process, then we should have the conversation
with an eye toward improving the rule, but that is not what has been
done. Unfortunately, this is what we are not discussing today. Instead,
H.J. Res. 40 would invalidate all aspects of this rule and prohibit the
agency from adopting substantially the same rule.
We should not summarily dismiss this rule, which would undermine the
effort to make the NICS more effective. If H.J. Res. 40 passes Congress
and is signed into law, some individuals will be able to pass firearm
background checks solely because Congress prevented relevant records
from being submitted to the system.
The Social Security Administration's rule is about making Americans
safer from the scourge of gun violence and, unfortunately, believe me,
H.J. Res. 40 would do the opposite.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs. Walorski).
Mrs. WALORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.J.
Res. 40.
As part of our bold agenda for the American people, we are reining in
the out-of-control bureaucracy in Washington. We are taking action to
roll back 8 years of Obama administration overreach.
Today we are stopping an egregious violation that flies in the face
of the Constitution. This regulation, finalized in the final days of
the Obama Presidency, would deny certain Social Security recipients
their Second Amendment rights without due process.
If you receive Social Security disability payments and someone helps
you manage those payments, this regulation stops you from being able to
purchase a firearm, your name gets added to a Federal database, and the
burden is on you to prove it doesn't belong there. This is absolutely
outrageous.
This regulation discriminates against individuals with disabilities
by denying them their Second Amendment rights and violating their
rights of due process. And it gives far too much power to bureaucrats
at the Social Security Administration, who should be focused on making
sure people get the benefits they deserve, not deciding who can own a
gun.
This is why we are standing up for the Second Amendment rights of all
disabled citizens. Being disabled doesn't make you a danger to society,
and getting help managing your benefits doesn't mean you forfeit your
constitutional rights.
Mr. Speaker, I want to absolutely thank Congressman Sam Johnson and
Congressman Ralph Abraham for their leadership on this issue. I
strongly support this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to do the
same.
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record additional letters of support.
National Association of County Behavioral Health &
Development Disability Directors,
Washington, DC, February 1, 2017.
Re NACBHDD and NARMH Letter of Support for the CRA on the SSA
NICS Rule.
Hon. Paul Ryan,
Speaker of the House,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
Office of the Democratic Leader,
Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: NACBHDD and
NARMH urge you to support a Congressional Review Act (CRA)
resolution to disapprove the Final Rule issued by the Social
Security Administration (SSA) on December 19, 2016,
``Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of
2007. This rule would require the Social Security
Administration to forward the names of all Social Security
Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income
(SSI) benefit recipients who use a representative payee to
help manage their benefits due to a mental impairment to the
National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
NACBHDD is a national organization that represents county
mental health, substance use, and developmental; disability
directors in Washington, DC. NARMH represents rural mental
health in the Capital.
Prior to the issuance of the Final Rule, NACBHDD and NARMH
conveyed our opposition to the rule through a letter to the
Obama Administration and through the public comment process.
We join many of our
[[Page H901]]
mental health coalition members and advocates who--opposed
the rule for a number of reasons, including:
The damaging message that may be sent by a SSA policy
change, which focused on reporting individuals who receive
assistance from representative payees in managing their
benefits to the NICS gun database. The current public
dialogue is replete with inaccurate stereotyping of people
with mental disabilities as violent and dangerous, and there
is a real concern that the kind of policy change encompassed
by this rule will reinforce those unfounded assumptions.
The absence of any data suggesting that there is any
connection between the need for a representative payee to
manage one's Social Security disability benefits and a
propensity toward gun violence.
The absence of any meaningful due process protections prior
to the SSA's transmittal of names to the NICS database.
Although the NICS Improvements Act of 2007 allows agencies to
transmit the names of individuals who have been
``adjudicated'' to lack the capacity to manage their own
affairs, SSA's process does not constitute an adjudication
and does not include a finding that individuals are broadly
unable to manage their own affairs.
Based on similar concerns, the National Council on
Disability, an independent federal agency charged with
advising the President, Congress, and other federal agencies
regarding disability policy, has urged Congress to use the
Congressional Review Act to repeal this rule.
We urge Congress to act, through the CRA process, to
disapprove this new rule and prevent the damage that it
inflicts on the disability community.
Sincerely yours,
Ron Manderscheid, PhD,
Executive Director.
____
National Alliance
on Mental Illness,
Arlington, VA, January 31, 2017.
Hon. Paul Ryan,
Speaker of the House,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
Office of the Democratic Leader,
Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: The
National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) writes to urge you
to support a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to
disapprove the Final Rule issued by the Social Security
Administration (SSA) on December 19, 2016, ``Implementation
of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007.'' This rule
would require the Social Security Administration to forward
the names of all Social Security and Supplemental Security
Income (SSI) disability beneficiaries who use a
representative payee to help manage their benefits, and who
have been found eligible by meeting or equaling an SSA mental
impairment listing, to the National Instant Criminal
Background Check System (NICS).
NAMI is the nation's largest grassroots mental health
organization dedicated to building better lives for the
millions of Americans affected by mental illness, with more
than 1,100 state and local affiliates nationwide. NAMI
recognizes and supports the need to prioritize reducing gun
violence in the U.S. However, we are gravely concerned that
the rule, as adopted, perpetuates unfounded stereotypes about
people with mental illness and other mental disabilities that
have no basis in fact. Moreover, we believe that the rule may
have unintended negative consequences, including deterring
individuals from seeking or receiving help when they need it.
Our specific concerns about the rule are the following:
There is no evidence supporting the proposition that people
who are assigned Representative Payees on the basis of mental
illness or other mental disabilities pose increased risks for
gun violence or threats to public safety;
Although the NICS Improvements Act of 2007 allows agencies
to transmit the names of individuals who have been
``adjudicated'' to lack the capacity to manage their own
affairs, the assignment of a Representative Payee to a
recipient of Supplemental Security Income (SSI) or Social
Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) is not equivalent to an
adjudication. Rather, it is a unilateral determination by the
SSA that a person may need help in managing his or her
benefits. There is no hearing, the beneficiary is afforded no
oppornmity to testify or provide evidence why he or she
should not be assigned a Representative Payee, and there are
no other due process protections typically associated with
formal adjudications.
The new rule reinforces unfounded perceptions associating
mental illness and other mental disabilities with violence.
