Monday Feb 11 in Congress

page 1

Source is the daily Congressional Record:

https://www.congress.gov/116/crec/2019/02/11/CREC-2019-02-11.pdf

House of Representatives

Rep Jones, NC, passed away.

Morning prayer remembers John Dingell, who "served in the people’s House for over one-quarter of its existence."

Bills:

H.R. 1063, Presidential Library Donation Reform Act of 2019 (page H1497)

Passed

Requires disclosure of Presidential Library donor.

H.R. 1065, Social Media Use in Clearance Investigations Act of 2019 (H1498)

Passed 377-3 (nays were Biggs, Gaetz, and Gohmert)

OMB will study and report.

H.R. 1064, to allow whistleblowers to disclose information to certain recipients (H1499)

Passed.

Whistleblowers now protected when disclosing to supervisors.

H.R. 995, Settlement Agreement Information Database Act of 2019 (H1500)

No quorum.

Public database of settlement agreements involving Federal Government.

H.R. 1079, Creating Advanced Streamlined Electronic Services for Constituents Act of 2019 (H1502)

Passed 379-0

Electronic privacy release forms so Representatives can help with federal agencies.

H. Res. 121, the House has heard with profound sorrow of the death of the Honorable Walter B. Jones, a Representative from the State of North Carolina.

Passed

Senate

[Debate on S 47, the long and detailed lands management bill, continues.]

CLOTURE MOTION, on the motion to proceed to H.J. Res. 1, making further continuing appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for fiscal year 2019, and for other purposes.

No quorum.

Amendment No. 187, To limit the extension or establishment of national monuments in the State of Utah (S1156-S1160)

Tabled 60-33 (nays incl Grassley, McConnell, Paul) (S1160)

CLOTURE MOTION, S 47 a bill to provide for the management of the natural resources of the United States

Passed 87-7 (S1161)

Other detailed land management act amendments passed.

Excerpts from Speeches

PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY REFORM ACT (H1497)

Rep HILL, CA: "Presidential libraries have become increasingly expensive as they have evolved into multipurpose centers."

"The George W. Bush Presidential Center, for example cost an estimated $250 million to build, and President Bush raised approximately $500 million for the building and an endowment for his library, museum, and institute."

"Although President Obama has raised hundreds of millions of dollars for his Presidential library, he has voluntarily disclosed the names of those who have donated $200 or more. We should not, however, rely on such voluntary disclosures."

"Under current law, there is no requirement to disclose the identities of those who donate to a Presidential library, and a President, while still in office, is able to raise an unlimited amount from private donations.

There is no limitation on who can donate to a sitting President for a Presidential library, or how much they can donate, and their identities remain secret. This bill would require organizations that raise money to build Presidential libraries to disclose the identity of any individual who donates more than $200."

>>5161113

Monday Feb 11 in Congress

page 2

REQUEST TO CONSIDER H.R. 962, BORN-ALIVE ABORTION SURVIVORS PROTECTION ACT (H1506)

[Same dialogue every day]

Mr. WALKER. "Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 962, the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House."

The SPEAKER pro tempore. "Under guidelines consistently issued by successive Speakers, and recorded in section 956 of the House Rules and Manual the Chair is constrained not to entertain the request unless it has been cleared by the bipartisan floor and committee leaderships."

Mr. WALKER. "Mr. Speaker, if this unanimous consent request cannot be entertained, I urge the Speaker and the majority leader to immediately schedule the born-alive bill so we can stand up and protect the sanctity of human life, and I would ask all others to join that request."

The SPEAKER pro tempore. "The gentleman has not been recognized for debate."

BORDER SECURITY (H1507)

Ms. JACKSON LEE. "I think in all fairness, the clarity on the question of detention beds is to make sure that the criminals are detained and to make sure that women and children, like little 9-month-old Roger, have alternative housing."

Ms. CHENEY. "Democrats are demanding that ICE release dangerous criminals onto the streets of the United States.

First, they demanded that we not build a wall. Their leader said that would be immoral. Now they are demanding that we release dangerous criminals we have already apprehended.

Mr. Speaker, they are threatening to shut the government down, they are so committed to this position."

BORDER SECURITY (H1508)

"House Democrats have other ideas.

