[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 12]
[House]
[Pages 15901-15903]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           THE FIRST 100 DAYS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 6, 2015, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Fortenberry) is 
recognized for the remainder of the hour as the designee of the 
majority leader.
  Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Speaker, before I begin my remarks, I think it's 
only appropriate to congratulate, thank, and wish all the best to my 
friend, Bob Dold.
  Bob, you have earned a reputation around here. You may not know it, 
but I am going to tell it to you: I think you are the hardest working 
person here. I listened to a number of your accomplishments. It is not 
only representative of your thoughtfulness and your desire to serve the 
country, but it is this integrity of work ethic that has impressed me 
and so many other Members here.
  I know this departure is a bit bittersweet. Sweet in a sense that you 
are now free to be with your primary purpose in life: your children, 
your family, and your mission together as a family; and a little bit 
bitter in that you are going to miss us and we will miss you. I thank 
you for your leadership.
  Mr. Speaker, regarding my remarks tonight, I want to begin with a 
little anecdote. Vice President-elect Mike Pence was a Member of the 
House of Representatives. I overlapped some time and service with him. 
He was a friend and, in some ways, a mentor. He came to speak to a 
group of us recently, and Vice President-elect Pence had this to say: 
Buckle up.
  Buckle up because, Mr. Speaker, the next 100 days are going to be 
intense. Beginning in January, we will have a new President and a new 
Congress. The next 100 days not only will be intense, but it will also 
create possibilities. That next 100 days will set a new architecture 
for government and a repurposed relationship between the people and the 
state.
  Mr. Speaker, for far too long, partisan paralysis has plagued this 
Congress leading to stagnation in Washington. We know it and the people 
know it. With this historic and transformative election, the playbooks 
of both political parties that had been used for decades are tattered 
and lay in shreds; and rightfully so.
  This transition of Presidential administrations has unleashed the 
potential for a genuine reimagining of public policy, and it is time 
for the Nation to adopt a more inclusive model. Power that has been 
concentrated in Washington and on Wall Street has left millions of 
Americans feeling left behind and at the margins of what many regard as 
a corrupt and elitist world. Millions of Americans face stagnating 
wages, downward mobility, and an increased cost-of-living. Income 
inequality has risen while, at the same time, the small business sector 
has been seriously harmed. This must change.
  So what are we looking at?
  We are looking at this: we are looking at new healthcare horizons, 
new trade and tax policies aimed at restoring the decimated 
manufacturing sector, returning jobs and returning dignity and social 
cohesion to large swaths of our Nation. An economic system of inclusion 
and empowerment capable of generating widespread participation is now 
the new center ground of this country.
  Now, Mr. Speaker, in the time that we have, I would like to survey 
multiple public policy areas that are in need of deep replenishment, 
and I would like to speak about the opportunity of possibilities that 
lies before us.
  So right out of the gate, what are we going to do?
  Congress will launch a significant healthcare reform initiative. Mr. 
Speaker, we all know this, but it needs to be said once again: 
skyrocketing cost and diminished choice is the residue of poor policy, 
and we can do better. At the same time, we cannot default back to the 
previous arrangement which left way too many persons behind. While 
there might be a fierce fight in this body on the specifics of reform 
proposal, broad agreement will likely coalesce around two things: 
protecting persons from inhuman market forces while, at the same time, 
incentivizing the best of market innovation to bring about change.
  Americans with spiraling healthcare costs know that a new healthcare 
construct is needed. To address these concerns, the next approach must 
reinvigorate health insurance with the goals of lowering price, 
protecting the sick, and improving options. The next generation health 
savings account will be at the cornerstone of this effort restoring 
relationship, responsibility, and respect as drivers of healthcare 
policy.
  Now, Mr. Speaker, the Affordable Care Act, known as ObamaCare, has 
helped some people, yet, at the same time, it has hurt others. We often 
speak about repealing and replacing it, but perhaps it is time to speak 
about repealing it and replacing the repeal-and-replace language with 
new language that really underlies the principles that we all ought to 
be embracing. They are really three-fold; the first of which is 
relationship, responsibility, and respect.