Scientific studies that have assessed risk factors for
violence contain no evidence linking difficulties with
managing benefits with increased risks for violence.
SSI and SSDI provide vital links to medical benefits for
people with mental illness. The rule may deter individuals
from applying for these benefits for fear that their names
will be added to a public database maintained by the FBI.
Without such benefits, access to mental health treatment and
services will be impeded.
Mr. Speaker and Madam Leader, NAMI asserts that the
adoption of this misguided rule in the aftermath of
Congressional adoption of a comprehensive bill to improve
mental health care in America is exactly the wrong step to
take. We therefore urge Congress to act, through the CRA
process, to disapprove this new rule and prevent the damage
it inflicts on people with mental illness and other
disabilities.
Thank you for your prompt attention to these concerns.
Sincerely,
Mary Giliberti, J.D.,
Chief Executive Officer.
____
National Association for Rights
Protection and Advocacy,
Huntsville, LA, January 31, 2017.
Hon. Mitch McConnell,
Senate Majority Leader,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Chuck Schumer,
Senate Minority Leader,
Washington, DC.
Dear Majority Leader McConnell and Minority Leader Schumer:
The National Association of Rights Protection and Advocacy
(NARPA) urges you to support a Congressional Review Act (CRA)
resolution to disapprove the Final Rule issued by the Social
Security Administration (SSA) on December 19, 2016,
``Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of
2007.'' NARPA was formed in 1981 to provide education and
advocacy in the mental health arena. Members are attorneys,
people with psychiatric histories, mental health
professionals and administrators, academics, and non-legal
advocates. Central to NARPA's mission is the promotion of
those policies and strategies that represent the preferred
options of people who have been diagnosed with psychiatric
disabilities.
This rule requires the Social Security Administration to
forward the names of Social Security Disability Insurance
(SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit
recipients who use a representative payee to help manage
their benefits due to a mental impairment to the National
Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). The rule is
inconsistent with the statute it implements, has no
evidentiary justification, would wrongly perpetuate
inaccurate stereotypes of individuals with mental
disabilities as dangerous, and would divert already too-
scarce SSA resources away from efforts to address the
agency's longstanding backlog of unprocessed benefits
applications toward a mission in which the agency has little
expertise.
First, there is no statutory basis for the rule. The
National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS)
statute authorizes the reporting of an individual to the NICS
database on the basis of a determination that the person
``lacks the capacity to contract or manage his own affairs''
as a result of ``marked subnormal intelligence, or mental
illness, incompetency condition or disease.'' The appointment
of a representative payee simply does not meet this standard.
It indicates only that the individual needs help managing
benefits received from SSA.
Second, the rule puts in place an ineffective strategy to
address gun violence, devoid of any evidentiary basis,
targeting individuals with representative payees and mental
impairments as potential perpetrators of gun violence. In
doing so, it also creates a false sense that meaningful
action has been taken to address gun violence and detracts
from potential prevention efforts targeting actual risks for
gun violence.
Third, the rule perpetuates the prevalent false association
of mental disabilities with violence and undermines important
efforts to promote community integration and employment of
people with disabilities. The rule may also dissuade people
with mental impairments from seeking appropriate treatment or
services, or from applying for financial and medical
assistance programs.
Finally, the rule creates enormous new burdens on SSA
without providing any additional resources. Implementation of
the rule will divert scarce resources away from the core work
of the SSA at a time when the agency is struggling to
overcome record backlogs and prospective beneficiaries are
waiting for months and years for determinations of their
benefits eligibility. Moreover, SSA lacks the expertise to
make the determinations about safety that it would be called
upon to make as part of the relief process established by the
rule.
Based on similar concerns, the National Council on
Disability, an independent federal agency charged with
advising the President, Congress, and other federal agencies
regarding disability policy, has urged Congress to use the
Congressional Review Act to repeal this rule. We urge
Congress to act, through the CRA process, to disapprove this
new rule and prevent the damage that it inflicts on the
disability community.
Sincerely,
Ann Rider,
President.
____
National Council
on Independent Living,
Rochester, New York, January 27, 2017.
Hon. Paul Ryan,
Speaker of the House,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
Office of the Democratic Leader,
Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: The
National Council on Independent Living (NCIL) urges you to
support a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to
disapprove the Final Rule issued by
[[Page H902]]
the Social Security Administration (SSA) on December 19,
2016, ``Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act
of 2007.'' This rule would require the Social Security
Administration to forward the names of all Social Security
Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income
(SSI) benefit recipients who use a representative payee to
help manage their benefits due to a mental impairment to the
National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
NCIL represents people with disabilities, Centers for
Independent Living (CILs), Statewide Independent Living
Councils (SILCs), and other organizations that advocate for
the human and civil rights of people with disabilities
throughout the country.
Prior to the issuance of the Final Rule, NCIL joined the
CCD Rights Task Force to convey its opposition to the rule
through a letter to the Obama Administration and through the
public comment process. We--and many other members of CCD--
opposed the rule for a number of reasons, including:
The damaging message that may be sent by a SSA policy
change, which focused on reporting individuals who receive
assistance from representative payees in managing their
benefits to the NICS gun database. The current public
dialogue is replete with inaccurate stereotyping of people
with mental disabilities as violent and dangerous, and there
is a real concern that the kind of policy change encompassed
by this rule will reinforce those unfounded assumptions.
The absence of any data suggesting that there is any
connection between the need for a representative payee to
manage one's Social Security disability benefits and a
propensity toward gun violence.
The absence of any meaningful due process protections prior
to the SSA's transmittal of names to the NICS database.
Although the NICS Improvements Act of 2007 allows agencies to
transmit the names of individuals who have been
``adjudicated'' to lack the capacity to manage their own
affairs, SSA's process does not constitute an adjudication
and does not include a finding that individuals are broadly
unable to manage their own affairs.
Based on similar concerns, the National Council on
Disability, an independent federal agency charged with
advising the President, Congress, and other federal agencies
regarding disability policy, has urged Congress to use the
Congressional Review Act to repeal this rule.
We urge Congress to act, through the CRA process, to
disapprove this new rule and prevent the damage that it
inflicts on the disability community.
We look forward to an opportunity to speak with you and
your staff about our concerns.
