[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 105 (Friday, June 22, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H5573-H5576]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

  (Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute.)
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise for the purpose of inquiring of the 
majority leader the schedule for the week to come.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield to the gentleman from California 
(Mr. McCarthy), my friend, the majority leader.
  (Mr. McCARTHY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the House will meet at noon for morning hour 
and at 2 p.m. for legislative business. Votes will be postponed until 
6:30 p.m.
  On Tuesday and Wednesday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for morning 
hour and noon for legislative business.
  On Thursday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for legislative business. 
Last votes are expected no later than 3 p.m.
  On Friday, no votes are expected in the House.
  Mr. Speaker, the House will consider a number of suspensions next 
week, a complete list of which will be announced by close of business 
today.
  In addition, the House will continue our work on appropriations by 
taking up the 2019 Defense Appropriations bill sponsored by 
Representative Kay Granger.
  Mr. Speaker, Republicans are committed to national security and 
rebuilding our military. This bill fully funds a well-deserved 2.6 
percent pay raise for our brave men and women in uniform, their largest 
pay raise in 9 years. It prepares for the future by investing more than 
$90 billion into the research and development of new defense systems 
and technology. Above all, it ensures American Armed Forces have the 
equipment and training necessary to successfully carry out their 
missions around the world.
  This bill passed 48 to 4 out of subcommittee, so I hope my friends 
across the aisle will consider voting for this important bill when it 
reaches the floor.
  Speaking of national security, the House will also make a motion to 
go to conference on the National Defense Authorization Act, which the 
House passed last month.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, additional legislative items are possible in 
the House, including two bills from the Committee on Natural Resources.
  First, H.R. 200, the Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing 
Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act, sponsored by Representative  
Don Young: This bill would reauthorize Magnuson-Stevens and replace 
one-size-fits-all regulations with a tailored approach that will ensure 
vibrant American fisheries.
  Next, H.R. 2083, the Endangered Salmon and Fisheries Predation 
Prevention Act, sponsored by Representative Jaime Herrera Beutler: This 
bill will allow State and Tribal authorities to respond more quickly to 
predators of the native salmon population.
  Mr. Speaker, the House is also expected to consider legislation 
related to border security and immigration.
  As soon as our schedule is finalized, I will be sure to inform all 
Members.
  With that, I thank my friend.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the information.
  Mr. Speaker, I note that the bill that was supposed to be on the 
floor either yesterday or today dealing with DACA and dealing with the 
children, who are an object of great concern by all the country, is not 
mentioned in the gentleman's remarks for legislation that will be 
considered next week.
  The DACA bill was supposed to be voted in the second immigration bill 
pursuant to the rule that we adopted this week. That vote, I thought, 
had been postponed until next week. Now, however, I do not see it being 
announced as a bill that is going to be considered.
  It is disappointing that, after months of committing to working 
together on a solution to the DACA crisis, Mr. Speaker, this week, the 
House considered two partisan bills.
  I would like to point out that Speaker Ryan, on September 5, 2017, 
some 8 months ago, said: ``It is my hope that the House and Senate, 
with the President's leadership, will be able to find consensus on a 
permanent legislative solution that includes ensuring that those who 
have done nothing wrong can still contribute as a valued part of this 
country.''
  Speaker Ryan said more recently, on February 8, 2018, when he urged 
people to support the caps bill--that is, setting the limits of 
expenditures--``my commitment to working together,'' and he looked at 
our side of the aisle when he said that. But, Mr. Speaker, the only 
persons who apparently will be included in ``working together'' are 
between the Freedom Caucus and others on the Republican side of the 
aisle.
  He went on to say: ``My commitment to working together on an 
immigration measure that we can make law is a sincere commitment. Let 
me repeat,'' the Speaker said, ``my commitment to working together on 
an immigration measure that we can make law is a sincere commitment. We 
will solve this DACA problem.''
  He said that February 8, 2018, from that rostrum on the floor of this 
House. There has been no ``together.''
  Now, my friend, the majority leader, Mr. Speaker, said this: ``This 
all started when I was at Camp David with the President this weekend.''
  We know that the majority leader is probably the closest ally that 
the President has in the Congress of the United States.
  ``He was telling me how, earlier last week, he was with some 
Republican Senators talking about DACA. They all agreed, but he said we 
can't solve that unless we bring Democrats into the room, too.''
  That was Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy on FOX News on January 10, 
2018.
  So I ask my friend, the majority leader, can the gentleman clarify 
whether or not changes will be made to H.R. 6136--that is, the Ryan-
Trump so-called compromise that, from our perspective, ``together'' 
meant simply together among Republicans trying to decide what the 
Republicans wanted to do. Can you tell me whether there will be changes 
to that so-called compromise bill and whether or not that

[[Page H5574]]

bill may be brought to the floor anytime soon?
  I yield to my friend.

