[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 1]
[House]
[Pages 1349-1351]
[From the U.S. 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 yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
McCarthy), the majority leader, for the purpose of inquiring about the 
schedule for the week to come and perhaps thereafter.
  Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, on Monday, no votes are expected in the House. On 
Tuesday, the House will meet at noon for morning hour and 2 p.m. for 
legislative business. Votes will be postponed until 6:30 p.m. On 
Wednesday and Thursday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for morning hour 
and noon for legislative business. On Friday, the House will meet at 9 
a.m. for legislative business.
  Mr. Speaker, the House will consider a number of suspensions next 
week, a complete list of which will be announced by close of business 
tomorrow.
  Mr. Speaker, the House will also consider H.R. 3293, the Scientific 
Research in the National Interest Act, sponsored by Representative 
Lamar Smith. This bill will go a long ways toward providing greater 
transparency and accountability at the National Science Foundation. It 
is essential that we ensure precious Federal dollars are spent on 
Federal grants that promote science but do so in a way that is in the 
best interest of the United States.
  Additionally, the House will consider H.R. 3442, the Debt Management 
and Fiscal Responsibility Act, sponsored by Representative Kenny 
Marchant. This commonsense bill simply requires the administration to 
report to Congress on the status of the Nation's debt and their plans 
to address our fiscal problems prior to the Nation reaching its debt 
limit. With more than $18 trillion in public debt, we have a 
responsibility, both Democrats and Republicans, to show the American 
people a path toward solvency.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, the House will consider H.R. 2017, the Common 
Sense Nutrition Disclosure Act, sponsored by Representative Cathy 
McMorris Rodgers. This important bill addresses a harmful menu labeling 
regulation that will burden every grocery store, convenience store, and 
pizza restaurant in the country. Instead, our approach will provide a 
reasonable and flexible way for these businesses to provide customers 
with nutritional information.
  I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for that information with respect to 
the legislation that is going to be on the floor next week.
  I would simply say with respect to one of these bills, the Debt 
Management and Fiscal Responsibility Act, I don't know whether that 
bill requires the House to do the same, but certainly both the 
executive and the legislative branches of government need to have a 
responsible fiscal program and analysis so that, in fact, we can move 
toward fiscal balance. I look forward to having that discussion next 
week on the floor.
  Mr. Leader, we had a prayer breakfast this morning. It was a moving 
and very, I think, unifying time here in Washington where we had 
Republicans and Democrats and a lot of people from around the world 
attending. We talked about coming together. We talked about respecting 
one another, talking to one another, and serving our country and our 
people in a way consistent with our various faiths.
  In that context, I am going to ask the gentleman some questions on 
the scheduling, but I am hopeful that the Speaker has indicated that he 
wants to consider some broad issues. He refers to five in particular: 
national security, jobs and economic growth, health care, poverty and 
opportunity, and restoring the Constitution. I am not sure exactly what 
that last phrase means, but in any event, I think all of us want to 
make sure the Constitution is honored and certainly adhered to.
  However, it also appears--and we had this discussion last week--that 
substantive legislation--that is, translating thoughts and objectives 
and visions into legislation--may not occur in 2016. I don't know that 
to be the case, but I fear that to be the case, that we will not offer 
to the American people in this critically important election year 
specifics as to what we might do.
  I mention specifically the Affordable Care Act, which I know the 
gentleman's party believes is not good policy, whether or not we were 
going to consider an alternative to do what your party has said it is 
going to do for the last 5 years, and that is repeal, but replace with 
policies. I think that would be a useful discussion for us to have and 
do so in a way that respects the integrity of each person's view as to 
what the best interests of our country are.

                              {time}  1230

  In addition, one of the pieces of legislation would be the Voting 
Rights Act amendment. I bring that up now because Speaker Ryan said 
yesterday, as I understand it, that he was in favor of doing a voting 
rights bill. I don't know that he went into specifics.
  We believe that we need to address this bill because we believe it 
was substantially undermined by the recent decision of the Supreme 
Court some few years ago. He indicated that that was not going to be 
brought to the floor because of Mr. Goodlatte's opposition to that or, 
perhaps, the failure of Mr. Goodlatte to address that in committee.
  I bring that up specifically because I know, Mr. Leader, you made the 
observation, and I think you are quoted as saying you believe the two 
parties can achieve consensus on that legislation, but we may not be 
able to move it forward this year.
  Excuse me. That speaks to criminal justice system reform, not to 
voting rights. I think we can reach consensus on the criminal justice 
reform. I think

