Legislative Program

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, there are a few bills that we have been hearing might come that weren't discussed, and I know the gentleman alluded to the CHIPS Act. I know the Senate still hasn't finalized anything there. We are hearing they may.

There are some other bills we have been hearing might come over. Of course, it seems like we keep hearing talk that something on Build Back Better may come back over on budget reconciliation, whether it is the trillion plus, whether it is something different, whether we would come back in August to deal with that.

I don't know if the gentleman can touch on what he might be hearing from the Senate, and if there would be any plans beyond next week to come back in August where it is currently not scheduled to be a legislative period that we would be in session. I am not sure if the gentleman is willing to share that, but I will yield.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, and I appreciate especially the concern about that first 2 weeks because as with my family and a lot of families, those first few weeks where the families are still together before everybody goes back to school, you know, a lot of plans are made.

We have a lot of work to do. We also have families, and you don't want to, you know, lose that element of having people be able to spend the time back in their districts and back with their families. If schedules have to change, at least give some lead time. I know Members on both sides appreciate that.

Clearly, a lot of this depends on what the Senate does or doesn't do. For those of us that would prefer the Senate work in a bipartisan way or especially work in a way that focused on addressing and being aware of the inflationary problems in the country, and, of course, we just saw last week, 9.1 percent inflation, 40-year high, a lot of that driven by the spending in Washington.

There is still talk that the Senate is trying to reach some agreement that would lead to a potential large amount of tax increases. A trillion dollars is a number that keeps being thrown around. It seems like trillions of dollars keep getting thrown around to the point where inflation has gotten out of control from the spending.

We all know how much families are paying for so many things: gas prices, when they go to the grocery stores, all the things that they buy, if they can afford to buy them, those things are dramatically higher.

Hopefully, the Senate doesn't keep adding to that inflation by coming up with more ways to spend money that we don't have. We will see.

There is also talk that as part of the ObamaCare subsidies--you know, that is an entirely different conversation--that bill still needs heavy subsidies that are not affordable, but they are talking about drug price controls that would be paired with that.

Again, more a message to our friends on the other side of the Chamber in the Senate, just for situational awareness when countries do price controls, there is a cost in terms of lifesaving drugs that are not available in countries where they have done price controls. When you look at the United States, clearly a leader in innovation--we have seen it with Operation Warp Speed where we were able to get three different vaccines approved in less than a year because we encourage innovation in this country, we don't penalize that innovation.

But there are countries that do try to fix prices. While it might sound populist to do it, the cost for those countries is that many lifesaving drugs are not available in those countries. We all hear about Canada. Canada clearly is a country that fixes prices. France is a country that fixes prices. You can see here, almost half of the drugs that are available in America that save lives are not available in Canada and France.

I know there is a temptation, as they are negotiating over in the Senate, to get into the price-fixing business. I am not sure which lifesaving drugs the Senate would like to remove off the shelves of the United States, but there will be lifesaving drugs removed off the shelves. Let's not do to drug manufacturing and lifesaving innovation in America what they have done to baby formula in America, where you can't even find it on the shelves. You will not be able to find many lifesaving drugs on the shelves in America if they go to price fixing.

I know it is a heated negotiation over there. They haven't come to an agreement. Hopefully, they won't come to an agreement on something that would actually take lifesaving drugs off the shelves in this country.

I would yield to the gentleman.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SCALISE. I know there has been a lot of work by Members on both sides on the CHIPS Act. Mr. McCaul on our side, through the China Task Force, put out a number of recommendations. The CHIPS Act was one of them. Of course, one of the concerns we are seeing, as that bill continues to be negotiated in the Senate, it is not being negotiated more narrowly, it is being loaded up to the point where we are hearing numbers of well over $100 billion in unpaid-for new spending as part of that bill.

As we talk about inflation, any economist will tell you, inflation is too much money chasing too few goods, and if we already acknowledge there are too few goods, to put another $100-plus billion, maybe $150 billion--it keeps growing every day--of borrowed money, none of that-- they are not prioritizing existing money. Everything we are hearing is all of it would be completely borrowed money.

Next week, we are hearing the Fed is going to raise interest rates maybe up to another point, and that is without $100-plus billion of additional debt being added on. If the Fed is telling us that the spending is leading to higher interest rates, which makes it harder for low-income families to buy their first home, for people to maybe expand their business where they can hire more people to go and meet the needs of the supply chain, they won't be able to do that if interest rates keep going up.

And yet, as interest rates are about to go up again next week, the Senate is trying to figure out how to keep adding and adding and adding on top of what is already probably well over $100 billion in borrowed money that they are going to send over here.

I hope that we would keep that in mind as we are also trying to address these other problems like gas prices. I know we have talked about this many times. I shared it with the majority whip last week and would ask the majority leader again. We have identified a number of bills that have strong support that would address the many problems we are hearing that are leading to an inability to produce energy in America.

We saw the President go hat in hand to Saudi Arabia last week. As I and many others predicted, we all knew that they were going to tell the President no, but I also suggested that if the President just saved the 11,000-plus miles on Air Force One and stayed here and called places like Port Fourchon, Louisiana, they would say yes to producing more energy, not in Saudi Arabia where their carbon emissions are much higher, but here in the United States where nobody in the world does it better, does it cleaner, or more efficiently.

That would create more jobs in our country, and it would give more energy security to our country. It would allow us to lower gas prices, not just for us but for our allies around the world. And yet, instead of working with us on these bills, the President chooses to go to foreign countries who have no interest in lowering gas prices, and so we still end up in this situation.

I don't know if there is an opportunity to get any or all of these bills brought up where we could actually come to an agreement on some things that would move the needle and help families in America lower gas prices. Today, we are still over double what the price of gasoline was before President Biden took office.

Wherever the price moves, up or down, when families are paying over $150 to fill up their car, it is taking a huge hit out of low- and middle-income families' budgets, and that is one of the driving factors behind the sluggish economy.

I don't know if the gentleman wants to make an announcement of some of these bills coming to the floor. I would welcome that, and I would yield.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. This debate will continue. It would be great if we were debating these bills next week. I stand to be surprised and happily surprised if the announcement comes out over the weekend that some or all of these bills will be brought to the floor.

I would give the gentleman a prediction that if the House were to take up and pass these bills, we would see a dramatic reduction in the price of gasoline. I will leave that out there for the gentleman to consider as one more reason why these would be good debates to have, where we could talk together in support of good policy.

We are both blessed with good staff that help us identify really good pieces of legislation that we could bring to address these big, big problems that families are facing.

Mr. Speaker, unless the gentleman has anything else, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source