                              {time}  1215

  Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I 
appreciate him watching me on TV.
  Mr. Speaker, if I could just restate, so maybe I could speak more 
clearly.
  The House is also expected to consider legislation relating to border 
security immigration. So the answer is yes.
  As I said before, we are bringing that bill to the floor. We have 
been working very closely with the entire Conference, taking all ideas 
in. We had a very productive conference last night. We will work 
through the weekend, and you will see that bill on the floor next week. 
And I look forward to Mr. Hoyer's support as well.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, together, working with their Conference, not 
with us, not, frankly, with a bipartisan group that has support on this 
floor of 240 Members. 240 Members of the House of Representatives, and 
you need 218 for a majority, support an option and have been asking for 
that option for a long period of time.
  Now, the majority leader is looking somewhat quizzical, Mr. Speaker, 
and he wants to know how you get to 240; 193 plus 47.
  There were 54 Republicans who asked for the rule putting four bills 
on the floor, but 7 were, apparently, encouraged to take their name off 
of that, so only 47 Republicans remain. All 193, that is 240. That is a 
majority of the House.
  What was asked for was to put four options, giving everybody a chance 
to put the option that they liked on the floor. Notwithstanding Speaker 
Ryan's commitment and notwithstanding the comments that Mr. McCarthy 
made following his meeting at Camp David with the President of the 
United States where they needed to bring Democrats in, all we have seen 
is a deeply divided Republican Party negotiating with itself.
  They brought a bill to the floor, and they passed the rule. The only 
real effect of the rule, because the bill lost, was to negate the 216 
signatures--and we believe there would have been more but for arm-
twisting--to bring those compromised bills to the floor, which had both 
Republicans and Democrats working together and supporting. Two of those 
bills, the principal sponsors were a Republican and a Democrat.
  Mr. Speaker, I would ask the gentleman, he says he is going to bring 
a bill to the floor--I presume he is talking about the bill that was 
going to be brought to the floor yesterday then changed to today, and 
then changed to next week--whether there will be amendments in that 
bill and, if so, will they be discussed with us and will we have input 
into that process?
  The gentleman concluded, Mr. Speaker, his comments with he hopes he 
could have our support. We are not included. We are shut out. The 
compromise has been rejected and undermined, and the Speaker ignored 
216 people who asked for those bills to be brought to the floor, and he 
said no: no openness, no transparency, closed rules, consistent with 
the policies that have been followed in this, the most closed Congress 
in which I have served.
  So I would ask my friend again, Mr. Speaker: What changes will be 
affected in the bill that would be brought to the floor, or are we 
going to be told when they are brought to the floor what those changes 
are?
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend.
  Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, it is quite interesting to me to listen to my friend. He 
is complaining that somehow he is not involved. Mr. Speaker, he is 
complaining about the number of hours that he sat in my office, not 
just himself--Senator Durbin, the chief of staff to the President, the 
Secretary of Homeland Security as well, and Senator Cornyn--and we 
worked time and again. But every time, we tried to find compromise. We 
even went to the point of their number one issue, and the President 
went beyond what they even asked.
  But they said: No, we can't do anything else. They said all they 
wanted to do was go do a discharge petition. That is all they wanted. 
They didn't want to work through the system.
  But that was not unusual, because my friend, Mr. Speaker, likes to 
quote people--I don't have it written. I just have it by memory, the 
number of times my friend told me he would never vote to shut down the 
government. He doesn't care about politics; he would never do that. But 
we found it was a different year and a different time.
  Then we talked about children's health, CHIP. A number of times, Mr. 
Speaker, we would go to the other side, we would go to the ranking 
member, and we would go to those individuals on the committee, but they 
were told not to work with us. So we would run a bill, Mr. Speaker, 
with everything that they had ever said they would want in it, and yet 
they would get to the day and they would vote against it.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I reclaim my time just to remind the majority 
leader of what I asked.
  The majority leader likes to talk about what we did in the past. His 
party shut down the government, and he says I voted to shut down the 
government. That is absurd that he could cite a vote of mine against 
some sort of proposal that they put forward.
  The question is: He refuses to put on a bipartisan, to give even the 
House the opportunity to consider a bill that is supported by 240 
Members of this House. And, frankly, my perception--and I am not bad at 
counting, Mr. Speaker, which is why I am standing at this podium and 
why the majority leader is standing at his podium. We understand 
counting.
  I dare him, Mr. Speaker, I dare him to put the Hurd-Aguilar bill on 
the floor, and I guarantee him it will get 240 votes. The people's 
House will be allowed to speak. But they are afraid to do that, Mr. 
Speaker.
  All of this stuff about we had meetings in his office, we had 
meetings in his office and he knew, from the start, that the two things 
they were asking for were nonstarters. Very frankly, I have had 
discussions with the Secretary, who said: Well, we will just stick 
with border security and DACA.