[[Page 1350]]

both parties believe that there are substantial areas that need to be 
addressed in criminal justice reform. Senator Cornyn has certainly 
indicated that. Republicans and Democrats in this House have indicated 
that.
  My question to you is with respect to the issues that I think we have 
all discussed and that the Speaker has discussed, such as: jobs and 
economic growth; health care; poverty and opportunity, which we believe 
is a very important issue; criminal justice reform; job creation; long-
term fiscal agreements so that we can replace the sequester with a 
permanent rather than an every-2-year resolution; comprehensive tax 
reform, which almost all of us have said we are for--Mr. Camp brought a 
bill forward on that--comprehensive immigration reform; restoring 
voting rights, which I mentioned; taking action to address gun 
violence, which we are in favor of, and I think clearly your side has 
indicated that mental health is very much a component of that and you 
want to address that; and addressing our national security challenges, 
which I agree with the Speaker that is a primary responsibility and 
concern of, I think, everybody on the floor of this House.
  My question, therefore, Mr. Leader, is: Do you expect any substantive 
legislation, rather than simply ideas that both parties might express 
and put out to the public, that would be transparent, specific, and on 
which we could have debates on alternative policies? Do you expect, in 
the relatively short time we have this year, to have legislation on the 
floor dealing with one or more of those subjects?
  I yield to my friend.
  Mr. McCARTHY. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I did take notes because you raised a lot of different issues.
  The first point, you talked about Congressman Kenny Marchant's bill 
asking the administration to set a path forward. I agree with you. That 
is why I believe that any budget that comes before this floor should 
balance in the 10-year window. I am proud of the fact that, on this 
side of the aisle, we have been able to do it, because that shows you 
the path to solvency and how you deal with this debt through big 
changes.
  You talked about what Speaker Ryan laid out. These are big, bold, new 
ideas. The Speaker says that they are going to go through committee. 
Every Member of this body, your side and ours, will be able to 
participate. The legislation will come through committee.
  Knowing these are bold ideas and the time we have here, some will get 
done and some may not get done by the end of this calendar year, but 
that doesn't mean that we can't finish the job.
  If we want to save this country and put us on a path of solvency and 
increased growth, these are areas that we find need to get done. We 
look forward to you working with us on all of these areas.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman.
  I think, certainly, we agree that we ought to work together. He and I 
have worked together, as a matter fact, on some very significant 
legislation more than a month ago that passed the House. I think the 
American public wants that.
  My urging to the majority leader would be that each of these ideas, 
if we are going to ultimately make them policy, has to be translated 
into legislation.
  The gentleman says all of us will be able to participate. Frankly, 
the gentleman knows, as well as I do, that legislation has to come to 
the floor for all of us to engage in, hopefully, with the ability to 
offer amendments and our ideas on how to perfect legislation that may 
come out of the committees. I would hope that we would see that.
  The gentleman mentioned the budget. I think the gentleman and others 
have said they want to accelerate the budget process. I think that is a 
good idea. I have always felt that we ought to move the budget and the 
appropriations bills earlier than we have historically done so that we 
can get those to the Senate, so they have time to work on them and 
bring them back, in order to have all 12 appropriations bills done 
seriatim, one after another.
  In my view, we are going to need a bipartisan effort and not have 
poison pills or the so-called riders in them in order for the Senate to 
consider them and be able to work their will and then go to conference 
and get that done all prior to October 1. I don't know whether that is 
possible, but I think the gentleman would say that would be certainly 
good to do, if in fact we could get that done.
  When does the gentleman expect the budget, which is the start of that 
process, to be on the floor?
  I yield to my friend.
  Mr. McCARTHY. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Well, I was just speaking with the Budget Committee chairman. He is 
trying to move that process up. It is our goal. If we can reach that 
goal before the first part of March and get that done, we can move up 
the appropriations process.
  As you know, it is difficult to move too fast because you have the 
committee hearings and you want the input and to be able to have the 
accountability and oversight of all the agencies. We have to have those 
hearings so that both sides of the aisle are in those committees and 
are able to produce something that is very productive.
  Yes, it is our goal to try to move the process up this year. As soon 
as we have that scheduled for the floor, I will let you know.
  Mr. HOYER. Am I correct, then, in saying that our target is the first 
week in March or the second week in March, at the latest, for the 
budget?
  Mr. McCARTHY. We are looking at that timeframe, yes.
  Mr. HOYER. I appreciate that information.
  Let me discuss a number of other specific issues, if I can.
  First of all, the Speaker indicated that he wanted to see legislation 
on the floor of the House by March 31 on Puerto Rico. As you and I both 
know, Puerto Rico is facing a fiscal crisis of its own. It is going to 
need some authority to deal with that crisis so that neither the 
Americans living in Puerto Rico are disadvantaged nor the children and 
others--whether it is through the educational system, the healthcare 
system, providing power, or whatever services are necessary--will not 
be adversely impacted.
  Can the gentleman give me an idea as to what progress we are making 
towards seeing legislation on the floor by March 31?
  I yield to my friend.
  Mr. McCARTHY. I thank my friend for yielding.
  As the gentleman knows, we are committed to addressing this issue. We 
have had numerous meetings and we have also had committee hearings. 
Even this week, Chairman Bishop and the Natural Resources Committee are 
hard at work to find the best path forward.
  We are committed to getting this done. I will not prejudge the 
committee on what the solution should be, but I know they are hard at 
work. We continually monitor it week to week. As soon as we have it 
scheduled, I will notify the gentleman.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for that.
  Again, I would reiterate that, on the voting rights issue, the 
Speaker is supportive of some legislative treatment addressing that 
issue.
  Does the gentleman have any idea when that might occur?
  I yield to my friend.
  Mr. McCARTHY. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I think the gentleman is referring to an article that we both read. I 
am not sure that you were in the meeting. I was not in the meeting.
  Mr. HOYER. I was not.
  Mr. McCARTHY. One thing that Speaker Ryan has laid out for this body 
is that it is not top-down, it is bottom-up, and that we go through 
regular order. Committees are there to do their work.
  Look at the metrics of just this last year: If you take the 25-year 
average, it is usually a little over 300 bills come through committee 
to this floor. We are well over 500. So we've shown that we are taking 
that path and improving on having them come to the floor.

