July 30, 2020 - Issue: Vol. 166, No. 135 — Daily Edition116th Congress (2019 - 2020) - 2nd Session
All in House sectionPrev52 of 95Next
ISSUES OF THE DAY; Congressional Record Vol. 166, No. 135
(House of Representatives - July 30, 2020)
Text available as:
Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.
[Pages H4179-H4185] 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, 2019, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. Mr. ROY. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Garcia). Mr. GARCIA of California. Madam Speaker, I thank my distinguished colleague from Texas for yielding. Madam Speaker, I stand here this evening inspired. More specifically, I am proud, and I am in awe of our American space program and the monumental step that they took this morning with the launch of the Perseverance Mars rover on the back of an Atlas V rocket. But the rover is just one element of this amazing story. While humans have lived on this planet for millions of years, it was a mere 117 years ago when Americans were the first to solve the mystery of sustained, powered flight in our own atmosphere. That is a mere blink of an eye in the long arc of our planet and our own species' history. Now, just a few hours ago, besides the rover vehicle, we also launched a small helicopter named Ingenuity that will ultimately fly in the atmosphere of another planet. Madam Speaker, we will operate a helicopter on Mars. We will also collect samples of the Martian terrain and eventually return those samples back to Earth in about 6 years for further study. However, even while I and so many others applaud and celebrate these American successes, others question our pursuit of such endeavors amid the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting economic challenges thereof. They see this endeavor as unnecessary to our survival. My response to those individuals is simple: You haven't been paying attention. You haven't been paying attention to what makes this country the greatest country this world has ever seen. As Americans, we carry an inherent desire to push ourselves forward through adversity. In mankind's evolutionary journey from the caves all the way up now to Mars, there is no greater enemy to the American spirit than complacency and self-doubt. Madam Speaker, when you look back upon our Nation's history, the truth is that there has always been a conflict or a reason not to reach further towards the next milestone of monumental exploration. But we have never let that stop us before, and we cannot allow it to stop us now. With this mission to Mars, we are inspired not only by the journey, not only by the machinery, not only by technology and this marvelous team that got us here, but by the very name of the rover vehicle: Perseverance. You see, this morning's launch of this precious payload, the combined efforts of the thousands of Americans over the last 10 years working for NASA, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, United Launch Alliance, and others is about to payoff, despite the many technical challenges, as well as the challenges that COVID-19 produced. [[Page H4180]] Just days after the 51st anniversary of the Apollo 11 Moon landing, we once again sent American hardware beyond the surly bonds of Earth toward another landmark mission. And while we celebrate this achievement of American innovation and our ability to work through challenging and seemingly impossible problems, we must also remain vigilant. While our aim and our mission are admirable, not every country carries that same passion and desire for peaceful exploration. We need look no further than the Chinese Communist Government and their willingness to antagonize us while continuing to increase their footprint in the vacuum of space. Madam Speaker, they are not a near-peer threat; they are, in fact, a peer threat, especially in this domain. It is too great a threat to our national security and the rest of the world to let their efforts go unmatched or uncontested. For the sake of science and the defense of our precious planet, we must persevere. What sets the United States of America apart from the rest of the world is our resolve, our ingenuity, and our commitment to progress for noble missions. I spoke earlier of the American spirit. It is a story of exploration, and it is a story we haven't finished writing. We continue the next chapter so that our children and our children's children may know what it means to succeed where others thought we would stumble to accomplish what others thought was impossible. And as we meet here today, two astronauts continue to orbit overhead thanks to a successful SpaceX rocket launch a couple of weeks ago that launched American astronauts from our soil to the International Space Station. Those astronauts will return in just a few short days, and today we continue writing the story for future generations with yet another mission to Mars in parallel. To not only land on Mars, but also fly a helicopter in the Martian atmosphere, we should take pride in this. We can hold Communist China accountable and limit its dangerous power grab. We can survive COVID-19 and develop and deliver a vaccine to our entire country as well as the world, and we can continue to persevere in our quest to become a multiplanetary species. We can do all of the above, and we will. History will not forgive us if we fail to do so. Madam Speaker, this evening I say, Godspeed to the Perseverance team and the thousands who have supported today's successful launch. With over a decade of preparation, today they demonstrated the true meaning of American perseverance. Mr. ROY. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from California bringing up this important topic. The news these days tend to be filled--it is not often filled with positive things that we ought to be celebrating together as Americans and the great accomplishments that we are achieving together, the great accomplishments we are achieving on a completely nonpartisan basis and advancing our continued exploration. Jim Bridenstine is a friend of mine. I am just thrilled with what he is doing with NASA. I am certainly thrilled to be seeing that we are returning to space vigorously and that we are doing so actively, and I just appreciate their service. I love the rich tradition, the connection between NASA and our military. Madam Speaker, I know that Mr. Garcia is a veteran of our United States Navy, and I thank him for his service. I appreciate him joining me here tonight. Madam Speaker, I come down here tonight for a few reasons. First of all, a few weeks ago, a young lady, a 20-year-old named Rebekah Wendt was campaigning in west Texas with another young fellow from Trinity University. I represent Trinity University in San Antonio. I got a call from my staff assistant, Jonah Wendt, that his sister had been killed an hour or two before in a car accident in west Texas. I will have more to say about Rebekah in the future, but she was a bright star and a great defender of this country, out working hard, volunteering, as many of our young folks do, on campaigns. She was a member of the Young Conservatives of Texas. She was majoring in history. She and another young fellow, again, I will talk more about, Tyler, was with her. They were out trying to make this country better. They were out trying to get someone they believed in elected. They were trying to change this country for the better by standing up for Texas, standing up for this country. I want to celebrate her life, and again, I want to do it more in the future, but her brother, Jonah, and his twin brother, Manfred, are very dear to me and worked hard on my campaign 2 years ago and continue to serve this country as well as serving in support of me. And I mention that because I do want to talk more about her another time, but I mention that because it got me to thinking about what this is all about, what we are doing. Now, for those few people at home watching on C-SPAN, I am here alone, mostly, in the Chamber with the exception of the Speaker and my friend from California. And I think about Rebekah, and I think about all of those young Americans out there working hard every day, trying to get someone elected or go fight for what they believe in. And that is what this is about. This is the people's House. This is the House of Representatives. It is really an unbelievable institution when you think about what it meant in the history of the world. I was in Independence Hall on July 2nd. I went up there because I wanted to be up there when I was watching so many of our monuments and so many of our statues under attack, and it is not the marble, it is not the mortar, it is not the bricks that matter, it was the ideals represented there. I went up to Independence Hall, and it was on July 2nd, which many will know is the day we separated from the crown, the day of the actual vote. And the folks there were very kind to me. They were closed down because of what we are dealing with with the virus. They were very kind and allowed me to go into Independence Hall. I had the great blessing of being in Independence Hall on July 2nd, 244 years to the day of the vote. Then I got to go over to the other room, which is a different room, where the first five Congresses of the United States met. Then, of course, we have a history of then moving on to different capitols, and we ended up here. And we have been in this Chamber for, I don't know the history as well as I should, but 100 years or something in this Chamber. This people's House, in my opinion, is failing the people of the United States. I am going to say that again. The people's House, the 435 Representatives that make up this half of Congress, one-half of one-third of the Federal Government is failing the American people. It is failing the American people because we literally never debate. We literally never offer amendments and have any debate here on this floor. We are ruled by a handful of folks who meet in rooms in back chambers, drop bills on the floor of the House and then demand we come down and vote on them. By the way, that is both Democrats and Republicans. The people's House is supposed to be the people's House. We are supposed to actually debate, engage. Do you want to know why things are so broken? It is because if you even dare think about offering an amendment to a bill, you have got to go to some Rules Committee to get blessed to be able to even have the ability to offer it. You will get shut down in Rules Committee, and then there is never any debate. {time} 2100 What kind of a people's House is that? I would posit that it is not one. We have so many issues right now that are tearing our country apart. Why? Because there is no leadership coming from the Representatives sent to Washington to represent the people. None. If there were leadership, we would have actual debate. We would actually sit down here and come up with ideas, offer solutions, and then hammer them out. We would actually sit down at a table like a small business or sit down at a table like a family and balance a budget. We would have a debate about the proper policies to deal with a pandemic instead of pointing fingers and politicizing a virus. [[Page H4181]] In what universe do you politicize a virus? Yet that is precisely what the leaders of this great and august country have done. Everyone in America is sitting around wondering what on Earth has happened that we are now deciding how we make policy based on polls and reactions to whatever the President says or whatever Speaker Pelosi