They argue that allowing ICE to increase adult detention beds from 40,000 to 52,000 is actually a bad idea—unbelievable."

"Instead of providing additional beds and allowing our Border Patrol agents to do their jobs, they have actually proposed to knock that number down to 35,000."

BORDER SECURITY (H1509)

Mr. GAETZ. "The caravans that are forming in Central and South America and coming toward our southern border aren’t shrinking; they are growing. That is why Democrats don’t want us to be able to lock up all the people who commit the crime of unlawful entry into the country, because they want to induce that illegal immigration."

"It is like we are negotiating against a ghost. We are tired of it, and the American people are tired of it."

ISSUES OF THE DAY. (H1509)

Mr. WALKER. [Reading letter from the National Sheriffs Association]

" 'Dear Chairwoman NITA LOWEY and Ranking Member KAY GRANGER: On behalf of more than 3,000 sheriffs represented by both the National Sheriffs’ Association and the Major County Sheriffs of America, we write in opposition to Congress’ most recent deliberation to place an artificial cap on Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s detention capacity.' "

" 'Approximately 72 percent of ICE’s current detention population is subject to mandatory detention due to the alien having certain convictions or having committed certain acts.' "

Mr. YOHO. (H1511) "Just last week, there was a bust of drugs coming in from Mexico in a load of bell peppers that had over 1,000 pounds of methamphetamines.

Two weeks before that, there was a bust of a legal truck coming in carrying cucumbers from the southern border through Mexico that had over 200 pounds of fentanyl."

"the methamphetamine and the fentanyl that is coming in, these aren’t coming in by the honest farmer or ranch hand or farmworker in Mexico. These are orchestrated by drug cartels.

Keep in mind, the methamphetamine and the fentanyl coming into this country primarily comes via China, so you have nation-states that are sending products into this country. China is trying to re-create the Opium Wars of the 1800s with our youth in this country."

Monday Feb 11 in Congress

page 3

Mr. WALKER. "Speaking of God’s creation, Mr. Speaker, our Speaker of the House, just 3 days ago, sent this tweet out that I will read. She said: 'We have a moral responsibility to protect God’s creation for generations to come.' That is why, today, she was naming a select committee not on the sanctity of human life, but on climate control."

(H1512)

There are 300 opioid deaths a week in this country alone but that is just the tip of the iceberg.

A good friend of mine, he is a heart surgeon in Gainesville, Florida. He said: TED, that is just the tip of it. I have a young lady in and it is her fourth heart valve replacement. At 25 years of age, the fourth heart valve replacement, because as they use the drugs, they don’t use sterile techniques. They get infected. Their immune system goes down, and the bacteria will grow on the heart valve. Her fourth one.

I said: Tom, what is the cost of that?

He said: The average heart valve is close to $100,000.

$400,000, and if she dies, she doesn’t die from a drug overdose. In the records, it is from heart failure."

GOVERNMENT FUNDING (S1151)

Mr. MCCONNELL. "Mr. President, as recently as a few days ago, our government funding discussions seemed to be in a pretty good place. Bipartisan, bicameral negotiations on finishing out the year’s appropriations process seemed to be right on track."

"But then over the weekend, we heard that the talks had suddenly hit a snag. The bipartisan momentum had stalled. What went wrong? Here is what happened. The House Democrats decided to add a poison pill demand into the conversations at the eleventh hour. It is a new demand. It is really extreme—a hard statutory cap on the number of illegal immigrants who could be detained by the Federal Government This would result in the release of thousands of criminal aliens and our inability to detain thousands more criminal aliens whom our Federal and State law enforcement authorities will apprehend.

This is a poison pill that no administration—not this one, not the previous one—would or should ever accept. Imagine the absurdity of this. House Democrats want to set a limit on how many criminal aliens our government can detain. This is a limit that is not based on any aspect of reality, such as how many criminal aliens there actually are or what crimes they have committed; it is just an arbitrary number a couple of lawmakers have pulled out of thin air. The consequence of such an arbitrary limit is obvious Thousands of criminal aliens would simply be released into the interior of our country, both immediately and then on a rolling basis into the future."

