mr. shimkus: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may are five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the topic of this special order. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. shimkus: i do that, mr. speakers, because we've had members from oregon, i'm from illinois, tennessee, minnesota, california, georgia, south carolina, texas, connecticut come down, many, many members from all over this country also wanted to join me here tonight but they could not so they'll be submitting statements for the record. i appreciate you allowing us to do that. i also want to highlight a few things and just follow up on some of my colleagues, who i really appreciate coming down and spending their time to talk about the importance of this issue. this issue has national support. i think identified by the 49-4 vote out of the energy and commerce committee. people, very diverse and from all over the country, on energy and commerce. and i woul

mr. shimkus. i'd like to thank mr. johnson who has brought this legislation forward who worked with individuals, with companies in his district to address their concerns on this. w, what brings us here today is the fact that once before the brick industry faced an e.p.a. rule that went on the books, hasn't gone through judicial review. this happened in 2003, and over a period of five years they began ramping up to make these changes. and this is expensive because most of the brick manufacturers in our country are small businesses. they have two kilns, and they are working very, very hard to keep the jobs and keep people employed. and when they look at having to change to this new equipment, the investment is going to be $3 million, $4 million, $5 million, depending on the size of their business. now, previously a rule went through the process of judicial review and then it was withdrawn. what this legislation does is to say, look, let's finish this entire process before we move that expense to the industry because when

mr. shimkus: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, coal fired electric generation has been the subject of many costly regulations and we're already seeing an economic impact on conventional coal facilities. but today we're focusing on a relatively small number of very unconventional facilities that take environmentally damaging waste coal, burn it to produce electricity, and use the resulting ash to remediate the land. the more you learn about h.r. 1119, the satisfying energy needs and saving the environment, the sense act, the more you'll agree that these facilities are worth saving. which is what this bill does. i thank my colleague, keith rothfus from pennsylvania, for sponsoring this measure and i urge all my colleagues to support it. decades of coal mining in pennsylvania and other states have left a legacy of massive piles of waste coal that contributes to water and air pollu

mr. shimkus. mr. shimkus: i'll try to ask quick questions get quick responses and help my colleagues and you survive this long period of question and answers. dr. gottlieb, in your testimony you talk about the difference between addiction and physical dependence, part of that is how long can a physical dependence develop? in your medical -- dr. gottlieb: i would refer to dr. jones. it could develop quickly. nyone who is prescribed opioid s for a sustained period of time will become dependent. addiction is a state where you have a more than just a physical dependence on a drug, you have a psychological dependence and engaging in behavior that's not constructive to your life to et access to the drug. mr. chim cuss: -- mr. shimkus: in my experience they tell me the brain has been changed. the discussion with this individual was that he just said his brain, in essence, used the term pickled in that he not overwhelm has this physical dependence, but -- can someone comment about that and w quickly that can i

mr. shimkus: thank you very much. it's great to be with you and my friends from the great state of michigan. you know, as a republican, sometimes people ask, what's the difference? i say, well, republicans, we believe in less government, individual responsibility, lower taxes, more personal freedoms and liberties. so from my time here in washington, i've always wanted a fairer, flatter, simpler tax code. to fear ouldn't have filing our income taxes. we shouldn't have to fear whether we have the receipts and i think the other thing that was always frustrating about the code is you never know if you've done enough of the itemizing if you'll get anything or not and then have you forgotten something that you are not recouping, so having said that, that's why -- and i'm glad congressman mitchell raised this issue, the fairer, flatter, simpler tax code. before we passed the bill, 80% of my constituents did not itemize. under this tax reform, 90% of all my filers -- 90% will be able to do it on this simple postcard. and it's