says. It is absolutely amazing. The needle moved when President Trump said that we ought to open our schools. Simple notion: Let's open up our schools. Why might that be important? I don't know. How about for all the working-class Americans who can't afford daycare and are trying to figure out how to have their children get educated. Why aren't we having a robust debate about that instead of just pointing fingers and saying, ``Uh-oh. Be afraid''? But that is what we are doing. It is really easy for all the latte-drinking, Peloton-riding, Volvo- driving White Americans to run around going off and saying: ``Oh, I am going to go by and get my little drink, but somebody is serving me. And those people serving me, how are they going to have their kids get educated?'' It ain't going to be if we don't open our schools. Can I tell you, Madam Speaker, what they are doing in Austin, Texas? This is how genius it is in Austin, Texas. They are saying we can't open our schools until late September or some undetermined date. Oh, but don't worry. We will open the buildings, allow the YMCA to go in, hold a group forum there to watch virtual education--which now, by the way, I am seeing all sorts of stories of teachers saying: ``Well, we don't want to do the virtual education either.'' What are we doing for our children? Why aren't we debating this right now instead of having, ``Oh, President Trump said we should open our schools,'' so we are going to have a 20 percent swing in how we view opening our schools? In what universe does that statement by the President change what we should be doing as the people's House about opening our schools? Yet, that is precisely what happened. We have a current environment in the United States of America where the very rule of law, which attracts people from all over the world to come here, is being trampled upon by people--frankly, often self- identifying as Marxists--but people who are ravaging cities, literally undermining the health, security, safety, community of our cities, our States, our homes. A Federal courthouse is being targeted and burned in Portland. Now, what happens? Again, it becomes politicized. In what universe is that political? I mean, I would suggest to anybody, go look at anything I have ever said about federalism or about respecting States and respecting local powers to make decisions that are best for the people. But there is another point to all of this, which is the Constitution talks about securing the blessings of liberty. It talks about what we are supposed to do as a Nation in terms of defending the rule of law. Of course, the Federal Government should defend the Federal courthouse in Portland. To say otherwise is patently absurd. Yet, what did my Democratic colleagues do this week? What did they do when the Attorney General of the United States was here before the House Judiciary Committee but sit there and talk over him and mock him and relentlessly stand on the side of lawless Marxists who are trying to destroy a city of the United States of America instead of standing up alongside our law enforcement. What are we doing? What are we doing as a country? We are in an empty Chamber with three votes today at 6:30 tonight, two votes or three votes tomorrow, and then head home. And then what? Be gone for August while our businesses burn, literally and figuratively, while millions of Americans don't have jobs? Why are we going to adjourn? Why have we only met something like 15 out of the last 100 days, or whatever it has been? It is an absolute embarrassment what has become of the people's House. We should be ashamed. We should be ashamed that we are not here doing the work of the American people. More importantly, we should be ashamed that when we are here, we are not sitting down at a table and working through the issues of the day based on the rule of law, based on the Constitution, based on the Declaration, based on our job as Representatives to represent the people of the United States. Our police officers stand up to defend the rule of law. People come from all over the globe here. Why? Is it for what is enumerated in the Bill of Rights? Is it for what was enumerated, or laid out, in the Declaration of Independence, those unalienable rights? Yes. It is all of those things, and it is equal justice under the law, all the things that we should be fighting to strive for in order to reach those ideals that, by the way, we will never reach because we are flawed men and women. My faith teaches me that. But they are the ideals that we will constantly strive to reach. It is why, when I went to Independence Hall, I was proud to stand up and say this is a great thing that happened here. I will never back away from defending the United States of America. I stopped off where Francis Scott Key wrote our national anthem, and I did a video there. I am not going to back away from defending our national anthem and defending our history. I went from there to the Jefferson Memorial. I went to the Roosevelt monument. I went to the Lincoln Memorial. Two days ago, I took my 10-year-old son and my 9-year-old daughter to Mt. Vernon so they could see the home of the Father of our Country, George Washington, where I unapologetically taught my children about the greatness of our first President. It is important, that part. I unapologetically taught my children about the greatness of our country and of the Father of our Country. We are all flawed. We always will be because we are men and women. We are made in the image of God, but we are not God. And thank the Lord that he sent his son so that I might have eternal life because I am flawed. But we should not look at our country with shame or disregard because we have made mistakes. Yet, the other side of the aisle seems hellbent on tearing