S. 47 (S1152)

Mr. MANCHIN. "In my view, one of the most important provisions in the bill is the permanent—I repeat, the permanent—reauthorization of the Land and Water Conservation Fund. I have long supported the permanent reauthorization of the LWCF, which has played a crucial role in making my State all the more wild and wonderful. In fact, since 1965, $243 million of LWCF funds have been spent to enhance recreation and conservation in West Virginia alone."

"While LWCF funds are used to protect important Federal conservation and recreation lands, the program also provides essential funding to States to enhance State and local park and outdoor recreational opportunities. These are not free giveaways to States but, rather, they are matching grants that result in increased recreational opportunities at the State and local levels."

"Over the years, more than $625,000 in State Land and Water Conservation funds has been spent on improvements at Ritter Park…"

(S1153)

Ms. MURKOWSKI "We have been working on this bill with not only Senator CANTWELL and Senator MANCHIN but with the chairman and ranking member of the House Natural Resources Committee."

"I make mention of the contributions of a few Members on our side and a few Members on the Democratic side who have really been engaged with us throughout this process—Senator GARDNER, Senator DAINES, Senator WYDEN, Senator HEINRICH—and of the dozens of Members who are on this measure as cosponsors. We truly appreciate it."

"So over the course of several years and multiple Congresses, both the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and the House Natural Resources Committee have held dozens of hearings and business meetings to prepare the more than 100 bills we have now incorporated into S. 47. So when you think about again, the process that goes into it—this is endless hours, countless hours of Member time, of staff time that go into these meetings as we work on very local priorities and then drafting the legislative text and refining it to make it right and refining it yet again to make it right."

>>5161136

Monday Feb 11 in Congress

page 4

"The Southeast Tourism Society wrote that 'S. 47 has earned the enthusiastic support of the travel and tourism industry.' "

"In the bill, we also authorize individual title transfers to California and Oklahoma. These provisions will greatly improve water management and incentivize capital investment in water infrastructure while conserving water resources and protecting public safety."

S. 47 (S1156)

"Mr. LEE. Madam President, a little over a month ago, I stood before this body to object to the massive public lands package that it was poised to pass. This bill, some 680 pages long, was released at 10 a.m. that morning— that very morning when they first wanted us to pass this. My staff and I had not seen it beforehand, and we had been given no time to read it. This is, of course, really bad process—terrible process."

"This bill perpetuates a terrible standard for Federal land policy in the West, particularly for the State of Utah.

To give one some background, the Federal Government owns more than 640 million acres of land. This is a staggering amount of real estate—an amount of land that in its totality is larger than the entireties of France, Spain, Germany, Poland, Italy, the United Kingdom, Austria, Switzerland, and the Netherlands combined—all of them."

"Do you see this? Federal public land is not distributed evenly across the entire country. It is distributed in such a way that the West bears a disproportionate burden. In fact, my home State of Utah is a place that itself bears a disproportionate burden, a disproportionate share of that land, with two-thirds of the land being owned by the Federal Government."

"The result? Well, it has been used for more Federal land acquisition than to actually care for, access, and manage the land that we already have, and 61 percent of funds have historically been used for acquisition, compared to the 25 percent that has historically been allocated to State grants. So millions of acres of land have been added to the Federal Government’s already vast estate solely through the LWCF program.

Not surprisingly, the Federal Government has not always been a good steward of this land, and that is putting it mildly. Look, the sheer magnitude of unfunded needs on Federal lands is itself staggering."

"Furthermore, none of the current LWCF funds—not any of them—are directed toward maintenance or upkeep of these lands, including within our national parks."

"Second, the bill creates another 1.3 million acres of wilderness in the West—half of that being in Emery County, UT.

Now, at the outset, I want to say that wilderness designations might sound like a good thing, and sometimes they are. But this highly restrictive designation limits far more activities than is necessary in many, many instances to actually protect the land.

In fact, a wilderness designation prohibits almost all human activity. This land usually cannot be used for any commercial activity or any infrastructure. It cannot be developed for recreational purposes or traveled across by car, bus, automobile, or even a bicycle—even a bicycle made for that specific purpose—to say nothing of any type of agricultural development or timber harvesting. In a State like Utah, where the Federal Government owns more than two-thirds of the land, these designations have big consequences, especially for the poor and middle class in my State."

