Providing for Consideration of H.R. Helping Angels Lead Our Startups Act
Floor Speech
(Mr. McGOVERN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions), my friend, the chairman of the Committee on Rules, for the customary 30 minutes.
I rise in opposition to this structured rule, which provides for the consideration of H.R. 4498, the so-called Helping Angels Lead Our Startups Act, otherwise known as the HALOS Act. I also oppose the underlying legislation unless through the amendment process we can improve it.
The gentleman from Texas said something that I agree with: ``It is important for Congress to act.''
I think where we differ is: Act on what? What should Congress be acting on right now? Should we be talking about this? Or should we be talking about other things, quite frankly, that are much more important to this country and to the American people?
Four days from now, Puerto Rico faces a $422 million debt payment. Given the items listed for consideration in the House this week, it appears as though the Republican majority has no plans to act on legislation to address the debt crisis in Puerto Rico.
I understand that my Republican friends in the majority are having a difficult time in coming to an agreement within their Conference on how to move forward, but I urge my colleagues to continue working with Leader Pelosi and Ranking Member Grijalva toward a bipartisan solution that allows Puerto Rico to restructure its debt. This is a big deal. The Senate is waiting for us to act, the people of Puerto Rico are waiting for us to act, and our constituents are waiting for us to act. Rather than acting on that which is urgent, we are doing this.
Another thing we might want to think about acting on and is an area in which the House Republican leadership has also failed to act is that of the public health emergency created by the Zika virus. This is a big deal. It is the public health. The well-being of our citizens is a big deal, or at least it should be, but you would never know it if you are following the proceedings on the House floor. My colleague from New York, Congresswoman Lowey, has an emergency supplemental bill to help to fund what is necessary to protect our people from this virus, but we are told that is on the back burner.
What about doing something in response to the terrible tragedy that unfolded in Flint, Michigan, where that community was poisoned by the water that came out of their faucets? Why aren't we addressing that emergency?
By the way, Flint is not unique, unfortunately. There are other places across this country where the levels of lead in the drinking water are unacceptably high, are dangerously high. We need to make sure that our infrastructure in this country is up to the point at which people don't have to worry about drinking the water that comes out of their faucets. We should be addressing that issue, but for some reason we don't have the time.
There are lots of young people here who are visiting the Capitol this week. Why aren't we doing something about student financial aid so that people can afford to go to college, creating a situation by which young people who go to college are debt free when they get out of college, lowering the interest rates on college loans or eliminating the interest rates on college loans, thus making college more affordable?
That is a huge priority. That is important, but we don't have time to talk about that here in the people's House.
This Congress also continues to shirk its constitutional duty to vote on an authorization for the war against ISIS. In the past week, the Pentagon announced that the United States will send 250 more troops to Syria and 200 more to Iraq. In Iraq alone, the official number of U.S. troops is now over 4,000, but this House still can't seem to find time to debate and vote on an AUMF.
I have great reservations about the President's policy with regard to these wars. I think we ought to debate those wars and I think we ought to go on record as voting to authorize those wars. Instead, we don't want to talk about it. We are putting the lives of young American men and women in harm's way. We are sending them halfway across the world to be engaged in an effort, in my opinion, in which there is not a clearly defined mission.
We are not living up to our constitutional responsibility, which is we ought to debate and deliberate and vote on these wars. That is our constitutional responsibility, and we are not doing it. We don't have the time, or maybe we are just too cowardly to be able to tackle some of these important issues.
The American people are tired of endless wars, and it is our responsibility to debate these escalations that continue to invest more American tax dollars, add more firepower, and put more U.S. troops closer to the front lines; but, again, this leadership isn't focused on these very serious situations that call for immediate action.
Just so you know, we are not paying for most of these wars. While my friends like to talk about our debt, I would point out that most of these wars are unpaid for. They just go on the credit card. We don't even have the guts to have a vote on whether to pay for these wars. Instead, we are doing this today.
Mr. Speaker, 2 weeks ago, House Republicans missed the legally mandated deadline for Congress to enact a budget, and it appears as though we are not going to see a budget resolution on the floor this week or anytime soon. On the most pressing issues facing our country today, my friends in the Republican majority have failed--and they have failed miserably--to do their job, plain and simple.
So what is the House debating today? What is so urgent to debate today that all of these other things can be put to the side?
We are debating legislation, the so-called HALOS Act, that will undo an important investor protection that Democrats fought to include in the 2012 JOBS Act.