down this great country brick by brick, statue by statue, thread by thread of our flag, word by word of our anthem. It is a mockery of this House. How on Earth can you explain to a veteran who is missing limbs, who bled in the Middle East or bled at Normandy or bled in the Pacific? How can you explain to a veteran that our country is bad? Our country is not bad. Our country is great. Our country has done more for more men and more women than any other nation in the history of the world. I will debate that anywhere, anytime, with anyone who cares to actually have a debate in this so-called people's House. I will not sit here and listen to supposed representatives of this country tear her down. Right now, we have people who are hurting because of the virus, people who are hurting because they have lost jobs, people who are hurting because their businesses have gone out of business, people who are hurting because streets have been torn down or burned or because we have allowed looting to occur in the false name of social justice. What are we doing for them? Adjourning? Heading home to campaign so that people can score political points? I have had people on my own side of the aisle say perhaps they shouldn't do bills or work with certain Members on the other side of the aisle. Why? Because they don't want us to avoid the ability to score political points. I know that has happened on the other side of the aisle. How do I know that? Because Dean Phillips, a very good man, and I worked together to pass the Paycheck Protection Program Flexibility Act. And Dean, to his great credit, because he is a gentleman, deferred to me to introduce the bill because we had been working on the legislative part, and he was working on the political part. We were working together. So, I introduced the bill. We had worked to get to an agreement. It was going to move through this Chamber. Ah, but it couldn't be in the name of the Republican freshman [[Page H4182]] from Texas, who, by the way, is in a district that might be on the hot list for the DCCC. Coincidence that they then took the same language and dropped it into another bill with my friend from Minnesota--no fault of his own--and put it under his name and then said, ``Great. Let's move it through''? And it passed 417-1. Yes, Madam Speaker, I am looking at Congressman Massie, with a little bit of love. Why? This is what the American people are sick and tired of. They are literally just sick of it. We can disagree, and we are going to disagree. Dean and I disagree. The Speaker pro tempore and I disagree on issues. But we also agree. I was proud to join the Speaker pro tempore in January, along with Dean and another Democrat, three Republicans and an independent. You can guess who the independent was. Why? To write an op-ed in The Washington Post saying: Hold on here. Maybe we should rethink a 20- year-old Authorization for Use of Military Force. Now, do I have all the answers to what we should do in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Iran? I do not. It is okay to say that, by the way. It is okay to say you don't have all the answers. But we got together to say maybe, just maybe we should rethink 20- year-old authorizations of force when there are men and women who are now enlisting who weren't alive when we passed them. Just a couple of weeks ago, we had a 12-tour veteran, I think a marine, who killed himself. Twelve tours, Madam Speaker. What are we doing? Why aren't we having a debate about that? With all due respect to some of my friends on this side of the aisle, endless wars are not an answer. Neither is allowing bad actors to run amok around the world against our national security interests or that of our allies. So why must it always be, when we get to budget time: ``Well, we have to have more money. We are going to keep defense. We are going to keep things going. We are going to have OCO. We are going to do this. We are going to spend more money to keep the wars going, whatever DOD wants''? Why is it on the other side of the aisle too often: ``Well, an endless amount of dollars for nondefense discretionary spending, but whatever. We don't care about $26 trillion of debt. Let's just pass a bill. Let's just get it done so we can do something. And you get what you want, and you get what you want, and we spend another extra trillion dollars''? By the way, Madam Speaker, I would say to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Schweikert), a trillion dollars sounds kind of quaint, doesn't it? A trillion dollars sounds kind of quaint now. I don't even know where we are. Does anybody in this Chamber have the first clue what our national deficit is going to be this year? No. We don't have a clue because we are spending money hand over fist. Why? Because we are trying to deal with a pandemic that, frankly, our own public actions and public governments are causing a hell of a lot of the very damage we are trying to bail out. State and local governments are taking actions, which basically are tantamount to takings, shutting down people's livelihoods. Then, they just walk away and shake their hands, and they go, ``Well, I guess the Federal Government will bail them out.'' Governors, mayors: ``Sorry, bars, shut down. Sorry, restaurants, shut down. Sorry, barbershops, shut down. Sorry, live music venues, shut down. Sorry, artists who have to sing in the live music venue, you are shut down. Sorry, churches, you can't worship.'' {time} 2115 Madam Speaker, I am sitting here in this Chamber, wondering what it is going to take for the House of Representatives to actually represent. We don't govern. That is not what we do in America. We represent. We each represent whatever we represent, 700,000, 800,000 people, depending on the district. We are here to share their