[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 106 (Wednesday, June 21, 2017)]
[House]
[Pages H5042-H5045]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           ISSUES OF THE DAY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 3, 2017, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Rohrabacher) for 30 minutes.
  Mr. ROHRABACHER. Madam Speaker, today a lot of people are looking at 
Washington more perplexed than ever, thinking that nothing is getting 
done here. It is easy for them to think that because, when they turn on 
their televisions or listen to their radios and listen to news 
commentators, all they seem to be talking about is some very obscure 
idea. But something that dominates all the communication, or a great 
deal of communication, is that Russia in some way altered the outcome 
of the last election, perhaps--what they have been telling us--the 
Russians hacked into the system. This is the image we are being given.

                              {time}  1815

  All those emails that came out during the election from the 
Democratic

[[Page H5043]]

National Committee and the Hillary campaign, those emails were, in some 
way, a product of a Russian conspiracy with the Trump campaign. Over 
and over and over again, even though all of the experts who we have 
seen from the intelligence communities on down the line have said that 
that is bogus; that did not happen; there is no proof that that 
happened. And many people who are looking into this don't think that 
the Russians were involved with that hacking at all, much less their 
involvement in our campaigns in a way that differentiated from every 
other government in the world, including our own, being involved in 
trying to impact other people's elections in a light-handed way.
  In this situation, the Russian Government has not--again, has not--
been proven or even the evidence seems to indicate that they were not 
involved in a way that actually affected the outcome of our last 
election. Yet that is all we hear about. That is the massive news 
coverage, and the American people's attention is being focused on that, 
or they are being told: Oh, but over in Washington, the Congress is so 
tied up because of this crisis. We have not been tied up. We have been 
doing great things here in the Nation's capital, and the Trump 
administration has been doing great things. We have not been frozen by 
this unrelenting attack trying to give the American people the idea 
that the last election was invalid.
  This effort to distract us is a disgrace. And I do believe the 
American people see, when they hear this over and over repeated but 
there is no substance being told us that indicates the specific crime, 
the specific hacking incident that happened. No, we have no incidences 
where any type of Russian interference, in some way, determined the 
outcome of the last election.
  But, of course, the distraction that is taking place is basically 
covering the fact that we have a group of people who lost the last 
election who have been disrupting, who have a plan, a program of 
resistance and disruption of those who did win the election. If there 
is anything more anti-American than that, I don't know what is. Talk 
about destroying democracy.
  So with that said, what are we doing if we aren't tied up in this 
Russian problem? And let me note, there has been, even to the point 
after all the hearings that we had and there is no evidence of it, now 
some Republicans have gone along with this effort, and we have 
appointed what was called an independent or a special prosecutor. And 
now what we can expect is another 3 or 4 months of the headlines on all 
of the news media except one or two trying to divert our attention. 
Well, I would ask that the independent counsel and the special 
prosecutor, they are going to look into Russia, let them not just look 
into, did our Attorney General have two conversations or three 
conversations with the Ambassador from Russia to the United States in 
passing meetings, I might add, other people engaged, instead of asking 
questions like that and trying to find some way to charge our Attorney 
General with some sort of crime that he would have committed and maybe 