  But that is all in the past. What we are talking about is today. And 
what they did was shut down the people who wanted to vote on their 
option, on our option, and on two other options in this, the most 
transparent House that would take issues one by one and would face the 
tough issues head-on. While people are twisting in the wind and while 
children are being separated from their parents, ripped from the arms 
of their moms and their dads, we fiddle while Rome is burning, and we 
talk about shutting down government.
  Their party shut down government a number of times since I have been 
here. They did it intentionally. And, very frankly, their Speaker and 
the head of the OMB voted ``no'' and to shut it down; they voted not to 
open it up.
  That is not the issue, Mr. Speaker. The issue is: What are we going 
to do to solve a problem the President of the United States said we 
ought to solve?
  Now, the President of the United States, of course, this morning, 
says: No, forget it. Go deal with it.
  His tweet at 7:06 a.m. this morning: ``Republicans should stop 
wasting their time on immigration until after we elect more Senators 
and Congressmen/women in November''--in other words, until we take 
over.
  This President who said: Well, you know, I met with Kim Jong-un. He 
is loved by his people. And, boy, when he says stand up, his people 
stand up.
  Perhaps, that is what he wants us to do, Mr. Speaker, but we are not 
North Korea. We are a democracy, and, very frankly, they don't have the 
courage, Mr. Speaker, to bring bills to the floor and allow this House 
to work its will. What they do is they negotiate with themselves and 
bring bills to the floor, neither of which would have passed yesterday.
  After all of their compromise, after all of their talk, and after all 
of their commitments to solve the problem, neither one of their bills 
would have passed yesterday. They have 240-plus Members. They don't 
need us, but they took the bill off the floor because they couldn't get 
their own party to come to agreement.
  So, Mr. Speaker, my question is, and I will reiterate my question: 
What changes are going to be effected in the bill that would have been 
considered yesterday, had it not been pulled from the floor, that we 
will have to consider next week?
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend.

[[Page H5575]]

  

  Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I just asked the gentleman if he would allow me the 
opportunity to answer questions.
  Mr. HOYER. Certainly.
  Mr. McCARTHY. I know he likes to make long speeches before he gets to 
a question, and I know he likes to go back in decades for the decades 
that he has served, but I was only referring to this Congress. I was 
moving to the answer, but I was building and explaining why the answer 
is what it is.
  He doesn't think the actions prior don't take place until now. We 
have sat in those rooms and we talked about border security. The 
interesting part, though, Mr. Speaker: The other side of the aisle that 
said they were for border security, they were going to perpetuate the 
problem we currently have because they did not want to end this catch 
and release. They are going to put families in harm's way.
  They question whether you could actually have a border of a wall. 
That is really the philosophical debate that we are talking about.
  Now, we will work through this bill. There are some other parts of 
the bill that we are working on this weekend. Any changes that come to 
a conclusion, of course, we will let you know.
  But much of what this bill is is the same thing that we talked down 
at the White House about and we talked for those numbers of hours 
inside my office about.
  But, Mr. Speaker, the gentleman on the other side said that he was 
never going to shut down the government, but he voted to do it this 
time. They said that they were concerned about CHIP, but they would 
vote against it when we bring it to the floor.
  Do you know what we had to do? We had to carry it on our own.
  And do you know what happened for the American children? The longest 
it has ever been renewed: 10 years.
  So, yes, we want to work with them. But if the idea is to stop 
anything from happening for the American public, do not expect me to 
stop. It is too important. If we have to push through on our own, we 
will.
  And my friend made a statement that this body is one-sided. Don't 
take my word for it. Let's go to Quorum, a company that only focuses on 
data, that only focuses on measurements. Do you know what they said 
about this Congress? Seventy percent of the bills signed into law this 
Congress have one Republican and one Democratic cosponsor, the highest 
rate in the past 20 years for bipartisanship.
  The bills that we bring to the floor, despite the leadership's push, 
every week, Mr. Speaker, we can see the actions. What was the action 
that they held everybody until the last minute for those 23 people who 
wanted to vote for the appropriations bill? They had to wait until the 
Republicans carried it, then they released them to vote for it.
  Or we talk about the farm bill.
  Every day, Mr. Speaker, I come back here, I see the ranking member on 
the other side put a letter out to her Members to not vote for whatever 
comes.
  And, yes, we on this side of the aisle want to solve DACA. But I 
know. I read your tweets just as well: Dreamers can still apply to 
renew DACA protections.
  But, do you know what? In our bill, we deal with the DACA situation.
  Do you know what else we also deal with? We deal with the border, and 
we deal with security, because we do not want to be back here in 
another 2 or 5 years with the same problem we have today.