"Finally, this bill does nothing to address the imminent threat that Utah faces from unilateral Executive land grabs through the Antiquities Act. To be clear, anything and everything that is designated as red on this map may be designated as a national monument overnight, at any moment, solely at the discretion of the President. Anything here is fair game to any President, at any time, to say: I now make you a monument."

"Take, for example, the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, designated by President Clinton in 1996. The Clinton administration designated 1.7 million acres of land—or about 67 percent of Kane County, UT, for the monument, all the while claiming that grazing would remain at historical levels.

But this promise, of course, was not kept. Since then, the BLM has revoked permits and closed much needed range land. You see, the men and women of the Bureau of Land Management, while well educated, well intentioned, and perhaps hard-working in many instances, are not from Utah."

>>5161149

Monday Feb 11 in Congress

page 5

"Today, grazing is down almost one-third from what it had been more than two decades ago when the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument was proclaimed by President Clinton— proclaimed and designated as such, by the way, without any advance notice to the people of Utah, without the President even entering the State of Utah to do it.

Now, ranchers were hit hard. Many of them lost their ability to fence in water resources and maintain roads around them. In some cases, they could no longer bring water to their cattle, and many families were forced to reduce their herds, sometimes by half. This may not sound like much to someone who doesn’t understand ranching or doesn’t know anyone who makes their living off of ranching, but this means all the world to those people whose families for generations have supported themselves through ranching and ranching in that area where they are deeply connected to this land."

"What was intended to be an act of cultural preservation has, sadly, deteriorated into a greedy, harmful Federal land grab. As it currently stands, there is always the threat of a decision coming down from on high that will utterly decimate the livelihoods of people in Utah. There is no good reason for this."

"Protection of our lands will happen without the Federal Government’s thumb on the scale, and it will happen in a way that actually makes these treasures more available for future generations. We will not be helping them preserve them, however, by denying access to the people who are in the best position themselves to preserve them; that is, the people who live and work and recreate on them, the people whose lives are interwoven with them and have been for generations."

(S1160 - S1161)

Ms. MURKOWSKI. "Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to enter into a colloquy with my colleague from California, Senator FEINSTEIN.

While I was pleased that we could reach agreement to include a designation of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta National Heritage Area in the substitute amendment, I want to clarify what this designation does and, perhaps more importantly, what it does not do.

The purpose of this designation, as with congressionally designated National Heritage Areas in general, is to celebrate the region’s history and cultural heritage by promoting education, tourism, recreation, and other historic values. It also creates the opportunity for Federal participation in promoting these regional attributes.

In no way does this designation implicate or interfere with any water facilities or operations associated with the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. We are not creating new regulatory authority or modifying existing regulatory authority, including those related to land or water use, at any level of government.

Further, S. 47 includes protections to ensure that private property will not be impacted by the designation, protections that apply to the ownership and use of water rights both inside and outside of the National Heritage Area’s boundary.

I ask Senator FEINSTEIN, you have championed this National Heritage Area designation for quite some time.

In her view, have I properly characterized the intended effect of this designation?"

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. "I thank my colleague from Alaska and appreciate her help with this measure. Yes, her characterization of this provision is exactly right. There is no intent that this designation will have any impact on water rights or water-related management decisions."

"I am pleased that we have included additional language to dispel any such concerns and make absolutely certain that no one reads anything into the legislation that is not there and was never intended."

"I thank her for including this designation in S. 47 and for all of her work to move this historic public lands package forward. The public lands package includes a number of provisions that will benefit California, and I appreciate her leadership in building bipartisan agreement to steer it through the Senate."

Ms. MURKOWSKI. "I thank Senator FEINSTEIN. As we have explained, the purpose of this designation is straightforward and intended to promote and celebrate the cultural heritage of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta region, without any broader implications on water or land management."

>>5161165

Monday Feb 11 in Congress

page 6

BORDER SECURITY (S1162)

Mr. LANKFORD. "Mr. President, 2 1/2

weeks ago, Democrats and Republicans—the House, the Senate, and the White House—agreed to reopen the government for 3 weeks to be able to continue negotiations on border security.

It was a pretty straightforward conversation. President Trump said: We trust you on this.

We agreed to reopen the government for 3 weeks to focus on border security.