perjury even because he forgot about one conversation with someone over 
a year's time period where there were thousands of conversations with 
thousands of people, nobody hope--if they can go into detail like that, 
let us hope that the Clinton Foundation becomes a target of that 
investigation.
  They want to find out what effect the Russians had on our elections. 
Let's find out what the millions of dollars that went into the Clinton 
Foundation did that might have helped Hillary's chances of being 
elected. Let's find out that. And let's find out how much money was 
actually put into the Clinton family's pockets when former President 
Clinton, speaking again before Russian oligarchs, was able to receive 
certain payments, exorbitant payments, from what I understand, we need 
to know exactly what they were, into his own pocket at the same time 
Russian oligarchs were putting millions, maybe tens of millions, into 
the Clinton Foundation.
  So, okay, that needs to be looked at. But I would suggest that the 
American people need to go beyond this made-up crisis. The American 
people need to take a look at what we have been accomplishing here, and 
we have been accomplishing. A healthcare bill passed. And, yes, it is 
not a perfect healthcare bill, but now we have actually got a bill that 
is in the system. The Senate is going to have their bill. The system is 
now working, and there is a healthcare bill going through the system to 
improve our situation now instead of being stuck with ObamaCare that 
was so poorly written that people were being priced out of the market 
of having insurance. And we end up with millions of people who can't 
afford the health insurance because ObamaCare did what? ObamaCare 
basically said anybody with a preexisting condition, that risk will be 
paid for by other health insurance policyholders. And, thus, everybody 
else's health insurance went way up, and the amount of coverage they 
got went way down. Surprise. Surprise. No, that was not a good way to 
go, and the Republicans are trying to find a better method.
  Let me just note that I have personally been involved with promoting 
another concept of how we should be dealing with preexisting 
conditions, and there is a bill circulating now, and hopefully it will 
be seriously considered. And as the healthcare bill goes through the 
House and the Senate, maybe we can get this in there, and that is you 
look at preexisting conditions and you say: okay, that person has a 
preexisting condition, and right now that preexisting condition puts 
them into the mix with all the other policyholders. And then everybody 
else, including that person, picks up the cost of insuring for that 
preexisting condition, which then prices everybody out. More people end 
up without insurance, or insurance that they can't cover, or what they 
are getting for their money is decreased.
  My daughter, for example, had leukemia a few years ago. She is 9 
years old. And thank God that we got through that and she is now free 
of leukemia. But I am sure that somewhere along the line what we are 
going to have is an insurance company saying: Well, you had leukemia, 
you had a preexisting condition, thus we are going to charge you more 
money for health insurance. Maybe 10 years down the road this will 
happen to her, maybe 20. But the fact is that we don't need to have 
people around our country that are in that situation. My daughter is 
now cancer free. And if she has a preexisting condition, or anybody 
else in the country has a preexisting condition, what I am proposing--
and there is a bill making its way around, people are considering this 
as an alternative, and I hope they take it seriously, but we will see, 
at least we are trying, and the idea is the Federal Government will 
document all preexisting conditions. My daughter's leukemia would be on 
that list. And at any time from then on that someone with a preexisting 
condition has that preexisting condition, if leukemia comes back to her 
or anyone else who has a preexisting condition that is documented, it 
will be paid for by Medicare. Just as simple as that. That condition 
only. All the rest of her health insurance, however, need not be 
covered by the Federal Government or anybody else.

