[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 160 (2014), Part 8]
[House]
[Pages 11831-11834]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                THE THREE COEQUAL BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 3, 2013, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Woodall) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the time, and I appreciate 
your being down here with me. I think about the just a couple of years 
that you and I have served in this Congress, and I think back, and I 
hope ``Schoolhouse Rock'' was on TV when you were coming along.
  The thing I did when the Internet came out--yes, I was old enough to 
remember when the Internet came out--was I looked up the ``Schoolhouse 
Rock'' video, and I looked up ``I'm just a bill sitting here on Capitol 
Hill'' because it tells the tale--and we learned that before we learned 
all of our times tables, we learned about how a bill becomes a law.
  We learned about what this great experiment in self-governance is, 
and it is the United States of America. It makes me sad that it comes 
on less on Saturday mornings than it used to, and now, parents are down 
on watching as much TV on Saturday mornings.
  I hope ``Schoolhouse Rock'' is still required viewing in every family 
in America because the whole process of how a bill becomes a law is 
critically important to who we are as a people--as a people.
  I know it happens to you, Mr. Speaker, like it happens to me. I go 
back home, and I am the Congressman. I am the Congressman. I am holding 
the townhall meeting. I am standing up in front of the room. Maybe I am 
up on the stage, I have got a big microphone.
  There are all these folks sitting out there in the audience, and it 
dawns on me that I am the servant, and all the bosses are sitting out 
there. That is what is so wonderful about what goes on here. You and I 
have the great privilege of representing a small slice of America; and, 
in my case, it is the Seventh District of Georgia--but the bosses live 
at home.
  Mr. Speaker, if we don't do this the way ``Schoolhouse Rock'' laid it 
out, if we don't go through that process each and every time for how a 
bill becomes a law, the loser is each one of those individuals who show 
up at my townhall meetings who are actually the bosses of this country.
  The loser is the citizen in America who should be sitting on the 
board of directors, but who gets shut out of the decisionmaking process 
if we don't follow that simple cartoon that we all became fond of 
growing up.
  Mr. Speaker, you know better than I do that there was a Supreme Court 
decision that came out last week. It was called the Noel Canning 
decision, and that Supreme Court--you know, we talk about it all the 
time, Mr. Speaker.
  I wish I had a microphone that went out to the folks back in their 
offices who were watching this on TV. We could do a quick telephone 
poll of who folks think the liberal Justices are and who folks think 
the conservative Justices are and who folks think the middle is, but 
that Court is divided.
  Oh, Mr. Speaker, you know there are some hardcore conservatives 
sitting on the Supreme Court today, and there are some hardcore 
liberals sitting on that very same bench.
  Nine of those folks sitting up there on the bench--and I read the 
decisions when they come out, Mr. Speaker, and it is 5-4 this, 6-3 
that. It is these starkly divided opinions about what the direction of 
America ought to be, and I get that. We are a sharply divided country. 
We see that in Presidential elections, and we see that in congressional 
elections.
  This decision that came out last week, Mr. Speaker, this Noel Canning 
decision was decided 9-0 by the Supreme Court--9-0. It did not matter 
how hardcore conservative the Justice was, and it did not matter how 
hardcore liberal the Justice was. Every single Justice agreed.
  What they agreed on--and it gives me no pleasure to talk about it--
what they agreed on is that the President of the United States exceeded 
the authority granted to him by this United States Constitution and 
that the United States Congress did absolutely nothing to rein that in; 
and so the Supreme Court, 2 years later, had to make the decision that 
it was wrong.
  Now, I get the balance of powers, Mr. Speaker. I get it. I get that 
the Congress is here as article I, and we make decisions; and then our 
bills have to be signed by the President there in article II.
  I get it that, if we pass the wrong kind of legislation and it is 
unconstitutional, the courts, in article III, get to make that 
decision--but, dadgum it, we have that responsibility as the 435 
Members who serve in this Chamber who are not the bosses of this 
country, but who are the servants of the true bosses of this country 
back home, we have the responsibility to maintain the authority on 
Capitol Hill that the Constitution provides.