                              {time}  1230

  Even if you won't work with us from the children's health insurance, 
from funding of government, from appropriations for our veterans, you 
want to hold those votes back, I don't think the public wants to hold 
those back.
  And you know what? If we have to push forward, we will. And I will 
not apologize for it. This country is too important, the problems are 
too big.
  And I can listen, Mr. Speaker, to every argument we make, but I will 
just think the American public can look at the data.
  Do you know what today is, Mr. Speaker? The 6-month anniversary of 
the tax bill passing. You know what else it is? One million new jobs. 
You know what else it is? Unemployment below 4 percent. And in the last 
49 years of this country, unemployment below 4 percent has only been 7 
months in 49 years, but two of those 7 months were April and May of 
this year. Unemployment claims, 44-year low. And for the first time in 
the history of this Nation, there are more jobs being offered than 
there are people looking for them.
  So all that rhetoric, all those arguments you made building up to 
that tax bill, the Armageddon, the crumbs, how terrible this is going 
to be, 6 months later, history proves different.
  And you know what, Mr. Speaker? If we had waited and waited for the 
Democrats, there would not be a million new jobs, there would not be 
unemployment where it is, because, Mr. Speaker, there wasn't one 
Democrat to vote for it, even though a number of them privately told me 
on this floor they wanted to, but their leadership told them no.
  So if we have to solve the economy and we have to solve immigration 
on our own, we will.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, he didn't answer the question, of course. He 
hardly ever does.
  400,000 more jobs created in 2016 than 2017. He doesn't say that. 
They inherited a growing economy. We inherited, when President Obama 
took office, a receding economy, hemorrhaging 787,000 jobs in January 
of 2009. He doesn't talk about that. That was after the two tax cuts 
that they passed in 2001 and 2003 that they said would create the 
greatest economy we have ever seen. It didn't. He didn't say that.
  Mr. Speaker, he didn't say that the only time we balanced the budget 
for 4 years was under President Clinton, and we created jobs and had 
the best economy he has experienced and I have experienced. He didn't 
say that.
  And, Mr. Speaker, what he didn't say is why we are not bringing to 
this floor four pieces of legislation, giving everybody on the floor 
the opportunity to express their opinion and say to the American people 
how they think we can address, yes, border security, which we want to 
address.
  But what the President asked us to do and the Speaker said he would 
do, and the Speaker has not done, and that is to address in a rational 
way, in a way that can get the majority of votes--the two bills they 
brought to the floor, they knew they couldn't get the votes.
  The farm bill that he just talked about that is going to the Senate, 
it is dead on arrival. He knows it, Mr. Speaker. The 69 times they 
tried to repeal the Affordable Care Act, wasted time. He knows it.
  And he mentions, by the way, how bipartisan this Congress is. Let me 
tell you why it is bipartisan: we don't control it, but we cooperate 
when we can. When we were in charge, it wasn't nearly as bipartisan, 
because the Republicans did not cooperate when they could.
  And, Mr. Speaker, he talks about fiscal bills. Ninety percent of the 
fiscal bills could not have passed this House, kept the government 
open, opened the government up, give relief to those who were suffering 
from natural disasters without substantial Democratic help, and in many 
instances with the majority of Democrats and the minority of 
Republicans.
  But the answer I looked for, Mr. Speaker, what are we going to 
consider next week in terms of an issue that the Speaker said some 8 
months ago we were going to solve and promised us in February 2018 he 
was going to address to solve DACA? And now we have this crisis in the 
country created by the President of the United States with children 
being wrenched from the arms of their moms and dads. That is what we 
ought to be discussing.
  The majority leader is a good friend of the President's. I understand 
that. All the President has to do is pick up the phone and call and say 
to the Attorney General and the Secretary of the Department of Homeland 
Security: stop wrenching those children from the hands of their 
parents.
  We don't need legislation, but now we have legislation. And I would 
ask him if he would bring the Nadler bill to the floor, which will 
prevent children from being wrenched from the hands of their families 
simply because they have committed a misdemeanor of wanting to seek 
opportunity in the land of opportunity that we call America.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend for his response, but we need to 
know what is going to be considered next week.