  Now that the preexisting conditions have not put their amount way up 
in the cost to buy an insurance, now they will be charged just the same 
as anybody else who is healthy. But if they break their arm, they are 
in a car accident, if they have another disease that comes on, they now 
are insured from that, but they are not having to pay extra insurance 
because of that preexisting condition, and you just leave that to 
Medicare. It is a simple answer. It is not going to cost the taxpayers 
any more money by doing it any other way. Just let the government take 
care of those preexisting conditions. All the rest of their healthcare, 
however, will have to be paid for by that individual. Just the 
preexisting condition is covered.
  So that is a type of reform that we can put into place, and people 
are talking about these ideas now here. That is why, when the 
Republican bill passed, it was launching a discussion, an honest 
discussion, of what we should do. The Senate is going to send us back 
something, and we will, this year, have a healthcare bill because we 
will have gone through all of these types of alternatives like the one 
I just suggested.
  We also passed a financial reform bill. It was called the CHOICE Act. 
It was a financial reform bill that one of

[[Page H5044]]

the main parts of it actually repealed the Dodd-Frank bill which was so 
dramatically hard for our economy and was basically making it very 
difficult for businesses to function in our country, was a terrible 
burden, and was actually bringing our economy down. So we passed the 
elimination of the Dodd-Frank Act, and we have reformed our financial 
community, and that has passed the House. It is now over to the Senate.
  We have passed dozens of notable bills, yet the impression we are 
given, of course, is the only thing happening here is the Russians 
were, in some way, engaged in the last election, and we must focus 
totally on that, even though all the committees that investigated this, 
all the people who came from the various intelligence agencies, no one 
said, here is the proof that they were colluding with the Trump 
campaign to defeat the Democratic candidate in the last election.
  So people are only getting that story, but there are all kinds of 
bills that are being passed, legislation being passed here. Like, for 
example, there was a weather bill that passed. I mean, this is one 
example. Suzanne Bonamici was someone who had a bill that was attached 
to the weather bill. It was aimed specifically at trying to have a 
warning system for tsunami waves that might be created and come not 
only towards the United States but towards Japan and any other coastal 
area. That bill passed, and, as I say, it is part of the weather bill 
now.
  And Suzanne Bonamici, of course, is a Democrat, and I am a 
Republican.
  The other lie is that Republicans and Democrats can't work together. 
Well, that is just wrong. People are creating a false image, and I am 
glad to see, by the elections last night, that the American people 
aren't falling for the baloney they are being fed.
  So was that a good bill, the tsunami bill? I think it was, and it has 
made it through.
  We have other environmentally aimed bills that are making up for the 
excesses of the last administration that was basically pushing a 
radical, environmental, globalist approach to environment issues. I 
think it is a great thing that the President of the United States has 
withdrawn us from the Paris Agreement, which would have cost us 
billions of dollars that we would send to other countries and would put 
us under the jurisdiction of decisions made by international bodies, 
not by American-elected officials but by international bodies. That was 
a terrific move on the part of the President.
  In fact, Trump has done a number of wonderful things that he is not 
getting credit for. Because all the media wants to talk about is how 
many conversations anybody associated with Trump had with any Russians 
in the last 2 years. Sorry. A lot of other things that are happening 
are important. Those people who are trying to distract us are not 
succeeding. The fact is that President Donald Trump had a triumphant 
trip overseas. His first visit was to the Middle East.
  I am a former speech writer for President Reagan. I didn't write the 
speech, but I was there when he gave that speech in Berlin telling 
Gorbachev to ``tear down this wall,'' a speech that made history, not 
just reflected it but is now seen as a pivotal moment in changing the 
direction of what was going on with the Cold War.