  Mr. Speaker, for persons who have had a gravely sick child, perhaps 
there is nothing more difficult than having to turn that child's care 
over to other persons. I recall when our daughter, Kathryn, was a 
little infant. My wife and I, with our daughter, walked to the door of 
the surgery room and then handed her over to the nurse. We had to let 
her go into the hands of people that we had to trust. She has had a 
long journey. She has had five major heart surgeries and nine total 
surgeries. But that very first moment where we turned our little baby 
over to the nurse was an extraordinarily poignant and deeply impactful 
one for my wife and me, made only better by the reality that that team 
of people that had been put around her genuinely cared and that we were 
in relationship with them. Relationship between the doctor and the 
patient, between a healthcare system and the person--not the commodity, 
but the person--is an absolutely critical first principle.
  Mr. Speaker, a long time ago, I had a very severe headache. I was a 
young man, and I had to buy my insurance privately. I did so. I tried 
to be responsible. But because that headache was so intense, I decided: 
Well, I am going to have to seek a specialist.
  Bypassing the family doctor in order to save myself $50, I went to 
the ENT, the ear, nose, and throat surgeon. She told me that, after an 
x-ray, she couldn't really tell what the problem was and that they were 
going to need to do a CAT scan.
  Immediately I launched into some questions. I said: Doctor, I know 
there is a problem with medical liability and there is an attempt by 
the medical establishment to create the conditions in which the 
potential for lawsuits is mitigated and there are a lot of tests to 
run.

[[Page 15902]]

  She interrupts me. She says: Why are you telling me all this?
  I said: Because, Doctor, I am paying for it. I have a major medical 
policy, what is called a catastrophic policy, with a very high 
deductible. This is coming out of my pocket. Do you really need the 
test?
  She said: Oh, I see. Well, yes, I need the test; but now that you 
said that, I am just looking at your sinuses. So why don't we call a 
couple of places in town and ask them if they could widen the cross 
section of the image and give you a discount for doing so?
  She had her assistant do that. In a minute, we found a facility that 
would actually discount the price based upon another type of test.
  So what happened here?
  I saved perhaps another $75, the doctor got the tests that she 
needed, and perhaps, more importantly, the community resource was more 
properly allocated because I had a role in the decisionmaking process. 
Put in economic terms, I had an incentive in the allocation of that 
resource because I was paying for it. That is called responsibility.
  Back to this idea of what we are coming to, particularly for the next 
generation, the younger generation, whereby we create and revitalize 
the whole health savings account policy apparatus. If you set a little 
money aside on a tax-deferred basis, then it helps you control the 
ordinary costs of health care, and, at the same time, if something goes 
wrong, you shouldn't have to be on the gurney in the hospital asking 
for a price list for the cheapest anesthesiologist. No, you are 
protected. That is the right methodology of thinking forward that will 
actually protect you when you are in vulnerable circumstances but 
empower you to take better control in relationship with your doctor and 
medical provider of those first-dollar costs.
  That is what I think we can see coming as a cornerstone of the 
revival of our healthcare system. That is a start of a system we can 
regard with respect. It is relationship, responsibility, and respect. 
Those are the principles and the new cornerstones of health care moving 
forward.
  Mr. Speaker, regarding infrastructure, another important policy area, 
broad bipartisan agreement exists around rebuilding our Nation's 
infrastructure. From airports to roads, to bridges, to information 
technology, new projects are on the horizon. I would add that 
sustainable energy should be on that list. As a public good, properly 
selected infrastructure improvements are a benefit to society at large.
  Infrastructure can also be virtual, setting up systems for better 
interconnectivity. It also has implications for health care as we build 
out, for instance, innovative healthcare models. The challenge, of 
course, to all of us will be in financing and insuring the proper 
division between Federal, State, and local governments as well as with 
the private sector.
  Mr. Speaker, the third policy area is spending. In an unprecedented 
legislative development, our government is moving forward on two 
budgets simultaneously. Those of us serving on the House Appropriations 
Committee have a very heavy lift. In a parallel process, we will fix up 
the current budget while creating a budget for the following year.
  While it is easy to speak about new ideas, plans to pay for them are 
the test of smart government. We must remain sober about spending. 
Deficit spending is a form of taxation--especially on the poor and 
seniors--when this debt that is run up is monetized. The good news is 
that this peculiar set of circumstances gives lawmakers--all of us--
much more flexibility in creating genuinely creative policy outcomes.
  Mr. Speaker, a fourth area I want to touch on is taxes. Tax is a 
broad issue that, like health care, has many thorny and complex 
considerations. I anticipate that Congress will move to solve tax 
anomalies that harm America's competitive standing in the world, 
including giveaways to multinational corporations. The Tax Code should 
reposition funds captured overseas to be brought back into America, and 
any reform should prioritize small business--the source of new jobs and 
the source of local economies.