Now it appears that based on the negotiations that are happening right now in this building, this has become a Lucy-and-the-football-type negotiation because this doesn’t seem to be about border security anymore.

My Democratic colleagues have said: Now we want to add one thing. We will vote for fencing at the border as long as you agree to defund a section of ICE.

The whole negotiation now is this: Yes, we will add border fencing, but you have to agree to defund ICE.

Here is the way that works. Their agreement is this: You will have to limit the number of people that ICE can detain."

"Coyotes now try for any adult who is coming to try to have them bring a child with them because they know if a child travels with the adult, they are going to get a special lane into the country, as if they are coming as a family. They get their own fast lane into being released into the country.

If you have this ICE detainer cap, coyotes will know: Bring people in mass migration because ICE can’t release enough people at once. So if you come as a thousand across the border or 500 across the border, they have to be released into the country because ICE can’t quickly release 500 people from detention to add the new 500 people who are coming through.

My Democratic colleagues also know that it currently takes about 41 days for someone who is in detention to go through the whole process to get a hearing and get finished. This would accelerate the process of getting those people out and released into the country, rather than getting them through the actual hearing.

The better solution on this is to add judges and actually get people to go through the process and get due process faster, instead of releasing people into the country. Once someone crosses our border illegally and they are released into the country, the vast majority of those individuals never get deported because they either don’t show up for the hearing at all or, when they do show up for the hearing and they are told, no, you can’t legally stay, they disappear.

This cap negotiation that is going on right now is exactly the wrong direction to go. It is not about border security. It is about releasing people into the country."

"The reason we don’t already have a deal that is already done right now, with this body debating it, is that debate about capping ICE detentions got added into the conversation last weekend and blew up the whole negotiation.

This is not the White House blowing up negotiations. This is not Republicans blowing up negotiations. This is my Democratic colleagues saying they want a cap on ICE detentions and allowing coyotes to be able to rush large quantities at the border or forcing ICE to have to make difficult choices about which gang members they are going to release and which they are going to hold, literally getting a briefing every morning saying: We can’t arrest anyone today because we don’t have enough detention space, so today we have to look the other way.

That is an absurd proposal, and we should reject it."

>>5161178

Monday Feb 11 in Congress

page 7 - last page

THE ECONOMY (S1163)

Mr. TOOMEY. "Let me preface this with the observation that I am pretty sure we are living through the strongest economy in the United States in my adult lifetime."

Senator SANDERS and Senator SCHUMER joined up and made a proposal that we adopt legislation that would severely restrict the ability of American companies to buy back their own stock. This is just the latest iteration of a socialist tendency that seems to be growing on the far left. This is a horrendous idea.

First of all, what is a stock buyback? It is not that complicated. It is when the owners of a company take some or all of their money out of the company.

So why would they buy back their own stock? The reason they would buy back their own stock is that sometimes it happens that the management team of a company is just not able to deploy any more capital in a way that would generate a better return than what is generally available in the marketplace."

"First of all, as far as freedom goes, whose company is it? To whom does a given company in America belong? I have always thought they belonged to the shareholders of those companies—

the people who saved up and invested in them, the people who have launched those companies, and the people whose capital made it possible."

"Our economy thrives when people are willing to invest in existing businesses, in new businesses, and in startup businesses, but that investment is an absolutely essential part of a thriving economy. Well, people are much less likely to make an investment if Congress makes it harder to take that investment out."

"Finally, this idea would be very harmful to the people it is, presumably, meant to help. About 40 percent of all equities in the United States are held in pension and retirement accounts."

NOMINATION HOLD

Mr. GRASSLEY. "Mr. President, due to the actions of the Department of Justice, I have placed a hold on Donald Washington to be Director of the U.S. Marshals Service. This hold does not reflect any misgivings I may have against Mr. Washington."

"On December 10, 2018, the Department of Justice agreed to provide my staff with a briefing on the Marshals' apparent misuse of the Assets Forfeiture Fund. Then on January 7, 2019, less than 24 hours before the briefing was set to take place, the Department cancelled on account that I was no longer the chairman of the Judiciary Committee."

"I am placing this hold on Mr. Washington, a Department of Justice nominee, until the Department of Justice fulfills the promise to provide my staff with a briefing of the Assets Forfeiture Fund."