Respectfully,
Kelly Buckland,
Executive Director.
____
January 31, 2017.
Hon. Paul Ryan,
Speaker of the House,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
Office of the Democratic Leader,
Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: The
National Disability Leadership Alliance (NDLA) urges you to
support a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to
disapprove the Final Rule issued by the Social Security
Administration (SSA) on December 19, 2016, ``Implementation
of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007.'' This rule
would require the Social Security Administration to forward
the names of all Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI)
and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit recipients who
use a representative payee to help manage their benefits due
to a mental impairment to the National Instant Criminal
Background Check System (NICS).
NDLA is a national cross-disability coalition that
represents the authentic voice of people with disabilities.
NDLA is led by 14 national organizations run by people with
disabilities with identifiable grassroots constituencies
around the country. The NDLA steering committee includes:
ADAPT, the American Association of People with Disabilities,
the American Council of the Blind, the Association of
Programs for Rural Independent Living, the Autistic Self
Advocacy Network, the Hearing Loss Association of America,
Little People of America, the National Association of the
Deaf, the National Coalition for Mental Health Recovery, the
National Council on Independent Living, the National
Federation of the Blind, the National Organization of Nurses
with Disabilities, Not Dead Yet, Self Advocates Becoming
Empowered, and the United Spinal Association.
Prior to the issuance of the Final Rule, NDLA conveyed its
opposition to the rule through letters to Vice President
Biden, to President Obama, and to Congress. NDLA members also
raised concerns through letters to the Obama Administration
and through the public comment process. We--and many other
disability rights organizations--opposed the rule for a
number of reasons, including:
The damaging message that may be sent by a SSA policy
change, which focused on reporting individuals who receive
assistance from representative payees in managing their
benefits to the NICS gun database. The current public
dialogue is replete with inaccurate stereotyping of people
with mental disabilities as violent and dangerous, and there
is a real concern that the kind of policy change encompassed
by this rule will reinforce those unfounded assumptions.
The absence of any data suggesting that there is any
connection between the need for a representative payee to
manage one's Social Security disability benefits and a
propensity toward gun violence.
The absence of any meaningful due process protections prior
to the SSA's transmittal of names to the NICS database.
Although the NICS Improvements Act of 2007 allows agencies to
transmit the names of individuals who have been
``adjudicated'' to lack the capacity to manage their own
affairs, SSA's process does not constitute an adjudication
and does not include a finding that individuals are broadly
unable to manage their own affairs.
Based on similar concerns, the National Council on
Disability, an independent federal agency charged with
advising the President, Congress, and other federal agencies
regarding disability policy, has urged Congress to use the
Congressional Review Act to repeal this rule.
We urge Congress to act, through the CRA process, to
disapprove this new rule and prevent the damage that it
inflicts on the disability community.
Sincerely,
ADAPT, American Association of People with Disabilities,
Association of Programs for Rural Independent Living (APRIL),
Autistic Self Advocacy Network, Little People of America,
National Association of the Deaf, National Coalition for
Mental Health Recovery, National Council on Independent
Living, National Organization of Nurses with Disabilities,
Not Dead Yet.
____
National Disability
Rights Network,
Washington, DC, January 30, 2017.
Re National Disability Rights Network letter of support for
Use of Congressional Review Act on the Social Security
Administration NICS Rule.
Hon. Paul Ryan,
Speaker of the House,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
Office of the Democratic Leader,
Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: The
National Disability Rights Network (NDRN) urges you to
support a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to
disapprove the Final Rule issued by the Social Security
Administration on December 19, 2016, ``Implementation of the
NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007.'' This rule would
require the Social Security Administration (SSA) to forward
the names of all Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI)
and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit recipients who
use a representative payee to help manage their benefits due
to a mental impairment to the National Instant Criminal
Background Check System (NICS).
NDRN is the nonprofit membership organization for the
federally mandated Protection and Advocacy (P&A) and Client
Assistance Program (CAP) agencies for individuals with
disabilities. Collectively, the P&A/CAP Network is the
largest provider of legally based advocacy services to people
with disabilities in the United States.
Prior to the issuance of the Final Rule, NDRN joined the
Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD) Rights Task
Force conveying its opposition to the rule through a letter
to the Obama Administration and through the public comment
process. We--and many other members of CCD--opposed the rule
for a number of reasons, including:
The damaging message that would be sent by a SSA policy
change, which focuses on reporting individuals who receive
assistance from representative payees in managing their
benefits to the NICS gun database. The current public
dialogue is replete with inaccurate stereotyping of people
with mental disabilities as violent and dangerous, and there
is a real concern that the kind of policy change encompassed
by this rule will reinforce those unfounded assumptions.
The absence of any data suggesting that there is any
connection between the need for a representative payee to
manage one's SSDI benefits and a propensity toward gun
violence.
The absence of any meaningful due process protections prior
to the SSA's transmittal of names to the NICS database.
Although the NICS Improvements Act of 2007 allows agencies to
transmit the names of individuals who have been
``adjudicated'' to lack the capacity to manage their own
affairs, SSA's process does not constitute an adjudication
and does not include a finding that individuals are broadly
unable to manage their own affairs.
Based on similar concerns, the National Council on
Disability, an independent federal agency charged with
advising the President, Congress, and other federal agencies
regarding disability policy, has urged Congress to use the
Congressional Review Act to repeal this rule.
We urge Congress to act, through the CRA process, to
disapprove this rule and prevent the damage that it may cause
on the disability community.
We look forward to an opportunity to speak with you and
your staff about our concerns.
[[Page H903]]
Sincerely,
Curt Decker,
Executive Director.
____
New York Association of Psychiatric Rehabilitation
Services, Inc.,
Albany, NY, January 31, 2017.
Hon. Paul Ryan,
Speaker of the House,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
Office of the Democratic Leader,
Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: On behalf
of thousands of New Yorkers with psychiatric disabilities,
the New York Association of Psychiatric Rehabilitation
Services (NYAPRS) urges you to support a Congressional Review
Act (CRA) resolution to disapprove the Final Rule issued by
the Social Security Administration (SSA) on December 19,
2016, ``Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act
of 2007.''
By way of reference, NYAPRS is a 36 year old statewide
coalition that has brought together New Yorkers with
psychiatric disabilities and community recovery providers to
advance policies, programs and social conditions that advance
recovery, rehabilitation, rights and community inclusion.
This rule would require the Social Security Administration
to forward the names of Social Security Disability Insurance
(SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit
recipients who use a representative payee to help manage
their benefits due to a mental impairment to the National
Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
The rule is inconsistent with the statute it implements,
has no evidentiary justification, would wrongly perpetuate
inaccurate stereotypes of individuals with mental
disabilities as dangerous, and would divert already too-
scarce SSA resources away from efforts to address the
agency's longstanding backlog of unprocessed benefits
applications toward a mission in which the agency has little
expertise.
First, there is no statutory basis for the rule. The
National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS)
statute authorizes the reporting of an individual to the NICS
database on the basis of a determination that the person
``lacks the capacity to contract or manage his own affairs''
as a result of ``marked subnormal intelligence, or mental
illness, incompetency condition or disease.'' The appointment
of a representative payee simply does not meet this standard.
It indicates only that the individual needs help managing
benefits received from SSA. Second, the rule puts in place an
ineffective strategy to address gun violence, devoid of any
evidentiary basis, targeting individuals with representative
payees and mental impairments as potential perpetrators of
gun violence. In doing so, it also creates a false sense that
meaningful action has been taken to address gun violence and
detracts from potential prevention efforts targeting actual
risks for gun violence.
Third, the rule perpetuates the prevalent false association
of mental disabilities with violence and undermines important
efforts to promote community integration and employment of
people with disabilities. The rule may also dissuade people
with mental impairments from seeking appropriate treatment or
services, or from applying for financial and medical
assistance programs.
Finally, the rule creates enormous new burdens on SSA
without providing any additional resources. Implementation of
the rule will divert scarce resources away from the core work
of the SSA at a time when the agency is struggling to
overcome record backlogs and prospective beneficiaries are
waiting for months and years for determinations of their
benefits eligibility. Moreover, SSA lacks the expertise to
make the determinations about safety that it would be called
upon to make as part of the relief process established by the
rule.
Based on similar concerns, the National Council on
Disability, an independent federal agency charged with
advising the President, Congress, and other federal agencies
regarding disability policy, has urged Congress to use the
Congressional Review Act to repeal this rule. We urge
Congress to act, through the CRA process, to disapprove this
new rule and prevent the damage that it inflicts on the
disability community.
Please feel free to contact me at any time.
Sincerely,
Harvey Rosenthal,
Executive Director.
____
Safari Club International,
Washington, DC, January 31, 2017.
Re Safari Club International Support for House Joint
Resolution 40.
Hon. Paul Ryan,
Speaker of the House,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
House Minority Leader,
Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Ryan and Minority Leader Pelosi: Safari Club
International (Safari Club) supports House Joint Resolution
40, which provides for Congressional disapproval under the
Congressional Review Act of the final rule submitted by the
Social Security Administration (SSA) relating to
``Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of
2007,'' adopted on December 19, 2016, 81 Fed. Reg. 91702.
Safari Club seeks Congressional disapproval of the rule for
several reasons. It deprives an individual of the ability to
receive or possess a firearm, including for recreational
hunting, due to that individual's inability to manage his or
her financial affairs (Firearms Rule). Under the Firearms
Rule, the prohibition would apply when the SSA designates a
representative payee because of the individual's mental
impairment. A mental impairment that makes an individual
incapable of handling his/her financial affairs does not
necessarily equate to an inability to properly abide by the
law in the use of firearms. The Firearms Rule unfairly
attributes illegal conduct to law abiding citizens.
In addition, the Firearms Rule fails in its attempt to
rectify its unfair treatment of individuals with mental
impairments through its program for individuals to request
relief from Federal Firearms prohibitions. This program
places on the individual with a mental impairment the costly
and burdensome task of collecting and presenting data to
overcome the presumption that he or she is incapable of
abiding by the law. This program forces upon law-abiding
citizens the task of confronting a federal bureaucracy just
to prove that they should not be unfairly treated as a
criminal due to a mental impairment.
For these reasons, Safari Club supports a joint resolution
stating ``that Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the
Social Security Administration relating to Implementation of
the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007, and such rule
shall have no force or effect.''
Sincerely,
Larry Higgins,
President, Safari Club International.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Arrington).
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Speaker, the regulatory state in America is alive
and well. I wish I could say as much for our economy and our personal
freedoms, but I believe that that is about to change thanks in large
part to the recent Presidential election.
Over the last 8 years, we have replaced a free enterprise system with
a regulatory bureaucracy that has crushed our economy, stifled our
innovation, and quashed the great American spirit.
America has never seen such an onslaught of abusive and burdensome
actions from the fourth branch of government. The cumulative cost of
regulations on our American economy is almost $2 trillion. It costs
almost $60 billion just to enforce all the regulations on the books.
Let me give you, though, an example of a regulation that is far worse
in its effects than just simply economic burden or burden on our
people.
Today, I stand with my friend and great American hero, Sam Johnson,
in strong support of H.J. Res. 40 to strike down the Obama
administration's last-ditch effort to infringe upon our Second
Amendment rights. In the 11th hour, the Obama administration quietly
sneaked in a rule that threatens to deny certain Social Security
beneficiaries their right to purchase a firearm. Federal law makes it a
crime already to possess a firearm if an individual has been
adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to a mental
institution. This midnight rule designates Social Security
beneficiaries as having a mental impairment simply because they ask
someone to manage their finances.
Just because an elderly or disabled individual chooses to delegate
their financial responsibilities to another does not make them mentally
incompetent, nor does it waive their right to due process. Many people,
even in this Chamber, are designated to manage the finances of their
parents on Social Security, and they do so because their parents may
prefer not to deal with the complexities of our current financial
environment.
Not only would this proposed rule be a continuation of the Obama
administration's regulatory fiat, it would be irresponsible and
dangerous and a breach of one of our fundamental rights. We cannot
allow the Federal Government to haphazardly restrict our freedoms and
the freedoms of over 4 million law-abiding Americans who would
otherwise be responsible gun owners. In fact, they are some of the most
vulnerable Americans who need to be able to protect themselves.
As noted by the Founders and in the plain language of our
Constitution, the Federal Government shall not infringe upon our right
to keep and bear arms.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume,
[[Page H904]]
and I would like to emphasize several points additionally.
