This is a critical reauthorization and it is imperative to maintaining our Nation's efforts to address the opiate epidemic. In February of 2018, the Drug Enforcement Administration used its authority to place nonscheduled fentanyl-like…
Michael Burgess
The Public Record
Michael Clifton Burgess is an American politician and physician who has served as the U.S. Representative for Texas's 26th congressional district since 2003. A member of the Republican Party, Burgess has focused on healthcare policy, leveraging his medical background to inform his legislative work. He has been involved in various committees and has advocated for issues such as medical research and veterans' healthcare. Burgess has also been a vocal supporter of conservative fiscal policies and has participated in discussions surrounding healthcare reform.
I want to thank Mr. DeSaulnier from California for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I first want to acknowledge, along with Mr. DeSaulnier, the poignant loss that we all…
But, I mean, if you have ever been down to the Texas-Mexico border, particularly that sector in the lower Rio Grande Valley, it is very, very difficult to provide those--that interdiction.
I have worked with your predecessor, James Carroll, while we--in two Congresses ago, when we worked on the SUPPORT Act.
Now is not the time to eliminate a proven harm reduction and overdose prevention strategy.
The effects of the 3 years of fentanyl class scheduling are clear: the creation and distribution of finished fentanyl and fentanyl-related substances from China has ground to a halt.
Angie Craig eloquently pointed out how you are putting restrictions on trans-affirming speech.
No, you don't. You all think you do, but you don't because you continue to do a disservice to that law and its intent.
The American people really are tired of you abusing your rights, abandoning their values.
72 percent of the public thinks it is likely that social media platforms actively censor political views that Big Tech companies find objectionable.
I challenge my colleagues to really get serious about doing something about this liability shield so that we do have a fair and free internet and people aren't censored.
I do think we need to revisit Section 230 in the terms of, have you now become actual publishers as opposed to simply carriers of information?