  Last week, the Court said, unanimously, 9-0, that the President can't 
just decide what the law is and what the law isn't, that the law exists 
independent of the President, and his job is to follow those laws.
  Now, that is pretty clear here. You get into article II--in fact, we 
all take that oath when we get elected. We swear to uphold and defend 
the Constitution. The executive power shall be vested in the President 
of the United States, the legislative power vested here, and so the 
Supreme Court said, unanimously, that the President had overstepped his 
bound and that what he did was unconstitutional.
  I have a quote that they used--and it is important to me, Mr. 
Speaker, as I suspect you hear the same thing from your constituents 
back home. Folks say: Why can't you get something done? Why can't you 
get something done in Washington? What are you guys arguing about? Why 
don't you get something done? Aren't there some things out there that 
you can do to make a difference in people's lives?
  I am proud to say that you and I have collaborated on a number of 
those things, but folks feel the friction in this town, the friction of 
people who believe different things about what the future of this 
country ought to look like.
  Here is what the Supreme Court said--and I love it in its simplicity, 
Mr. Speaker. The Supreme Court said last week that regardless--the 
Recess Appointments Clause was the clause that was being debated, this 
is the exceeding of his constitutional authority that the President 
embarked upon.
  ``Regardless, the Recess Appointments Clause is not designed to 
overcome serious institutional friction.''
  It ``is not designed to overcome serious institutional friction. It 
simply provides a subsidiary method for appointing officials when the 
Senate is away during a recess.''
  Here, as in other contexts, friction between the branches is an 
inevitable consequence of our constitutional structure. The friction 
that you hear about back home, Mr. Speaker, the frustration that our 
constituents express about why folks can't get something done, why 
can't you agree, why is there a big argument going on, that friction, 
the Supreme Court says, is an inevitable consequence of our 
constitutional structure.
  The concern then, Mr. Speaker, is in the name of avoiding that 
friction, some folks want to throw out parts of this Constitution, and 
my question--not just for Members in this body, Mr.

[[Page 11832]]

Speaker, but for every single constituent who votes in our national 
elections--what is more important? Is it more important to get 
something done? Is it the ends that are the most important, or is it 
the means?
  The means that were provided to us were provided to us in 1787, that 
great summer in Philadelphia, where the best minds of our land came 
together and laid out a structure that has successfully protected the 
power of the people for over 200 years.
  Is it the ends, or is it the means? I tell you--and I don't attribute 
any bad motives to the President, Mr. Speaker, I don't. I don't want to 
attribute bad motives to the President.
  I will tell you that, in making the recess appointments that led to 
this unanimous decision that what the President did was 
unconstitutional, the President prioritized the ends.
  He knew who he wanted in these job positions. He knew the Senate 
would never approve these people for these job positions, and so he 
said: Who cares what the Senate thinks? I am going to put them in 
anyway.
  The Supreme Court said: No, you are not. No, you are not.
  Now, the great shame for us, Mr. Speaker, is that it should have been 
the Congress that said that. It should have been the Congress that said 
that.
  More specifically, it should have been the Senate right across this 
Chamber that said that, Mr. Speaker. It should have been the Senate 
that stood up for the power that is not their power, but is the power 
of the American people to engage in this great balance that is our form 
of government, this great balance that has inevitable friction.
  We have got to decide for ourselves, Mr. Speaker, in this Chamber and 
across the country: Are we Republicans and Democrats? Or are we 
Americans? Are we Green Party folks and Independent folks? Or are we 
Americans? Is this about which party wins and which party loses? Or is 
this about America?
  America is not a place on a map, Mr. Speaker. You know this better 
than most. America is not a place on the map. America is an idea. 
America is a set of values.
  There is so much more that unites us in this country than divides us. 