                              {time}  1830

  I might say, I didn't write it, but I did make sure that I was one of 
the people who smuggled that speech into the President's hands. After 
the President was given that speech and said he was going to say that, 
all of his senior advisers tried to convince him not to say, ``tear 
down this wall.'' And ``Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall,'' was a 
phrase in history that made history. And Ronald Reagan stood up against 
all of the people on the left who were attacking him and even all of 
his own advisers. That made a huge difference in the world that we live 
in.
  Now, let me just note this. We have a President now, President Donald 
Trump, who went to Saudi Arabia and went to a meeting with the leaders 
of that part of the world. He talked to them--and these were Muslims, 
of course. And he said to the Muslim world that, if there is going to 
be peace with the United States, drive the terrorists out of your 
mosque; drive the terrorists out of your country.
  I haven't been as proud of any President since I was with Ronald 
Reagan when he said ``tear down this wall'' than I was proud of our 
President, President Donald Trump, for telling the Islamic world that 
they have got to disassociate themselves, they have got to drive the 
terrorists out of their families and out of their relationships with 
good and decent Muslims, who are the vast majority of the Muslims in 
the world.
  So, with that said, I think there is a lot going on that is good. 
There are good things. This is a good report. I hope the American 
people pay attention.
  There are a lot of creative ideas that are going on. These I just 
told you about, healthcare and finance reform, these are really 
important things. And the fact that we are not putting everything in 
the hands of the United Nations or some unelected government to tell us 
what we have to do in the name of the environment, that is good, too.
  Well, I have got a few creative ideas that I have actually presented. 
I thought I would just let my colleagues know, let my constituents 
know, and let the rest of the country know, these are some issues on 
the table that I have personally put on.
  I think I have a good chance, for example, of getting into the tax 
bill a provision that is now written out in H.R. 1792, the Expanding 
Employee Ownership Act.
  What my bill suggests is that we should have more involvement by 
working people in their own companies. Let them own part of their 
companies so that the bosses and the laborers work together as a team 
rather than looking at each other as adversaries.
  My bill, H.R. 1792, is being considered for the tax bill that we are 
putting together. What it says, very simply, is that, if an employer 
gives to his employees--it has to be a general distribution--stock in 
that company, the employees don't have to pay income tax on it. And if 
they keep that stock for 10 years, they don't have to pay capital gains 
tax.
  So what we have now is a major boost of people keeping their good 
employees, a better working relationship, more productivity, and 
management more concerned about their laborers because now their 
laborers own stock in the company--maybe even 10 or 20 percent of the 
stock at some point. What we have is a bill that has a chance, and it 
is being considered. That is the type of thing that is going on here.
  People are talking about new ideas. For example, I talked about the 
idea of a new healthcare reform bill and my approach and what I am 
doing to promote that price for people with preexisting conditions. 
That is another example, ideas that are being discussed, legislation 
that is going through, and people are trying to mold it. That is part 
of the legislative process.
  Also, when you talk about Republicans and Democrats working together, 
we are being told we don't work together. Well, we do. Republicans and 
Democrats work together, just like I did on the tsunami bill. We 
actually have a good relationship--many of us do.
  Nowhere is that more evident than in my leadership of H.R. 975, which 
is a bill that is entitled, Respect State Marijuana Laws. What this 
bill does is--over the years, in the last 6 years, I have been joined 
with a Democrat. It is Mr. Blumenauer now, and it used to be 
Congressman Farr when he was with us. We were able to put into the 
appropriations bill for the Department of Justice a provision, an 
amendment to the bill that said: No money in this bill can be used by 
the Department of Justice to supersede the State laws on medical 
marijuana in those States that have legalized the use of medical 
marijuana.
  So, for the last 5 and 6 years, that has been a totally bipartisan 
effort. I am a Republican, obviously, and I have been joined by Mr. 
Farr and, now, Mr. Blumenauer. We have actually created a situation 
where we now have people who are getting involved in researching 
medical marijuana.
  By the way, did you know that Israel now, finally, has stepped 
forward and has done research in the last 10 years? We haven't. The 
United States hasn't. In fact, for 100 years, when we should

[[Page H5045]]

have been trying to find the medical uses of marijuana, it has been 
virtually outlawed. And now Israel has found wonderful applications for 
medical marijuana.
  They also, by the way, when they were studying the effects of 
marijuana, have legalized it for personal use, for adult use of 
marijuana, as well as medical marijuana.
  Well, what does that tell you? That tells you that some of the people 
who have been telling us, ``oh, we can't do this because it is going to 
have a serious impact,'' Israel studies this closely, especially when 
it might have a military implication. This would not destroy their 
military; otherwise, they would not have passed this major reform in 
their country.
  Now, why is it that marijuana is an important issue and it brings 
Republicans and Democrats together? We have limited resources here. The 
idea that we are going to spend billions of dollars not on protecting 
Americans from terrorists, not from trying to get bad guys--rapists and 
murderers--in our local area; no, we are going to spend billions of 
dollars on police, on jailers, on lawyers, on judges, and on prisons. 
And then we are going to take people out of the workforce. We are 
spending billions of dollars so somebody will not smoke a weed in their 
backyard.