I supported the JOBS Act, which expanded opportunities for small business capital formation. Since the JOBS Act became law in 2012, companies have raised roughly $71 billion of capital by using the new general solicitation and advertising exemption.
But it is important to balance our desire for capital formation with their need to protect investors, particularly unsophisticated retail investors.
The JOBS Act removed the ban on solicitation in advertising to the general public for private offerings, provided that companies verify the purchasers of their offerings are accredited investors.
The legislation before us today repeals that verification requirement when companies solicit their offers at a wide range of sales events.
The private securities marketplace is already under limited SEC oversight, and many of us share the concern that this legislation could unnecessarily expose investors to risks that they are unprepared to absorb.
Now, my friend, Ranking Member Maxine Waters, will offer an amendment later today to restore some of the investor protections that would be eliminated by the underlying legislation. I urge my colleagues to support that amendment.
Mr. Speaker, the House is set to adjourn on Friday for yet another weeklong break and we have yet to consider any of the priority legislation that I had just spoken about earlier. We need to focus on important issues. We need to focus on urgent issues rather than taking away important investor protections.
So I urge my colleagues to defeat this rule and the underlying legislation.
I want to say to the gentleman from Texas that I appreciate the fact that he appreciates the concerns that I have raised, but I would appreciate him even more if we could bring some of the legislation to the floor that would actually solve some of the problems and deal with some of the challenges that I outlined.
I had brought up earlier the issue of the Zika virus, which has infected 891 individuals in the U.S. States and territories, including at least 81 pregnant women. This is a big, big deal.
Some of us are not interested in robbing from Peter to pay Paul to deal with this. We don't want to be dipping into the Ebola fund, which is still an issue, to deal with the Zika crisis. I mean, we have multiple challenges that we have to deal with.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. McGOVERN. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I reclaim my time.
We are doing something, but I think what people who are dealing with this crisis would feel better about is if there was a certainty that the resources were going to be there.
Those who are fighting the Ebola crisis are concerned that, if you are going to take money from Ebola to put into Zika, that maybe you are not going to replenish the monies to deal with Ebola. We have some serious public health issues that we are trying to deal with.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to urge that we defeat the previous question. If I do, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up a bill that would provide desperately needed funding to combat the Zika virus.
The administration requested this funding more than 2 months ago, and it is reckless to delay our response to this public health crisis any longer. Yes, we are doing things to respond to it. We can be doing a lot more. I think the American people want us to do all that we possibly can to protect the public health of the citizens of this country.
Mr. Speaker, what we are trying to do here is sound the alarm bells that we need to do something much more robust than is currently being done. I include in the Record the letter that we have referred to from the administration signed by Shaun Donovan, Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and Susan Rice, the National Security Adviser. This is a letter to Speaker Paul Ryan. The White House, Washington, DC, April 26, 2016. Hon. Paul D. Ryan, Speaker, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Ryan: As you are aware, on February 22, the Administration transmitted to Congress its formal request for $1.9 billion in emergency supplemental funding to address the public health threat posed by the Zika virus. Sixty-four days have passed since this initial request; yet still Congress has not acted.
Since the time the Administration transmitted its request, the public health threat posed by the Zika virus has increased. After careful review of existing evidence, scientists at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) concluded that the Zika virus is a cause of microcephaly and other severe fetal brain defects. The Zika virus has spread in Puerto Rico, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands and abroad. As of April 20, there were 891 confirmed Zika cases in the continental United States and U.S. territories, including 81 pregnant women with confirmed cases of Zika. Based on similar experiences with other diseases transmitted by the Aedes aegypti mosquito--believed to be the primary carrier of the Zika virus--scientists at the CDC expect there could be local transmission within the continental U.S. in the summer months. Updated estimate range maps show that these mosquitoes have been found in cities as far north as San Francisco, Kansas City and New York City.
In the absence of action from Congress to address the Zika virus, the Administration has taken concrete and aggressive steps to help keep America safe from this growing public health threat. The Administration is working closely with State and local governments to prepare for outbreaks in the continental United States and to respond to the current outbreak in Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories. We are expanding mosquito control surveillance and laboratory capacity; developing improved diagnostics as well as vaccines; supporting affected expectant mothers, and supporting other Zika response efforts in Puerto Rico, the U.S. territories, the continental United States, and abroad. These efforts are crucial, but they are costly and they fall well outside of current agency appropriations. To meet these immediate needs, the Administration conducted a careful examination of existing Ebola balances and identified $510 million to redirect towards Zika response activities. We have also redirected an additional $79 million from other activities. This reprogramming, while necessary, is not without cost. It is particularly painful at a time when state and local public health departments are already strained.
