Legislative Program

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for his information with reference to the two bills that will be considered next week.

We are coming now to the end of the scheduled work period, and we will be going into the August break. We just passed a bill, Mr. Leader, which dealt with a tragedy--or purportedly dealt with a tragedy--that occurred in San Francisco.

Every Member of this House believes, I think, that a mistake was made by the sheriff in San Francisco in releasing this individual who had been convicted of numerous felonies.

We also believe, if we had passed a comprehensive immigration reform bill similar to the one the Senate passed in the last Congress, that this problem itself would not be solved--because we believe that the sheriff should not have released this individual irrespective of the status of immigration reform--but we believe this would go a long way towards enhancing the ability of both law enforcement and of communities to deal with the immigration issue as well as giving confidence to people of their status.

Does the gentleman believe that there is any possibility of a comprehensive immigration bill being considered in the next work period?

I yield to my friend.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HOYER. Just to make it clear, the mistake was the sheriff's. He should not have done what he did. It was a tragedy. We all agree on that.

Very frankly, we don't think that he was compelled to do so by the sanctuary law that San Francisco had in effect.

I will tell the majority leader that we had a difference of opinion in a previous bill, the Violence Against Women Act, where you did not include protection for immigrants when they came forward to law enforcement authorities and complained of domestic violence.

We had a disagreement on that, and the disagreement was that we thought they ought to be protected, which is why so many law enforcement officials opposed the bill that was brought forward.

I will tell you again, Mr. Leader, that we do not believe that the statute that was in San Francisco compelled or led to the actions of the sheriff in releasing a felon who had committed the numerous felonies and should not have been released. It was a tragedy.

Let me go on, Mr. Leader, to the appropriations process.

There are no appropriation bills listed on your schedule for next week. We have after next week some, I think, 16 legislative days left between now and the end of the fiscal year.

Again, for the next period that we are going to be back and in light of the fact that we know what it is going to be at least--and I will have some questions on some things that may be on, but we know what is scheduled for next week--does the gentleman believe that our Members ought to anticipate the further consideration of appropriation bills prior to the end of the fiscal year?

I yield to my friend.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HOYER. I thank the majority leader. I am pleased to hear that.

I know the Speaker observed--and I think he is probably right--that there will have to be a CR. In light of that, I would hope that the majority leader, in league with the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, perhaps with the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, and with the Speaker, would initiate the conversations now in preparation so that we would not have a crisis on September 30, but would, in a logical and, hopefully, a cooperative way, have gotten to what action would be taken with respect to a CR. I would urge my friend to pursue those discussions.

I would be glad to participate with him in those discussions with others on our side who will be involved in that process--our ranking member on the Appropriations Committee, our ranking member on the Ways and Means Committee, and our ranking member on the Budget Committee.

I yield to my friend if he wants to make a comment.

Mr. McCARTHY. No.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman.

The gentleman and I have had discussions about highways. We know that next week the highway authorization ends. We are planning on leaving here, if the schedule is kept, on Thursday of next week.

Will the gentleman tell me what he believes is the status of the highway bill?

I know the Senate is discussing a longer term highway bill. Neither the majority leader nor I are very enthusiastic about that bill as I have learned in my discussions with you.

Will you tell me what your plans are with respect to the highway bill so that we don't leave here without some sort of authorization having been passed?

I yield to my friend.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman.

Lastly, as the gentleman knows, I have been very much involved with the authorization of the Export-Import Bank through the years. As the gentleman knows, Mr. Cantor and I worked together and came up with a bipartisan proposal in 2012 that passed this House overwhelmingly with approximately 140 Republicans and about 185 or more Democrats, so it passed overwhelmingly.

Can the gentleman tell me whether or not there is any possibility of assuring that the majority of this House can work its will and the majority of the Senate--and I say that because Mitch McConnell, the leader of the Senate, is quoted as saying the supporters of the Federal Export-Import Bank have the Senate votes to revive it and will get a chance to do so.

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said, It looks to me like they have the votes--and I am requesting to give them the opportunity. MCCONNELL, who opposes the Bank, said he expects supporters to try to attach the reauthorization to a highway bill.

Assuming that we get a bill from the Senate with the Export-Import Bank attached to it, does the majority leader believe that we will have the opportunity--and I think the majority of the Members of the House would vote in favor of it--will have the opportunity to vote on the Export-Import Bank before we leave here on Thursday?

I yield to my friend

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HOYER. I keep asking that question, and I keep getting the wrong answer. I will be faithful to asking that question.

I say that with humor, but the gentleman knows that I believe this is an extraordinarily serious issue. The gentleman knows I agree with the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Mr. Boehner, that we are losing jobs right now as a result of our failure to extend the authorization of the Export-Import Bank past June 30.

The gentleman knows I believe that 165,000 jobs are at risk. The Indian director of their export-import bank is quoted as saying in the paper, just the other day, that he believes they are going to pick up jobs and orders because of the failure of the Export-Import Bank to be reauthorized.

I think this is not something that is not real. It is a loss of jobs and a loss of competitive status for our country if we do not reauthorize this and do so as quickly as possible.

I will keep asking the question because I feel it is so very important to our country and to our competitiveness, but I appreciate the gentleman's faithfulness in his answer. I am hopeful that it will change.

Mr. McCARTHY. We will keep repealing ObamaCare.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I didn't notice that ObamaCare had been repealed. I simply noticed the Supreme Court said it was a constitutional piece of legislation.

I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source