  And what is even worse, we are telling them we are going to spend 
billions of dollars to prevent you. If you find that there is a medical 
use for marijuana, like for senior citizens who have lost their 
appetites after a major operation--which happened to my mother, by the 
way. I did not give her marijuana, but I knew when I was feeding her 
that she had lost her appetite after a major operation. I said to 
myself: Why can't she have cannabis here? Well, now people know about 
that.
  There is no reason for us to prevent our seniors from having some 
euphoria when they are 85 years old in a senior citizens home, 
especially if it brings back their appetite and they feel better 
because of it rather than drinking. Do they want to have them all 
drinking?
  Well, this is not just for seniors. This is for people who have 
medical problems. It has been documented to have important uses. And 
again, no one has ever overdosed with marijuana, ever.
  In terms of what we need to do and what we need to focus on are drugs 
that are harmful. We have an opioid addiction problem now. Doctors have 
been giving prescriptions for this. We need to confront that and 
confront other challenges in crime rather than billions of dollars to 
try to prevent someone from hurting themselves.
  If an adult wants to consume cannabis--an adult--it is their 
business. For the government to intrude, especially the Federal 
Government, after a State has legalized it, this is tyranny. Our 
Founding Fathers did not believe that we should have police forces and 
criminal justice operating at the State--they believed it should happen 
at the State and local level, not the Federal level.
  These current restrictions that we have, we have people, 
unfortunately, again, that are living in the past. All they can 
remember is the sixties when hippies were smoking dope, and it was just 
literally a counterculture--counter our culture. And I say ``our 
culture'' because I have more of a conservative family background.
  Although I lived a life in my past and I had too much to drink at 
times, and maybe even when I was younger, maybe I tried cannabis a 
couple of times, but I have had an adulthood since I was 23 that I 
think meets the approval of my parents and, in particular, my dad, who 
was a lieutenant colonel in the Marines.
  So with that said, had I been arrested, let's say, where some of my 
friends or something were consuming marijuana when I was around, what 
would have happened to my life? And what is happening to the lives of 
all of these people, especially in our less affluent areas, who can't 
afford the legal protections of hiring a lawyer right away?
  It is destroying their ability to function in our society. We should 
not be taking people who are involved in an activity like consuming a 
weed. Adults should be able to make that decision for themselves. 
Sending police for someone like that or expending billions of dollars 
or ruining the life of that young person who can't afford, whether 
Black, Chicano, or Caucasian, who can't afford a lawyer to get them off 
and expunge their record, it is going to affect them the rest of their 
life. We can't be doing that. It is a waste of money.
  We have a chance now, with bipartisan support, to pass this amendment 
again, perhaps. We are trying to get that onto the appropriations bill 
for the Department of Justice, which would then keep in place those 
restrictions on the Federal Government.
  But I have a bill, again, with bipartisan support, that would make 
that across the board. It just says that every State that has legalized 
the use of marijuana, that none of the departments and agencies of the 
Federal Government should supersede. They should be treated just like 
someone selling alcohol or whatever. And, in fact, if they do, they 
will be asking for ID cards from people to make sure that they are not 
selling to juniors, to people who are minors, rather than to adults, 
just like beer.
  Unfortunately, when it is illegal, it is easier to get marijuana than 
it is--for someone who is not 18 or 21, it is easier for them to get 
marijuana than beer because they don't have to show their ID card at 
the liquor store.
  So with that said, there is bipartisan support for my bill. I am 
hoping that we can get it passed this year or next year, at least in 
this session of Congress.
  And then, finally, we have lots of things going on here. I just 
discussed several creative things that are being discussed around town. 
And we have got a President of the United States who is opening the 
door which was guarded by basically a very far-leftwing philosophy for 
the last 8 years. The door of government in this country now is open to 
working people, where this President has committed himself to trade 
policies and others that are aimed at creating jobs for the American 
people, ordinary jobs.
  One of the things that he has promised us to protect the American 
people and our American workers is to stop the massive flow of illegals 
into our country. The massive flow of illegals into our country is 
bringing down the standard of living of working people.
  There is one idea that I have presented. When he wants to build a 
wall, we have the means to provide the resources to build that wall in 
a very creative way. It wouldn't cost the American people anything.
  So I would hope that those who are listening who like some of these 
ideas don't get depressed about what they are hearing in the news. Good 
things are happening in Washington, and a lot of new creative ideas are 
being discussed.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________