While this immediate infusion of resources is necessary to enable the Administration to take critical first steps in our response to the public health threat posed by Zika, it is insufficient. Without significant additional appropriations this summer, the Nation's efforts to comprehensively respond to the disease will be severely undermined. In particular, the Administration may need to suspend crucial activities, such as mosquito control and surveillance in the absence of emergency supplemental funding. State and local governments that manage mosquito control and response operations will not be able to hire needed responders to engage in mosquito mitigation efforts. Additionally, the Administration's ability to move to the next phase of vaccine development, which requires multi-year commitments from the Government to encourage the private sector to prioritize Zika research and development, could be jeopardized. Without emergency supplemental funding, the development of faster and more accurate diagnostic tests also will be impeded. The Administration may not be able to conduct follow up of children born to pregnant women with Zika to better understand the range of Zika impacts, particularly those health effects that are not evident at birth. The supplemental request is also needed to replenish the amounts that we are now spending from our Ebola accounts to fund Zika-related activities. This will ensure we have sufficient contingency funds to address unanticipated needs related to both Zika and Ebola. As we have seen with both Ebola and Zika, there are still many unknowns about the science and scale of the outbreak and how it will impact mothers, babies, and health systems domestically and abroad.
The Administration is pleased to learn that there is bipartisan support for providing emergency funding to address the Zika crisis, but we remain concerned about the adequacy and speed of this response. To properly protect the American public, and in particular pregnant women and their newborns, Congress must fund the Administration's request of $1.9 billion and find a path forward to address this public health emergency immediately. The American people deserve action now. With the summer months fast approaching, we continue to believe that the Zika supplemental should not be considered as part of the regular appropriations process, as it relates to funding we must receive this year in order to most effectively prepare for and mitigate the impact of the virus.
We urge you to pass free-standing emergency supplemental funding legislation at the level requested by the Administration before Congress leaves town for the Memorial Day recess. We look forward to working with you to protect the safety and health of all Americans. Sincerely, Shaun Donovan,
Director, The Office of Management and Budget. Susan Rice,
National Security Advisor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. McGOVERN. The letter basically says that the existing appropriations are not enough. This is what the letter says: ``Without significant additional appropriations this summer, the Nation's efforts to comprehensively respond to the disease will be severely undermined. In particular, the administration may need to suspend crucial activities, such as mosquito control and surveillance in the absence of emergency supplemental funding. State and local governments that manage mosquito control and response operations will not be able to hire needed responders to engage in mosquito mitigation efforts. Additionally, the administration's ability to move to the next phase of vaccine development, which requires multiyear commitments from the government to encourage the private sector to prioritize Zika research and development, could be jeopardized.''
I mean, I go right down the list on all the warnings here. This is a big deal. This is a big deal. If my friends on the other side are trying to rationalize putting this off, I would suggest to reread this letter. Reread this letter. Talk to the scientists. Talk to the experts. We need to have the necessary resources to be able to combat what might come our way in terms of the Zika virus. I want to do this so that we don't have a loss of life here in this country, so we are prepared.
DeLauro).
In closing, I again urge my colleagues to vote against the previous question so we can bring forward a bill that we believe can help adequately prepare this country to deal with the Zika virus, something that I think the majority of Americans support, whether they are Democrats or Republicans.
This should not be a controversial issue. If it is, then people can vote against it if it comes to the floor, but what we do know is that what we have done up to this point in terms of our responsibility here in Congress in providing the funds has not been adequate. I read earlier from the letter from the White House all the things that could be on hold or not move forward if we don't adequately fund the necessary infrastructure to deal with this crisis.
Mr. Speaker, I would also say that it seems to me that dealing effectively with the Zika crisis is a heck of a lot more important than what we are being asked to vote on and debate today. I have been saying this every time I come to the floor and handle a rule, but it seems that legislation that has minimum impact or that in some cases might even be trivial takes precedence over legislation that actually might do something to help lift up the lives of people in this country or, even in this case, protect the lives of people in this country.
We ought to come together in a bipartisan way to make sure that at least priority items come to the floor of the House. This is supposed to be the people's House, and that is where the people's business is supposed to be done. We are not doing it. By not addressing the Zika crisis more forthrightly, we are not doing the people's business.
So, again, vote ``no'' on the previous question and vote ``no'' on the rule.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source