values and beliefs and reach some point of actual responsible leadership and do our job. But I have to say something here. The President of the United States, he draws a lot of fire. The President of the United States ran in 2016 on what? Build the wall. Drain the swamp. And what does drain the swamp mean? I would tell you that, whatever you think of the President, drain the swamp means everything I am just talking about and 1,000 other things that are irritating the American people every single day about why this government, and particularly this Congress, can't do its job, why bureaucrats stand in the way of what the people want, why judges make up the law, and why Congress can't balance a budget. That is the swamp. The swamp represents the frustration of the American people who, while extremely willing to have people come to this country with open arms, also want their border to be secure. They don't want cartels running the border. They don't want 900,000 people coming to our border being apprehended and having to deal with it. They don't want cartels to abuse women and children on the journey. They don't want fentanyl pouring across our border, and that is the state of our border. If the President of the United States should dare to say we should have a secure border, what happened? Colleagues on the other side of the aisle went to the border and lied about the state of the border with respect to kids in cages and kids drinking out of toilets. I went there. My chief of staff went down there the week after claims were made about kids drinking out of toilets, and they were toilets that have water fountains attached to them. But this is the hyperbole that drives public opinion, gets out in social media, and undermines the one thing that almost all Americans understand is critically important, and that is to have border security where cartels don't run our border. That is not a controversial statement. By the way, it is not just my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. There are a whole lot of people on my side of the aisle who love to sit there at the Rio Grande and have a little sign that says ``no trespassing,'' and then they wink, wink, nod, nod, over here, and they have a ``help wanted'' sign. How about we have an honest conversation about what a secure border looks like? Why don't we sit down at a table and actually do that? I am sick and tired of Republicans who 10 years ago were saying to those of us who thought we should have a secure border because we knew what was happening, and we saw what the cartels were doing, and we saw the hordes of human trafficking, and we saw the dead bodies in deserts, and people in our own party were saying: Well, fences are a 19th century solution to a 21st century problem. Now, because it is a politically charged thing, the President is for it and it has become partisan, they say: Well, yeah, we are all for it. When are we going to do our job, Republicans and Democrats, to do that, to secure the border of the United States, not because we don't want to welcome immigrants, but because it is the responsible thing for a government to do? Why would we let the Reynosa faction of the Gulf cartel run the border in the Rio Grande Valley? That is precisely what we are doing. Why would we allow fentanyl to pour across the border? Why would we allow addicts in our country to have a constant supply coming through from Mexico, across our border, through Texas, through Arizona, through to Mexico, through California? Why would we do that? It defies all rationality. It makes no sense. Yet, that is what we do, and the American people are sick and tired of it. Giving credit where it is due, the President of the United States has tried to attack that problem, and he has met resistance from the swamp at every turn. He has met resistance from our Democratic colleagues, met resistance from bureaucrats at DHS, met resistance from bureaucrats throughout the administration when he is trying to do what the American people elected him to do. When we stand up saying that we should defend the rule of law and stand beside law enforcement, what happens? The swamp pushes back and says: No, we can't do that. Heaven forbid we have Federal law enforcement protecting a courthouse. Who would have thought? [[Page H4183]] The swamp pushes back. Right now, we are facing the struggles that we are dealing with, with respect to the pandemic. I suspect that my friend from Arizona is here to talk a little bit about the data on that. I could be wrong. I think I am right. There is a lot of stuff that we should be looking at about this virus. It is a virus. It is not something you bottle up into a Tupperware container and put on the shelf. It is a virus. It is out. It is among us. It is in all 50 States. It is in every city and town. It is a virus. What are we going to do as a country to work through it? Cower in fear? Be afraid to actually look at the data? Be afraid to actually talk to doctors who might have an opposing or different view than the powers that be at the CDC or the NIH? Let me be clear. I don't know Dr. Fauci other than having interacted with him in a hearing or a setting like this. I don't know Dr. Birx other than similarly engaging as an official. But they are not the President. They are not an elected Member of Congress. They are not an elected Member of the Senate. Why aren't we having hearings with different alternative views from other health professionals, other doctors? There is a large number of doctors, not insignificant, with differing opinions: Ioannidis at Stanford University; Scott Atlas at Stanford; Oxford put out recent reports; Dr. Risch at Yale, talking about the possible efficacy and success with HCQ, hydroxychloroquine. I am not a doctor. I don't know whether HCQ works, but I would like to know. And I would like to have the right to try. Why is it, in the United States of America, a supposedly free country, a doctor cannot prescribe HCQ in certain circumstances? Or why are States preventing that? Or why are doctors at the CDC or NIH preventing that when there is evidence, studies, to the contrary, when it is sold off-the-shelf in other countries around the world because it is a malaria medicine? Why would we not have a debate about that? You have doctors going across the street at the Supreme Court of the United States, doing a press conference. I don't know them, but they are doctors, M.D.s, and they give a press conference saying how they think HCQ works as a prophylactic. What happens? It is censored by Big Tech, shut down as being potentially misleading. Does that not concern my colleagues on the other side of the aisle? That is a genuine question that I would actually like to know the answer to. But I won't know because the 200-and-some-odd colleagues are out doing whatever they are doing right now, going to dinner, doing their thing, going home, will come in tomorrow. We will rush in here, and we will have three votes. We will never actually debate it, will we? We will not actually debate it. Instead, everybody will go to Twitter. Everybody will go to the press conferences. People will point. They will call doctors crazy. They will say it is no good, and we will never know, or we won't know unless we fight through it to try to figure it out ourselves, not doing the hard work of this body to figure out whether HCQ is a good prophylactic or not. Again, I am not advocating for it. I am advocating for--it is unbelievable to have to say this--I am advocating for actually investigating it, debating it, finding the truth, and not censoring it. But that is what is happening. Why are we always saying how bad we are doing as a country right now? For the longest time: ``We are not testing. We are not testing. We are not testing.'' We have done over 50 million tests. Are they the right tests? Are we testing the right way? Maybe we should have a good, robust debate about that. But we had over 50 million tests. We are testing at a rate only surpassed by, I think, three other countries. I think we are fourth. I could be wrong. I think that is right. No, the rate, the testing, we are fourth. We have 50 million tests, more than any other country in the world. We are testing by the thousands in Texas. And all the eyes have been recently on Florida, Texas, and Arizona. Again, I am sure my friend from Arizona will have some data on this, but these States which have had, yes, an increase in the last several weeks, tragically, we are concerned. We are watching it. Our Governor is all over it. We are paying attention to it, but it has become a political football. The total numbers in all of those States still pale in comparison to New York and New Jersey, in terms of fatalities. I have no real interest in sitting here and pointing fingers at the Democratic Governor of New York or the mayor of New York, talking about how they failed versus how we succeeded or not succeeded, or whatever. Why are we doing that? Why aren't we just sitting down together and working together to try to figure out what the right policies are? Dare I talk about masks? Am I allowed to talk about masks? It is a genuine question. Am I actually allowed to talk about masks? Yet, the Speaker of the House of Representative said--by the way, putting aside our constitutional duty to represent our constituents and vote on the floor of this House--that somehow that is a breach of decorum. And oh, by the way, I am sure all the 12 viewers of this, when they take their viewers, my opponents will all say: ``Oh, he is an anti- masker.'' I have had this mask since April. My wife sewed a HEPA filter in here. It is a really good mask. It is not one of those flimsy old cotton masks that, by the way, were made fun of or said were inadequate by the NIH 5 years ago in a study. Yet, we go around, and as long as you virtue signal that you are wearing a cotton mask, everybody says: Aren't you really important? Aren't you just loving your country? Are we doing what we are supposed to do to actually make our country safer? Does anybody here know for certain? Does anybody know when I am sitting on an airplane, and the guy two rows over has a cotton mask kind of dangling down--it is just sitting there. And, oh, the flight attendant says, ``Good job. You got your mask on.'' Is that making me safer? How about when you wear an N95 mask with one of those little valves? Have we finally gotten around to the side of saying: Oh, we all raced to get those, but no, you have got the valve. It is kicking too much air out, and that is going to hurt people? Why am I saying all that? I am not saying don't wear a mask. What I am saying is, for goodness sake, this isn't the gospel handed down as to what precisely is the right way to do it when our own Dr. Fauci was questioning masks mere months ago, when our own NIH was questioning it, when there was report after report about it, when Denmark and Sweden and Finland and all of these other Nordic countries aren't wearing masks. ``Oh, no, he is talking about masks. He is an anti-masker.'' That is what it is all about now. Get on Twitter, bash somebody. They are a nutball. When are we going to look at the data and try to do the thing that we need to do to lead this country forward? Do we know what we are doing to children right now? Do we have any idea? We have our own CDC Director talking about the number of suicides outpacing the number of deaths from COVID. I love my 10-year-old son. I love my 9-year-old daughter. I would give my life for them at any given moment, but they are going back to school on August 20 