The degree of impairment required for reporting to the NICS is
extremely high, to the extent that someone is not capable of working at
any job in the economy, no matter how basic. Someone receiving Social
Security benefits as a retiree, even if they have mental impairment and
have been assigned a representative payee, would not meet the criteria
for reporting to the NICS because they are not receiving benefits
because of disability.
Further, the rule went into effect in January, but compliance is not
required until December of this year. This would only impact claims
going forward and will not involve retroactively assessing individuals
already receiving Social Security disability payments based on mental
impairment.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Yoho).
Mr. YOHO. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Johnson for standing up and
defending our Nation's Constitution again, not just in his service to
our country during the Vietnam era, but here in Congress and his many
years here.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation. As a tireless
advocate for the protection of our Second Amendment rights, I am
disappointed, but not surprised, in the Obama administration's attempt
to impair Americans' right to own firearms, by fiat, in its last days
of existence. It is unconscionable and unthinkable that a President
would do that to the citizens of this country.
This rule claims to strengthen the National Instant Criminal
Background Check but, in reality, acted as a gun grab on individuals
who receive disability insurance benefits or Supplemental Security
Income payments. Participants in those programs should not be forced to
worry that, in order to receive government assistance, they must
sacrifice their constitutional liberty at the random whim of a
government bureaucrat. The Second Amendment to our Constitution states
very clearly that the right to keep and bear arms ``shall not be
infringed,'' and Congress cannot stand by and allow unaccountable
rulemaking from a previous administration to infringe on that right.
I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Judy Chu), my colleague, a member of the Judiciary
Committee.
Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition
to this use of the Congressional Review Act to repeal the Social
Security Administration's rule strengthening the National Instant
Criminal Background Check System. The rule in question implements
already-existing law to establish a commonsense streamlining of
information which will help improve our background check system for gun
purchases.
It is important to note that individuals with disabilities are
actually more likely to be victims than perpetrators of gun violence,
which is why I support more far-reaching gun safety measures like
universal background checks and a ban on the most dangerous weapons.
However, when there have been instances of mass shootings committed
by those with a history of mental health issues, top Republicans,
including Speaker Ryan, have stood on this very floor to say that they
believe we should focus on mental health issues. Well, this is their
chance to prove that those were not just empty words; but, instead,
they are showing their true loyalties and again resisting any attempt
to strengthen basic safeguards to ensure responsible gun ownership.
This is a commonsense regulation that sets a high bar for referring
names to the background check system. No one's rights are unduly
restricted. An appeals process has been built in to afford due process.
So it is clear that my Republican colleagues concerns' are not about
safety, but about maximizing profits for gun manufacturers, even if it
costs the lives of fellow Americans.
And worse, they are using the restrictive Congressional Review Act to
do so. This will not only make it easier for even those with severe
mental health issues to buy a gun, but it will also take the option for
writing similar rules off the table forever, tying the hands of all
future administrations.
This is reckless. Gun deaths are a daily scourge in our country, and
it is up to us to do whatever we can to mitigate the risk of the
dangerous weapons in the wrong hands. I urge my colleagues to vote
``no'' on this resolution.
Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, having no other speakers, I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Members of the House, this is a very serious matter. This rule, and I
have to emphasize this, does not run afoul of the Second Amendment. You
can oppose this--well, let's put it like this: The Heller Court, in the
Supreme Court case, said that ``nothing in the Court's opinion should
be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession
of firearms by felons and the mentally ill.'' I emphasize ``and the
mentally ill.''
And it is in that sense that I join with the AFL-CIO, Consumer
Federation of America, Everytown for Gun Safety, Americans for
Responsible Solutions, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, and
many thoughtful citizens who support the Second Amendment in opposing
the measure that is on the floor now.
I urge Members to vote ``no.''
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
{time} 1430
Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of
my time.
This is about constitutional rights of individuals with disabilities.
Just because someone has a disability does not mean they are a threat
to society. Furthermore, needing help to manage your benefits does not
make you dangerous.
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record additional letters of support.
American Association of
People with Disabilities,
Washington, DC, January 26, 2017.
Hon. Paul Ryan,
Speaker of the House,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
Office of the Democratic Leader,
Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: The
American Association of People with Disabilities (AAPD) urges
you to support a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to
disapprove the Final Rule issued by the Social Security
Administration (SSA) on December 19, 2016, ``Implementation
of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007.'' This rule
would require the Social Security Administration to forward
the names of all Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI)
and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit recipients who
use a representative payee to help manage their benefits due
to a mental impairment to the National Instant Criminal
Background Check System (NICS).
AAPD is a national disability rights organization that
works to improve the lives of people with disabilities by
acting as a convener, connector, and catalyst for change,
increasing the economic and political power of people with
disabilities.
Prior to the issuance of the Final Rule, AAPD conveyed its
opposition to the rule to the Obama Administration. We, and
many other disability rights organizations, opposed the rule
for a number of reasons, including:
1) The damaging message that may be sent by a SSA policy
change, which focused on reporting individuals who receive
assistance from representative payees in managing their
benefits to the NICS gun database. The current public
dialogue is replete with inaccurate stereotyping of people
with mental disabilities as violent and dangerous, and there
is a real concern that the kind of policy change encompassed
by this rule will reinforce those unfounded assumptions.
2) The absence of any data suggesting that there is any
connection between the need for a representative payee to
manage one's Social Security disability benefits and a
propensity toward gun violence.
3) The absence of any meaningful due process protections
prior to the SSA's transmittal of names to the NICS database.
Although the NICS Improvements Act of 2007 allows agencies to
transmit the names of individuals who have been
``adjudicated'' to lack the capacity to manage their own
affairs, SSA's process does not constitute an adjudication
and does not include a finding that individuals are broadly
unable to manage their own affairs.
AAPD urges Congress to act, through the CRA process, to
disapprove this new rule to prevent the damage that it
inflicts on the disability community and the extraordinarily
damaging message it sends to society that people with mental
impairments could should be feared and shunned.
[[Page H905]]
Thank you for taking our position into consideration.
Yours truly,
Helena R. Berger,
President & CEO.
____
ADAPT,
Rochester, NY, January 31, 2017.