My challenge to my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, is that we rise to the 
occasion to protect and defend this document.
  No matter how small, no matter how simple, and no matter how much it 
gets in the way of getting something done, this U.S. Constitution is 
designed to protect those freedoms, to protect those common goals, and 
to protect that which makes us who we are as Americans.
  I am not trying to figure out who to blame, Mr. Speaker. I am trying 
to figure out how to solve it. When the Supreme Court--again, if you 
have watched the Supreme Court, these folks, they can't agree on what 
time to meet, Mr. Speaker. They disagree about so, so much--5-4 
decision after 5-4 decision.
  This divided Court--it is almost a term, Mr. Speaker, it is not the 
``Court,'' it is the ``divided Court,'' that is the way it always shows 
up in the newspaper, the ``divided Court''--9-0 said this Congress and 
the American people have abdicated their responsibility to rein in this 
executive branch and ensure that the law was followed.

                              {time}  1215

  And here is the thing, Mr. Speaker, and you know what I am talking 
about: I signed up to be on the Oversight and Government Reform 
Committee. The Oversight and Government Reform Committee, that is the 
committee that is responsible for going in and making sure the laws are 
followed and faithfully executed. And I joined that committee, Mr. 
Speaker, and you may think it foolish, but I joined that committee 
because I thought Mitt Romney was going to be the next President of the 
United States. And for too long, I had seen Republicans in Congress 
protect Republican Presidents and Democrats in Congress protect 
Democratic Presidents, and I haven't seen enough folks protecting the 
Constitution, protecting article I, protecting the power that the 
Constitution vests in each and every one of our constituents back home, 
and so I said I am going to sign up for this Oversight and Government 
Reform Committee because I am a hardcore Republican and I want to be 
the hardcore Republican who rides herd over the Romney administration, 
because you don't get a free pass because we are from the same party. 
You don't get a free pass because the Constitution doesn't give you a 
free pass. You don't get a free pass because my obligation is not to 
you as a fellow Republican, my obligation is to my constituents and to 
my country as an American.
  I wanted to bring back that idea that we as a Congress, not we as 
Republicans and Democrats in Congress, but we as a Congress, not we as 
the House, but we as the House and the Senate, we as the Congress have 
a common goal and a common responsibility when it comes to the future 
of this country.
  Now, sitting over there on the Oversight and Government Reform 
Committee, folks just think I am a political hack. I try to give advice 
and counsel to the administration about what they are doing wrong. 
Folks say, he is just a Republican, that is why he doesn't like what is 
going on. Nonsense; 9-0, the entire United States Supreme Court said 
what is going on in the administration is wrong; not wrong as in a 
mistake, but wrong as in the Constitution prohibits it. Wrong as in it 
is not allowed by that most powerful law that governs this land, the 
United States Constitution, and everybody in this town knew it. They 
knew it the day that the President took that action. And yet, too many 
in this town were silent.
  We have got to do better, Mr. Speaker. We have got to do better. 
There is still more that unites us than divides us. Love of this 
Constitution that protects our freedoms is one of those things.
  So where can we start, Mr. Speaker? Where can we start? I have one 
recommendation, and it is a small one. I have had the experience in my 
3\1/2\ years in Congress, Mr. Speaker, and you may have had the same 
experience, that if you can begin to agree on the little things, then 
the bigger things get a little easier to agree upon. You sort out those 
things that you have agreement on first, you lock those in as part of 
the final deal, and then you go out and you tackle the bigger things. 
So you start small, and you build. That is true. It is true of 
exercise, it is true of almost anything. Start small and build.
  I am thinking about the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Mr. 
Speaker. You may think, Rob, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 
for Pete's sake, that is just some little-bitty agency over there under 
the Federal Reserve. Well, it is not. It is a big agency. It is a 
growing agency. But the most important part is what I said finally in 
that sentence, it is under the Federal Reserve. This is what happened.