because it is good for them. {time} 2130 But there are so many children in this country who are not going to be going back to school because we have scared the bejesus out of the entire country. We are America. We cured polio. We put a man on the Moon. We beat Nazi Germany. We beat Japan. And we are cowering in the corner about a virus. Let's look at the numbers. Let's protect the elderly. Let's protect the people in nursing homes. But, for goodness' sake, let's open our schools, and don't let teachers' unions hide behind a virus to pretend they don't want something else when they do, and we know they do. The President of the United States ought to call a hearing and bring in Scott Atlas, bring in Dr. Ioannidis, bring in Dr. Rishi, bring in some of the Oxford folks, and bring in other doctors to talk about the science. Let's have a [[Page H4184]] full discussion about this. Let's show the American people they can go back to work, they can go back to school, and they can do it safely. We are destroying our economy, the greatest economy in the history of the world. Forty-five percent of Black businesses have gone out of business over the last 5 months. Do you want to talk about Black lives mattering? How about those 45 percent of businesses? I guess that doesn't look good on the mound for Major League Baseball, does it? I guess that doesn't fit on the back of a jersey for the NBA, does it? It doesn't fit on one of those cute little stickers that the NFL likes to put on their helmets so they can feel good about themselves as social justice warriors. Who cares about those families that are destroyed because their businesses are gone? But that is what we are doing by our own judgment and by our own decisions. We should be ashamed. The people's House. Look at it, Madam Speaker, it is empty. I don't know who is running your C-SPAN cameras. Take a broad view. Show the American people the people's House in all its glory, cycling in your Representatives to come in like robots and vote and walk out and then vote and then walk out and spend all day voting but never actually debating or talking. By the way, 20 or 30 or 40 of them are voting from boats and voting from their homes using proxy voting. What is a proxy vote? I am glad you asked. A proxy vote is when someone isn't actually doing their constitutional duty of voting here in this Chamber. A proxy vote is someone sitting at home and telling another Member to vote for them, delegating the nondelegable. Our Constitution doesn't provide for that. In 1793, our Founding Fathers were fighting yellow fever. Five thousand people had died in Philadelphia out of 50,000--10 percent. Washington, Madison, Jefferson, and Adams found a way to meet. They were debating: How can we do this adhering to the Constitution? Heaven forbid we adhere to the Constitution. We have a duty to be in this Chamber. We have survived wars and we have survived other pandemics. This stuff isn't foreign to me. My dad is a survivor of polio. It is real. He has got a tracheostomy. He walks with a limp and he can barely get around. But he is 77 years old, and he is alive because his mom fought through being a single mom in west Texas after she lost my grandfather, who died of cancer when my dad was 7, and here is my grandmother finding out her son has polio in September of 1949. My dad comes home from the hospital to say good-bye to his dad, whom he had only known for 2 years because his dad had been in the Pacific theater. Then my grandmother runs and becomes the first woman elected county clerk in Nolan County, Texas. She helps my dad, gets up at 4 in the morning, goes and does therapy. He was the first to go on to college. I am the first to go on to graduate school, and here I am in Congress. It is the American story. It is the American story we ought to be proud to share, proud to push, and proud to champion. But instead we are sitting here in an empty Chamber running people through and voting on things that likely have no chance of becoming law. In fact, we know these appropriations bills have no chance of becoming law. We know it. Yet we are showing the American people that we are ``doing something.'' Do you want to know what the swamp is? It is that. It is a disease, Madam Speaker. Do somethingitis. We have to show the people we are doing something when you are doing literally nothing. That is what this Chamber is about. It should be about something better, more, and bigger. We can disagree violently about certain issues and policies, but why can't we come together to balance our budget? Why can't we come together to figure out how to fight a pandemic without politicizing it? Yet that is precisely what we are doing. May I ask the Speaker how much time is remaining. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas has 14 minutes remaining. Mr. ROY. Madam Speaker, it was 9 years, last night, I was in an emergency room in Austin, Texas. I had fluid on my lungs and I didn't know what was going on. I found out 2 days later, 3 days later, it was likely, and then turned out to be, stage III Hodgkin's lymphoma. It was kind of a curve ball one gets when you have got a 4-month-old daughter, 2-year-old son, and a wife scared out of her mind. I remember the prayers and I remember the calls. I remember all of it like it was yesterday. I can't believe it has been 9 years. Governor Perry, for whom I worked at the time, couldn't have been a better man or gentleman trying to help us get through it. I went down to MD Anderson and did a trial drug that is now the standard of care. I am alive today because of that and because of the great doctor I had at MD Anderson. I remember when going through that, of course, you don't know what the outcome is going to be. It wasn't until October I remember being down there with