ADAPT urges you to support a Congressional Review Act (CRA)
resolution to disapprove the Final Rule issued by the Social
Security Administration (SSA) on December 19, 2016,
``Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of
2007.'' This rule would require the Social Security
Administration to forward the names of all Social Security
Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income
(SSI) benefit recipients who use a representative payee to
help manage their benefits due to a mental impairment to the
National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
ADAPT is a national grass-roots community that organizes
disability rights activists to engage in nonviolent direct
action, including civil disobedience, to assure the civil and
human rights of people with disabilities to live in freedom.
We oppose the rule for a number of reasons, including:
1) The damaging message that may be sent by a SSA policy
change, which focused on reporting individuals who receive
assistance from representative payees in managing their
benefits to the NICS gun database. The current public
dialogue is replete with inaccurate stereotyping of people
with mental disabilities as violent and dangerous, and there
is a real concern that the kind of policy change encompassed
by this rule will reinforce those unfounded assumptions.
2) The absence of any data suggesting that there is any
connection between the need for a representative payee to
manage one's Social Security disability benefits and a
propensity toward gun violence.
3) The absence of any meaningful due process protections
prior to the SSA's transmittal of names to the NICS database.
Although the NICS Improvements Act of 2007 allows agencies to
transmit the names of individuals who have been
``adjudicated'' to lack the capacity to manage their own
affairs, SSA's process does not constitute an adjudication
and does not include a finding that individuals are broadly
unable to manage their own affairs.
Based on similar concerns, the National Council on
Disability, an independent federal agency charged with
advising the President, Congress, and other federal agencies
regarding disability policy, have urged Congress to use the
Congressional Review Act to repeal this rule.
We urge Congress to act, through the CRA process, to
disapprove this new rule and prevent the damage that it
inflicts on the disability community.
We look forward to an opportunity to speak with you and
your staff about our concerns.
Sincerely,
Bruce Darling,
National Organizer.
____
Association of Mature
American Citizens,
February 1, 2017.
Hon. Chuck Grassley,
U.S. Senator, Iowa,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Ralph Abraham,
5th District, Louisiana,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Sam Johnson,
Chairman, Social Security Subcommittee, House Committee on
Ways and Means, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Grassley, Chairman Johnson, and Congressman
Abraham: On behalf of the 1.3 million members of AMAC, the
Association of Mature American Citizens, I am writing in
support of the Joint Resolution to protect certain Americans'
Second Amendment rights, H.J. Res. 40. Using the
Congressional Review Act, this Joint Resolution is meant to
undo a Social Security Administration (SSA) regulation that
would deprive thousands of Americans who are disabled and who
utilize a ``representative payee'' in order to acquire their
benefits of their ability to purchase a firearm. This
regulation is both unnecessary and unfair to thousands of
law-abiding seniors and citizens who wish to exercise their
basic Second Amendment rights.
In December 2016, SSA finalized a rule providing that any
American receiving disability benefits due to a ``mental
disability'' and who are also receiving assistance in
managing their benefits should be labeled ``mentally
defective.'' As a result, those who are inappropriately
labeled as ``mentally defective'' are mandatorily reported to
the National Instant Criminal Background Check System--a
federal list of people who are barred from purchasing
firearms--as required by the Gun Control Act. This finalized
rule unjustly equates persons with disabilities and those who
require assistance to manage their benefits to those who are
actually ``mentally defective.''
Aside from the fact that this regulation inappropriately
equates disabled persons relying on representative payees
with those who are ``mentally defective,'' AMAC objects to
the way in which this regulation has been implemented. Over
the past several years, Americans, particularly seniors, have
been at the mercy of executive overreach and mandate. As
millions of American seniors rely on SSA for their retirement
income, the burden of this regulation has been largely
concentrated in our communities. This Joint Resolution is a
welcome reprieve to seniors who have had their Second
Amendment rights subverted by an administration and agency
with significant influence over their retirement income.
As an organization committed to representing the interests
of mature Americans and seniors, AMAC is dedicated to
ensuring senior citizens' interests are protected. This
midnight regulation has placed an undue burden on those
requiring assistance to manage their benefits and who suffer
from disability. As an organization, we thank Senator
Grassley, Chairman Johnson, Congressman Abraham, and their
respective staffs for their quick response and steady resolve
to protect seniors and those who have been affected by this
regulation. We ask Congress to quickly pass this Joint
Resolution and restore the basic Second Amendment rights this
rule has abridged.
Sincerely,
Dan Weber,
President and Founder of AMAC.
____
The Arc,
Washington, DC, January 30, 2017.
Hon. Paul Ryan,
Speaker of the House,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
Office of the Democratic Leader,
Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: The Arc of
the United States (The Arc) writes to urge you to support a
Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to disapprove the
Final Rule issued by the Social Security Administration (SSA)
on December 19, 2016, ``Implementation of the NICS
Improvement Amendments Act of 2007.'' This rule would require
the Social Security Administration to forward the names of
all Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI)
disability beneficiaries who use a representative payee to
help manage their benefits, and who have been found eligible
by meeting or equaling an SSA mental impairment listing, to
the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
The Arc is the largest national community-based
organization advocating for people with intellectual and
developmental disabilities (I/DD) and their families, with
over 660 state and local chapters nationwide. The Arc is
devoted to promoting and protecting the human and civil
rights of people with intellectual and developmental
disabilities and has over 60-years of history of advocating
for the rights of children and adults with disabilities. The
Arc is concerned about the safety of all Americans, including
through gun violence. However, The Arc--and many other
members of the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities
(CCD)--opposes the rule for a number of reasons, including:
The damaging message that may be sent by an SSA policy
change, which focused on reporting individuals who receive
assistance from representative payees in managing their
benefits to the NICS gun database. The current public
dialogue is replete with inaccurate stereotyping of people
with mental disabilities as violent and dangerous, and there
is a real concern that the kind of policy change encompassed
by this rule will reinforce those unfounded assumptions.
The absence of any data suggesting that there is any
connection between the need for a representative payee to
manage ones Social Security disability benefits and a
propensity toward gun violence.
The absence of any meaningful due process protections when
interfering with an individual's constitutional right, prior
to the SSA's transmittal of names to the NICS database.
Although the NICS Improvements Act of 2007 allows agencies to
transmit the names of individuals who have been
``adjudicated'' to lack the capacity to manage their own
affairs, SSA's process does not constitute an adjudication
and does not include a finding that individuals are broadly
unable to manage their own affairs.