  The year was 2010, and this body, this body, led by the Financial 
Services Committee chairman at that time, Barney Frank of 
Massachusetts, passed what has come to be known as the Dodd-Frank Act, 
named after Chairman Frank on this side and Chairman Dodd over on the 
Senate side, and it went after Wall Street. It went after Wall Street, 
and this was in the aftermath of bank failures. This was in the 
environment when folks were concerned about what the economic future of 
America would be, much like they still are today, and this purported to 
solve so many of these challenges through more regulation.
  Now, we can argue about whether or not that was a good plan or was a 
bad plan. I think it was a bad plan. I think it is costing us economic 
growth, not helping us with economic growth, but that is not my point 
here today. My point here today is, as a body, as a U.S. House of 
Representatives, when we passed that Dodd-Frank bill, which went over 
to the Senate and was passed, and which went to the President's desk 
and was signed and is now the law of the land, we created an agency 
called the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and we specifically 
and exclusively decided that this agency would not be accountable to 
the Congress in any way, shape or form.

[[Page 11833]]

  I want you to think about that, Mr. Speaker. Here we are, we have 
been charged individually and collectively with protecting the United 
States Constitution, which divvies up power in this country. And what 
is so unique about this country is that the power does not come from 
government and is given to the people; the power comes from the people 
and is lent to government for a short period of time. The power belongs 
to the people, and it is lent to the government for a short period of 
time.
  Yet in our collective wisdom, and I certainly use that term loosely, 
we decided to create a brand new Federal agency, capable of spending 
hundreds of millions of dollars per year, capable of implementing 
hundreds of billions of dollars in regulations on America's small 
businesses, that we would create this agency out of the air. It had 
never before existed, and that we would create this brand new agency 
and we would place it somewhere beyond the oversight of this body. That 
we would bestow it with powers to crush businesses, to enable 
businesses, give it these powers and place it somewhere beyond the 
control of this institution.
  It is unique, Mr. Speaker, as you know, in that its funding stream 
comes directly from the Federal Reserve. That would be the guys who 
print the money. It turns out when you can print the money and lend the 
money, you end up making a lot of money. So accountability over that 
money is almost nonexistent.
  There is a renovation going on at the CFPB right now. This is an 
agency that has been around for 3 years, and it has a renovation going 
on. The most recent inspector general's report tells us they are 
spending $215 million to renovate their building, almost a quarter of a 
billion dollars, just to renovate, just to renovate a building.
  Now, when I try to evaluate building space, I try to do it on a 
square-foot basis. What is it costing per square foot to renovate, 
because you do have to renovate. That is a fair business decision. 
According to the Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and 
Investigations, this amounts to a $590 per square foot renovation cost, 
$590 per square foot. Well, if you are in the real estate business, 
your jaw has already dropped. But if you are not in the real estate 
business, let me give you that comparatively.
  I don't know if you have ever been to Trump World Tower in New York, 
Mr. Speaker, but $334 per square foot is its cost. The most expensive 
city in the country, $334 per square foot, compared to $590 with what 
the CFPB is doing.
  I don't know if you have ever been out to Las Vegas, Mr. Speaker, but 
you have probably seen Ocean's Eleven a time or two, and the big 
Bellagio hotel and casino with all those big fountains out front. It is 
the backdrop of so many movies Hollywood puts out these days, and it is 
really kind of the definition of decadence in that part of the world--
$330 per square foot versus $590 at the CFPB. Now, why do I bring that 
up? Maybe $590 is the right answer. Maybe it is. Maybe whatever is 
going on over at the CFPB is so important that it has to cost twice as 
much to build their offices as any of the most luxurious office spaces 
or hotel spaces in the country. Maybe that is true, but I can't tell 
because I'm not allowed, as a Representative here in this body, to do 
oversight over that institution. Why? Because its funding comes 
directly from the Federal Reserve, not from this Congress.