[[Page 1351]]

  I think what the Speaker said and what I read was that he may have a 
personal opinion, but he wants it to go through committee so that all 
voices are heard and we have the opportunity for amendments. When it 
gets out of committee, we can move it to the floor.
  I will keep you posted on when it is scheduled.
  Mr. HOYER. I appreciate you keeping me posted, but my frustration is 
that this issue has been hanging around for a very long period of time. 
When Mr. Cantor had your position as majority leader, he indicated he 
was receptive to addressing it. The gentleman is correct; I was not 
there either, but I believe the Speaker is reported as having said it 
needs to be addressed.
  I understand bottom-up, but if bottom doesn't work, you never get up. 
I refer to the Export-Import Bank that lay sanguinely for 2 years in 
the committee because the chairman was opposed to it when the majority 
of your party was for it when it came to the floor.
  So it is one thing to say that we ought to work bottom-up, but if the 
bottom is a stopper and creates gridlock, frankly, this body does not 
get to do what its responsibility is, and that is to reflect the will 
of the people, as we did on the Export-Import Bank.
  So I sympathize with the bottom-up, and that is the way it ought to 
work; but if, in fact, what we have is a blockage to the people's 
Representatives having the ability to work their will and reflect the 
United States citizens' views, then democracy is not working.
  We saw that in the Export-Import Bank, in my opinion, which I worked 
on very, very assiduously for over 2 years to get to this floor. Very 
frankly, when it did get to this floor, as I said repeatedly, it would 
enjoy the majority's support.
  In my view, if a voting rights bill gets to this floor, it will enjoy 
the majority's support. As you know, Mr. Sensenbrenner was the sponsor. 
President Bush was President when we passed the Voting Rights Act in 
2006. It passed overwhelmingly in the House, overwhelmingly in the 
Senate, and was signed by President Bush.
  I am certainly sympathetic to wanting to make sure that we follow 
regular order, but if regular order precludes democracy from working, 
then it is irregular order and not in the best interests of our 
country.
  Lastly, Mr. Leader, recently, all of us are concerned about Zika. We 
are all focused on Zika. Can the gentleman tell me whether or not there 
are any planned efforts to address what is clearly a very serious 
health crisis that confronts not only us, but certainly South America, 
Latin America, and other parts of the world?
  I yield to my friend.
  Mr. McCARTHY. I thank the gentleman for yielding, but I do want to 
thank the gentleman for still being able to work Ex-Im Bank into the 
colloquy.
  Mr. HOYER. You gave me such a great opening.
  Mr. McCARTHY. The gentleman brings up a very serious issue. This is 
something that should not be taken lightly. This should not be partisan 
in any way shape or form. This is something we should get ahead of. 
That is why the Energy and Commerce Committee has already scheduled and 
sent out letters for hearings. Susan Brooks has a bill that she has 
been working on dealing with this as well.
  So, yes, we want to get in front of this. I know we have been talking 
to the administration as well. I look forward to working with you in 
dealing with this issue because this is not something that should lay 
by the wayside. This is something we have to get in front of.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman. We certainly agree on that. I look 
forward to working together to address it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________