The potential for the rule to deter some people with mental
impairments from seeking access to the Social Security and
SSI disability benefits that they are eligible for, out fear
of being added to the NICS or having their privacy violated.
We urge Congress to act, through the CRA process, to
disapprove this new rule and prevent the damage that it
inflicts on the disability community.
Respectfully Submitted,
Marty Ford,
Senior Executive Officer, Public Policy.
[[Page H906]]
____
Autistic Self Advocacy Network,
Washington, DC, January 30, 2017.
Hon. Paul Ryan,
Speaker of the House,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
Office of the Democratic Leader,
Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: The
Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN) urges you to support a
Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to disapprove the
Final Rule issued by the Social Security Administration (SSA)
on December 19, 2016, ``Implementation of the NICS
Improvement Amendments Act of 2007.'' This rule would require
the Social Security Administration to forward the names of
all Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and
Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit recipients who use
a representative payee to help manage their benefits due to a
mental impairment to the National Instant Criminal Background
Check System (NICS).
The Autistic Self Advocacy Network is a nationwide
501(c)(3) advocacy organization run by and for autistic
people ourselves. ASAN promotes public education and public
policies that are aimed at eliminating stigmatizing attitudes
and increasing autistic Americans' access to all aspects of
the community.
Prior to the issuance of the Final Rule, the Autistic Self
Advocacy Network conveyed its opposition to the rule through
a letter to the Obama Administration and through the public
comment process, in addition to joining in public comments as
a member of the Consortium of Citizens with Disabilities
Rights Task Force. We--and many other disability rights
organizations--opposed the rule for a number of reasons,
including:
1) The damaging message that may be sent by a SSA policy
change, which focused on reporting individuals who receive
assistance from representative payees in managing their
benefits to the NICS gun database. The current public
dialogue is replete with inaccurate stereotyping of people
with mental disabilities as violent and dangerous, and there
is a real concern that the kind of policy change encompassed
by this rule will reinforce those unfounded assumptions.
2) The absence of any data suggesting that there is any
connection between the need for a representative payee to
manage one's Social Security disability benefits and a
propensity toward gun violence.
3) The absence of any meaningful due process protections
prior to the SSA's transmittal of names to the NICS database.
Although the NICS Improvements Act of 2007 allows agencies to
transmit the names of individuals who have been
``adjudicated'' to lack the capacity to manage their own
affairs, SSA's process does not constitute an adjudication
and does not include a finding that individuals are broadly
unable to Manage their own affairs.
Based on similar concerns, the National Council on
Disability, an independent federal agency charged with
advising the President, Congress, and other federal agencies
regarding disability policy, has urged Congress to use the
Congressional Review Act to repeal this rule.
We urge Congress to act, through the CRA process, to
disapprove this new rule and prevent the damage that it
inflicts on the disability community.
Sincerely,
Samantha Crane,
Director of Public Policy,
Autistic Self-Advocacy Network.
____
Council for Citizens
Against Government Waste,
Washington, DC, February 1, 2017.
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Representative, You will soon consider a number of
resolutions that will disapprove rules offered within the
last six months of the Obama Administration, pursuant to the
Congressional Review Act. On behalf of the more than one
million members and supporters of the Council for Citizens
Against Government Waste (CCAGW), I urge you to support the
following resolutions:
Rep. Bill Johnson's (R-Ohio) resolution to disapprove the
Department of the Interior's (DOI) Stream Protection rule.
The rule rewrites more than 400 regulations, while
threatening one-third of the nation's coal mining workforce.
The rule would also override preferable existing regulations
at both the state and federal level.
Rep. Bill Huizenga's (R-Mich.) resolution to disapprove the
Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) rule, ``Disclosure
of Payments by Resource Extraction Issuers.'' The SEC, whose
mission is to maintain efficient markets, estimates
compliance of the rule could reach $591 million annually. The
rule also fails to protect investors and prevents capital
formation.
Rep. Sam Johnson's (R-Texas) resolution to disapprove a
rule promulgated by the Social Security Administration
relating to the National Instant Criminal Background Check
System (NICS). This rule misinterprets the NICS Improvements
Amendment Act, and it allows disability or Supplemental
Security Income beneficiaries to be deemed ``mental
defectives'' in NICS without any due process as required by
law.
Rep Virginia Foxx's (R-N.C.) resolution to disapprove the
so-called ``blacklisting'' rule promulgated by the Department
of Defense, General Services Administration, and National
Aeronautics and Space Administration. This rule requires
employers bidding on federal contracts to disclose both
violations and alleged violations of state and federal labor
laws for every contract bid, and to update that information
every six months during the contract. This rule unnecessarily
drives up the cost of projects, violates due process, and
puts small business at a disadvantage.
Rep. Rob Bishop's (R-Utah) resolution to disapprove the
Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) Venting and Flaring rule.
This rule is an example of agency overreach, as BLM lacks the
statutory authority to regulate air quality. Further, the
rule fails to address BLM's real problem: a backlog of
permits for the pipelines, in turn forcing the methane
companies to vent and flare gases wastefully.
It is critical that Congress removes as many of the
``midnight regulations'' as possible forced on taxpayers by
the previous administration. All votes on these resolutions
will be among those considered for CCAGW's 2017 Congressional
Ratings.
Sincerely,
Tom Schatz.
President.
____
Disability Law Center,
Anchorage, AK, January 25, 2017.
Re: Social Security ``Implementation of the NICS Improvement
Amendments Act of 2007''.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski,
Anchorage, Alaska.
Sen. Dan Sullivan,
Anchorage, Alaska.
Congressman Don Young,
Anchorage, Alaska.
Dear Senators Murkowski and Sullivan, and Congressman
Young: This past summer, our office commented on Social
Security's propsal to report certain beneficiaries to the
federal firearms database. A copy of these comments is
attached. Despite those comments, and many others, the agency
went ahead with its proposal. 81 Fed. Reg. 91702 (December
19, 2016). According to press reports today, you will soon
have before you a joint resolution disapproving these new
regulations. This is to urge you carefully to consider, and,
if appropriate, pass this joint resolution.