[[Page H5576]]

Apparently, they haven't decided. So the majority leader says they will 
let us know as soon as they have decided what they are going to do--who 
they have to deal with to cobble the votes together on their side of 
the aisle. We have 240-plus votes for an option, but they are being 
muzzled. They are being prevented to express the will of this House.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask the majority leader, does he believe that my 
representation that Hurd-Aguilar has 240 votes on this floor 
inaccurate?
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend.
  Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding. My friend 
made a lot of points. Sometimes facts get caught up in them.
  So, Mr. Speaker, the gentleman talked about the floor and the 
willingness of this side to allow Democratic amendments, or 
bipartisanship.
  As of June 7, Republicans in the 115th Congress--and we are not done 
with this Congress yet--have provided for the consideration of over 
1,200 amendments on the House floor. Now, that includes 570 Democrat 
amendments.

  And I don't want to compare apples to oranges, so let's do apples to 
apples.
  So in the entire 111th Congress--that was their entire Congress when 
my friend was majority leader--Speaker Pelosi allowed less than 1,000 
amendments to be considered on the floor.
  Now, despite the unified Democratic opposition, Republicans are still 
getting the work done, and we will continue to do that.
  Now, my friend made a few statements, said there are things I did not 
say. Maybe there were some things I did not say about the economy, but 
they are different than what he would, because there is some really 
good news, and it is not far from here.
  Mr. Speaker, you could go to my friend's district. Each of the 
counties that make up Maryland's Fifth Congressional District has seen 
a drop in unemployment since 2016. St. Mary's County is down over a 
full percent to 3.7, Calvert County down to 3.5, Charles County down to 
3.8, Prince George's down to 4.1, and Anne Arundel County down to 3.2 
percent.
  Now, the other point I did not make--and I thank the gentleman for 
bringing it up to me that I missed points--do you realize in America 
today, if you are African American, this is the lowest unemployment has 
ever been; if you are Hispanic, the lowest it has ever been.
  Yes, there are things we had to do on our own, but the numbers prove 
it is worth it.
  And what is even more telling about this and something that makes me 
prouder, it doesn't just help Republican districts, it helps 
everybody's districts. It helps all Americans. And that is what we are 
here for.
  My friend brought up that there are issues. Yes, there are. That is 
why we want to pass the immigration bill. We think there should be a 
border and the border should be protected. We think children should be 
with their parents, and that is what we are working on.
  So I look forward to next week, to us passing an immigration bill 
that solves a lot of these problems.
  And, Mr. Speaker, I hope my friend from the other side of the aisle 
would look at the bill and understand not everybody gets what they 
want, because in that bill there won't be everything that I want, not 
one person in this room will get everything they want. But will America 
be safer? Will America be better in the future? Will we have a system 
that works? Those answers will be yes, and that is how I will cast my 
vote.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, we will close now.
  Neither of the questions that I posed were answered. And certainly 
the fact that there are 240 votes on this floor was not disputed, by 
the majority leader, for the Hurd-Aguilar, which addresses security at 
the border. By the way, cosponsored by Mr. Hurd, a Member of the 
majority leader's party. A Member from Texas who knows about the border 
and who, I presume, wants to keep it secure. The bill he has 
cosponsored has at least 240 votes on this floor.
  This is the most closed Congress in which I have served, the most 
closed rules. That is a fact. And apparently it is closed to the 
majority, who want to move ahead on a bill and just have the 
opportunity to vote on it and to give the Speaker the opportunity to 
put something on the floor and have the House consider it, and have Ms. 
Roybal-Allard and Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, Republican from Florida, have a 
bill on the floor and have it considered, and have Mr. Goodlatte, who 
did, in fact, have his bill on the floor, and it lost.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I regret that I don't know what there is going to be 
next week, because we need to take action. And we need to take action 
not by compromising with one side of the aisle and seeing only 
capitulation by some. We do need compromise, we do need action, and we 
need action that can pass the Senate.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________