  This process should really be guided by a three-fold goal. First of 
all, fairness. Second, simplification. And the third is economic growth 
in order to produce revenues for the government.

                              {time}  1900

  First of all, let's touch on this issue of fairness. President-elect 
Trump, our new President, has called for doing away with a provision in 
the Tax Code called carried interest. I agree with him. If you are 
wealthy enough, you can basically take income and restructure it to be 
paid as capital gains. That means a higher income tax becomes a much 
lower tax through this mechanism. The vast majority of people in 
America can't do it. A few can. Closing this is not a panacea, 
necessarily, but it is a good first step. It points to a deeper 
principle; one that is called fairness.
  When a person makes things with their own two hands, when they use 
the creative gifts of their intellect, this is an imprint of their own 
personal dignity, the dignity of work, that gift, that meaningful place 
where you can actually see the fruit of your own labor.
  So what is the first thing we do? We tax it. We call it earned 
income, while another category of income called unearned gets a 
preferential rate. This is a discussion we need to have.
  The second point, simplification. A few years back, we had a tax 
reform act here. It was controversial. A number of us voted for it, and 
it passed. Before doing that, I decided to run up the road and see 
someone who lives near where I do. His name is Warren Buffett. Now, 
Warren Buffett and I have different philosophical approaches on many 
things, but he was generous enough to welcome me to his office. We 
spent about an hour together. I wanted to get his particular 
perspective not only on that tax bill but on some other things.
  In an interesting exchange, Mr. Buffett turned around to his 
credenza, pulled out a file, an old file, pulled out a single piece of 
paper, and said: Jeff, just do this, just do this. Put the Tax Code on 
a piece of paper. Simplification.
  Now, a Tax Code, in reality, cannot always be cut. It has to be 
optimized. We have to run the government, we have to have revenues, but 
in a manner that does not deteriorate the ability of the economy, small 
business and others, to create jobs, and to provide the proper catalyst 
for economic growth. And that is the balance.
  Mr. Speaker, let me turn to the issue of regulation. But before I do, 
can I inquire as to the amount of time that is left.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Donovan). The gentleman from Nebraska 
has 11 minutes remaining.
  Mr. FORTENBERRY. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
  Let's touch upon the issue of regulation. Washington is readying to 
correct regulatory overreach that has constrained the ability of small 
business to flourish. For far too long, Washington has distorted 
markets and, most importantly, the imagination of people to find better 
solutions for themselves and for their neighbors. Government must play 
its role, but with constraints on its tendency to seize more power.
  Mr. Speaker, I recently visited a 125-year-old bank in a small town 
called North Bend, Nebraska. It is an agriculture community. This bank 
is now in its fourth generation. The family was eager to show me 
something they had recently discovered. There is an architectural gym 
that had been covered over by a ceiling. In doing some remodeling, they 
found a hidden stained glass panel and gorgeous ornamentation on the 
various beams above. The bank is, rightly, proud to showcase this 
history and this beautiful symbol of a flourishing past.
  The story began when all of the banks in the area in this town went 
under during the Great Depression. One of the local banks reorganized 
itself and came forward with a proposal to the community. It was this: 
If you stay with us, you stay with our bank, we

[[Page 15903]]

will give you 50 cents on your dollar now and pay you back the rest 
over time.
  Mr. Speaker, it took the family that owned that bank 20 years, but 
they paid every dime back to every member of that bank, without ever 
taking a dividend for themselves until that money was paid back. The 
original owner died shortly thereafter. He gave his word, and he got it 
done.
  As a longstanding community institution, this local bank did not 
bring our Nation down in the financial crisis of 2008. It did not 
benefit from insider class privilege that enabled liar loans and high-
risk collateralized debt negotiations. It did not help multinational 
banking conglomerates grow so large in hubris and reach that they 
nearly tanked our economy. At the same time, this small Nebraska bank 
is besieged by a regulatory overlay created by a crisis that it did not 
participate in. It is not fair.
  So rightsizing regulation does not mean doing away with it, Mr. 
Speaker. It means what is sensible to protect the health and safety and 
well-being and create a fair playing field for everyone with minimal 
intrusion for maximum market functionality. There is a real cost to 
regulation, there is a real cost to no regulation, and there is a real 
cost to dumb regulation. We look forward to finding that balance once 
again.