This is not a situation where Congress would be asserting
its political will over an agency that carefully analyzed the
comments on its proposed regulations and responded to those
comments in a thoughtful way. Instead, in its responses to
comments, Social Security:
1) Simply failed to take into account that its disability
determination process does not purport to decide whether
someone is a ``mental defective,'' that Social Security is
not the kind of ``court, board, commission, or other lawful
authority'' that makes such findings, and that written
decisions saying that someone qualifies for benefits
typically do not mention whether the person meets or equals
the mental Listings, thus omitting information necessary for
people to decide whether to appeal. 81 Fed. Reg. at 91703.
2) Relied, repeatedly, for its legal analysis on a DOJ
Guidance that has not been published anywhere, let alone
published in the Federal Register. 81 Fed. Reg. at 91703,
91704, 91706.
3) Responded to the suggestion that people might not apply
for disability benefits they deserved because they would be
reported to the database by saying that the reason they were
on the database would be kept private, so they would not be
``stigmatized'' or ``embarrassed.'' 81 Fed. Reg. at 91707. It
isn't a matter of stigmas or embarrassments. It's a matter of
wanting to own a firearm and being discouraged from applying
for benefits because you know that if you get benefits you
may lose your property.
4) Agreed that the process can assign someone a
representative payee even though the person is competent, 81
Fed. Reg. at 91709-10, but did not see that this fact ought
to keep that person from going onto the federal firearms
database; and
5) Completely failed to analyze whether putting someone on
the database restricts Alaskan subsistence activities as
protected by ANILCA.
This is agency decisionmaking that is, for want of a better
word, wrong. It deserves to be analyzed and rejected under
the Congressional Review Act.
Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, as the ACLU said: ``We oppose
this rule because it advances and reinforces the harmful stereotype
that people with mental disabilities, a vast and diverse group of
citizens, are violent. There is no data to support a connection between
the need for a representative payee to manage one's Social Security
disability benefits and a propensity toward gun violence.''
Mr. Speaker, we must act today to protect the rights of individuals
with disabilities.
Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption of H.J. Res. 40, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I have always been a strong ally of the
disability community and have paid close attention to the concerns many
have had with this rule.
I'm proud to have been the lead sponsor of the Americans with
Disabilities Act in 1990,
[[Page H907]]
which opened doors of independence, access, opportunity, and equity for
millions of Americans with differing abilities.
In Congress, Democrats have put forward commonsense gun safety laws
that would prevent violent and dangerous individuals with mental
disabilities from purchasing firearms. However, the Republican-led
Congress would not allow even a vote on such legislation.
President Obama took a series of limited steps within his authority,
one of which was this rule, whose aim has been to prevent those who
shouldn't have guns from obtaining them. I believe that, absent action
from Congress to enhance our background check system, this rule
represents an imperfect but necessary step.
It is imperfect because it stigmatizes the disability community
unfairly and needs a stronger appeals process to protect the rights of
those who fall under its purview. I disagree with the premise that
having a mental disability that precludes independent management of
one's finances correlates with a heightened risk of violence. I have
read the rule and recognize that it was written in a narrow way so that
it applies only to those with severe mental illnesses.
I've had many discussions over the past several days with leaders in
the disability community. I've grappled with the very difficult
questions this resolution poses and ultimately decided that, given
these circumstances, the best step right now is to oppose this
resolution.
I look forward to working closely with the disability community and
gun safety advocates to push for Congress to take up legislation that
keeps all Americans safe from gun violence while protecting the rights
of those with differing abilities.
Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong
opposition to this misguided resolution that will only imperil the
lives of more Americans.
In 2007, this body passed the National Instant Criminal Background
Check System Improvement bill with a unanimous voice vote.
We all agreed that the background check system needed better
information, especially after dangerous individuals slipped through the
cracks and were able to purchase guns they never should have been
allowed to buy in the first place.
Like Jared Loughner, who killed six people in Arizona who were at a
grocery store to meet our colleague Gabby Giffords.
He passed background checks even though he had a history of drug use
and disturbing behavior that should have been in the system.
So the Obama Administration, at Congress's direction wrote this rule
to make sure that federal mental health records make their way into the
background check system, so that it can effectively deny purchases to
individuals who are already prohibited from buying guns.
And let's be clear about what we're talking about.
This rule only affects those with very severe, long-term mental
disorders, and who have been identified by doctors and psychologists as
severely mentally disabled.
It does not paint disability recipients with a broad brush.
8.8 million Americans receive Social Security disability benefits,
yet SSA estimates only 75,000 would meet the criteria under this rule.
That is less than one percent.
Let's also be clear: this resolution is an attempt to hamstring our
federal agencies and to keep them from improving the background check
system.
Rather than work with a new administrator to improve the rule, the
Majority would rather have no rule at all because this bill not only
repeals this background check improvement rule, it also prohibits the
federal government from issuing a similar rule in the future.
We've got it backwards. We shouldn't be repealing gun safety rules,
we should be strengthening them. Gun violence is an epidemic in this
country and we have done literally nothing in Congress about it since
Republicans took the majority in the House in 2011.
I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill.
Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I strongly oppose this
bill that uses dangerous procedure to advance dangerous policy to erode
our important firearms background check system and undermine public
safety.
In response to the tragic mass shooting at Virginia Tech, the
National Instant Criminal Background Check System Improvement Amendment
Act was passed by Congress unanimously and signed into law by President
Bush because everyone agreed that we need federal and State agencies to
submit relevant information to maintain an accurate, effective system.
This bill directly undermines public safety by permanently blocking a
federal agency from submitting records to this critical safeguard
system.
I know the high cost of gun violence on families and communities. I
know that policy makers have an obligation to address public safety
carefully and responsibly. Reasonable people can disagree about whether
the rule by the Social Security Administration struck the right balance
between the threshold and process reporting to the background system.
While opponents have raised some concerns about whether there is
sufficient due process in this rule, the solution is not to block the
rule entirely. Rather, the solution is to fix it.
Therefore, I oppose this CRA because it would permanently prohibit
the Social Security Administration from ever reporting individuals to
this critical safety system, which is an extreme, dangerous,
irresponsible, and irreversible action that threatens the safety of our
communities.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 71, the previous question is ordered.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the joint
resolution.
The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed and read a third
time, and was read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the joint
resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this question will be postponed.
____________________