  How does all of this come together, Mr. Speaker? Well, the answer is 
still in this little old book, still in these little pages. From the 
summer of 1787, there is a fabulous painting right outside these 
Chamber doors, Mr. Speaker, of that summer in 1787. George Washington 
is presiding, Ben Franklin is seated there. All of the Constitutional 
Convention delegates are there as they craft this document. And what 
they decided was, we were going to have to have an executive to execute 
the laws. You can't execute the laws by committee. It was going to be 
too complicated, you need an executive to execute the laws. But an all-
powerful executive is what those constitutional delegates had been 
fleeing in England. That is what the revolution was all about, so they 
were suspicious of an all-powerful executive, so they created the 
Congress first, article I, and said the power of the purse, the power 
of the purse, spending of the money, will reside here. Because if you 
cut off the money to that executive who has run amok, he won't be able 
to run amok any longer. That was the theory. That was the plan.
  And yet this body is creating institutions--and by ``this body,'' I 
mean before you and I arrived here, Mr. Speaker, not on our watch--but 
just 4 short years ago, this body began to create government agencies 
and institutions that were beyond the reach of our oversight, beyond 
our ability to defund and beyond our ability to control.
  It may be the best agency on the planet, but it shouldn't be beyond 
the control of the people.
  Mr. Speaker, I will end where I began. Are we Republicans and 
Democrats first, or are we Americans first? Are we northerners and 
southerners, are we Independents and Green Party? Are we MoveOn and Tea 
Party? Who are we first? And the answer for me has always been I am a 
citizen first. I am an American first. This great country that I have 
inherited--I didn't build it, I didn't sign my name to the Declaration 
of Independence pledging my life and my fortune to success, no. Can you 
imagine? Can you imagine what it took in a time of great uncertainty 
when the die had not been cast for freedom to stand up and say, My name 
is Rob Woodall and I pledge my life and my fortune that freedom will 
come to this land?
  No, Mr. Speaker, that is what I have inherited. That is what you have 
inherited. That is what every single child born on these sacred shores 
inherits, what every immigrant who travels from far and takes that 
oath, what they inherit, and it is our responsibility to preserve it.
  When we concern ourselves with the end and believe the end justifies 
the means, we will trample this Constitution at every occasion--at 
every occasion. And you need to look no further than the Supreme Court 
decision last week, Mr. Speaker, where unanimously these men and women 
entrusted with upholding this Constitution said friction between the 
branches is an inevitable consequence of our constitutional structure. 
I dare say an intentional consequence of our constitutional structure.
  I know there is a lot of pressure on folks, Mr. Speaker, from their 
constituents back home to get something done, but implicit in that is 
to get something done the right way--to get something done the right 
way.
  There are serious men and women on both sides of this Chamber, Mr. 
Speaker; there are serious men and women on both sides of this Capitol; 
there are serious men and women working in the administration who all 
love this country and want it to be better tomorrow than it was 
yesterday. We cannot allow our zeal for results to trample the document 
that has enabled the results that we have had so far.
  And so I challenge my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, whether you are the 
most conservative Republican or the most liberal Democrat, or anywhere 
in between, I challenge each and every one of us to decide that if we 
have a bad process, we are going to end up with a bad product. But that 
our Constitution, no matter how cumbersome, our Constitution, no matter 
how deliberate, our Constitution provides that framework where, whether 
we win or lose on a particular policy, our principles of freedom and 
opportunity will forever be preserved.
  I want to get good policy out of this Chamber, too. I want to get 
policy out of this town. I want to make a difference in the lives of 
people back home, but not at the expense of the birthright that I have 
inherited, which is this great country and the experiment in self-
government. I believe we are worthy of that birthright. I believe we 
can rise to that occasion, but it is not going to happen by accident, 
and it is not going to happen just inside the four walls of this 
building. It has got to happen in the hearts and the minds of every 
single family in this country, who are the true leaders of this Nation,

[[Page 11834]]

and I hope those will be their instructions to us each and every day.
  With that, Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________