my wife when we got the news that the cancer was clear. I had to finish treatment through January of 2012. It changes your perspective. Now, everybody in this Chamber has personally dealt with something like that. I can't even imagine what my friend Andy Barr is going through in losing his lovely wife. I can't imagine what folks who have known Representative Lewis for decades are going through. I can't imagine what Chairman Nadler has been going through with his wife's battle with cancer. We could go around the room. All of us deal with these kinds of things. But I will acknowledge that, for me, that was intensely personal, getting a cancer diagnosis at age whatever I was at the time, 39. But the reason I am bringing it up here is because as I think, through this virus right now--it is a virus. I know it is bad. I know it is scary. I know there are people who have lost loved ones. But our reaction to it does not represent the greatest of this country, in my opinion. I don't mean that we are not testing enough or we are not getting enough announcements out about masks. I mean, loved ones who are dying alone. Let me be perfectly clear that if any of my loved ones get this virus, they are not dying alone. No local judge, no local mayor, no local Governor, no President, and no Member of this body is going to stop me from seeing my loved one. But that is because I am stubborn. But we are forcing that environment on a lot of people who don't know how to fight a system. Why would we allow that to happen in America? Why? But that is what we are doing. Why would we do what we are doing to children out of fear? Again, I promised myself I would lay down everything I have to defend and save this Republic for my kids and my grandkids, my now 10-year-old son and 9-year-old daughter who are with me here this week. But I would be doing them a disservice if I held them back from going to school. I know all the arguments. Well, they go to school and then the teachers will take it home to someone else. Madam Speaker, if we look at the data, look at who is likely to get hit by this virus, we should be adults about this. We are leaders. We set the tone. Fear is not the tone we should be setting as a nation. Yet that is precisely what we are doing. We should not be letting loved ones die alone. We should not be doing what we are doing to children. By the way, I talked about cancer. I was blessed that I got a diagnosis at stage III. What if I had been sick this year? What if it had gotten into my bones with stage IV? That is happening to Americans right now. Do we ever talk about that on the floor, or is everybody running around talking about 150,000 dead Americans because it is the President's fault? Why aren't we talking about the suicide rates? Why aren't we talking about the opioid addiction? Why aren't we talking about the cancer screenings that aren't occurring? Why aren't we talking about the suicide? Veteran suicides are increasing. People are feeling alone, and it is scarring our children. That is not what a great country does. [[Page H4185]] Madam Speaker, we are a great country, and we should darn well start acting like it again. Let's debate on the floor here what we should be doing with our military abroad authorizations of force. Let's secure the border of the United States and not allow the swamp to stand in the way of common sense. Let's stand up for law enforcement, secure our communities, and don't let people run over streets and burn down buildings. Let's stand up in the face of a virus. Let's say we are going to defeat it, and let's damn well defeat it. It is who we are as a people. It is in our DNA. It has been since our founding. It has been there through all the wars. It has been there through previous pandemics. And it is with us here now if we will just tap into it. This should not be partisan. I look at both directions when I say that. It should not be partisan. I cannot believe we are sitting here in an environment where we have allowed a virus to become partisan, but that is precisely what we have done. Madam Speaker, I am not going to take up too much more time. I know that the gentleman from Arizona has been patiently waiting. I didn't even start to bring up my charts and talk about numbers because I could never do battle with the gentleman from Arizona when it comes to presenting that kind of information. I know he will do it well. But I do know this: We are a great country that is doing great things right now to combat this virus. I do know that my physician is a great man. Dr. Yunis grew up in Damascus, Syria. I asked Dr. Yunis: Doc, I am stage III. I have a 4-month-old, a 2- year-old, and a wife. I am 39. What am I looking at? Dr. Yunis looked at me and said: I am not going to give you a percentage. Later he gave me one because I made him give me one. He said: I am not going to give you a percentage. For you, it is zero percent or 100 percent. Choose 100 percent. When are we going to choose 100 percent? When are we as a body, when are we as the Senate, when are we as the White House, when are we together on a nonpartisan basis going to choose 100 percent behind this country, 100 percent for the rule of law, 100 percent standing alongside of our law enforcement keeping our communities safe, 100 percent that we are going to have our kids go back to school, we are going to get back to work, we are going to lift our economy up, and we are going to prove that the 21st century is going to be the greatest century that this country has ever known, not because we are cowering in fear, but because we are facing these things head-on? That is what 100 percent means. That is what being an American means. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. ____________________
All in House sectionPrev52 of 95Next