  Mr. Speaker, there are many other aspects that I could speak about 
regarding community revitalization and foreign policy, but I want to 
touch on an important debate that is under way now regarding our 
immigration system. Our immigration system is stretched. Laws have not 
been enforced, have led to chaos and dislocation, testing the natural 
generosity of Americans. Righting the legal system, stopping 
unscrupulous employers, and holding those who break the law to account 
are the start of restoring a humane and fair immigration policy.
  In another small town right north of Omaha, Blair, Nebraska, it is 
nestled among the beautiful, rolling, wooded hills along the Missouri 
River. It is a traditional hub of agricultural activity as well. I am 
proud to represent them in the United States Congress.
  There are several large manufacturing plants, and it is a very stable 
community, a community of very strong values, so much so that recently 
a Sunday school class of little children wrote to me about the need to 
help other impoverished children in countries across the world. Their 
letters were so touching and heartwarming. They demonstrated this 
enduring universal ideal that animates the moral imagination of 
Nebraska's young people and young people throughout the country.
  But fast forward to a jarring criminal incident that took place a few 
months ago when three men were arrested in Blair driving nearly 90 
miles per hour, with a loaded gun, stolen in Iowa. Two of them were 
Somali immigrants from Lincoln and Minneapolis here on visas. Both were 
wanted by the Department of Homeland Security, and, between the two, 
had 34 previous arrests. The third man had 50 previous arrests. Even 
though the three have been in America long enough to have been arrested 
94 times, they still requested a court interpreter. They abused their 
privilege. They do not belong in America.
  America has a great capacity to be generous. But those who have 
received our generosity have an obligation. If you want to come to 
America, you will accept American values. If you want to come to 
America, you will work, provide for yourself, and integrate responsibly 
into dutiful citizenship. If you want to come to America, it is 
absolutely essential, and I and many others will stand with you. 
Celebrate your past culture, explain it to your new community, and, at 
the same time, celebrate your new one, as so many good people coming to 
our country do.
  Our Nation has generally maintained a vibrant immigration system, and 
it has been an important part of the character and development of our 
country, but chaos, disorder, and crime undermine our ability to 
maintain that openness.
  Of all of our country's pressing priorities, one of the most should 
be ensuring that the criminal justice system, the judicial system, and 
the immigration system work in concert to swiftly remove persons who 
have seriously transgressed our laws. This will help keep America safe 
and protect the integrity of immigration policy for those who want to 
come here, rebuild their lives, contribute to this wonderful society, 
and sustain America's generous impulse.
  Mr. Speaker, I think it is appropriate to leave you tonight with some 
comments on the future of democracy. Some of what I talked about are 
ideals, but they give us a chance to envision and create a more 
inclusive government, economy, and society. Given that the future of 
democracy depends on quickly moving forward in the right direction, 
there is a mood of both curiosity as well as urgency here. Curiosity as 
to how we are going to translate this moment and urgency not to waste 
it.
  Even though the election was a proxy for many open and deep 
philosophical divides in our country, now there is the possibility of 
great change. As President-elect Trump said on the night of his 
election: We must now come together, and I want to be President for all 
Americans.
  President Obama very generously and graciously extended a hand of 
friendship to President Trump and said: President Bush was so 
extraordinarily helpful to me in this transition, I will work the same 
in any way he wants with President-elect Trump.
  President Clinton, admitting that this was a painful loss said: It 
was a fair election. We need to give the new President-elect a chance, 
and we must unite.
  I think that set an important tone, Mr. Speaker.
  We take it for granted, but this demonstrated the brilliance of how 
our democracy provides for this peaceful transition of power. In spite 
of some protest, we have witnessed the ongoing resiliency of America's 
governing traditions. In Congress, a great deal of ideological rigidity 
has been vaporized. Conversations among fellow Republicans and 
Democrats are yielding a sense of new horizons, which, if properly 
considered, will help shape a meaningful approach with the next White 
House.
  Mr. Speaker, the next hundred days are critical. It is time to create 
the architecture of a 21st century government, one that is innovative, 
one that is effective, restoring the trust and confidence of the 
people.
  Mr. Speaker, there is a great old movie starring Bette Davis called 
``All About Eve.'' In that classic Hollywood moment, she looks around 
to her guest with that smoldering gaze and says: ``Fasten your 
seatbelts, it's going to be a bumpy night.''
  Mr. Speaker, real change is always bumpy. But when done with purpose 
and clarity, with the intention of doing good for others, we can allow 
ourselves to dream big again.
  I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________