Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize National Ostomy Awareness Day, which will be observed on Saturday, October 3, 2026.

An ostomy can be a difficult and deeply personal journey, but for many individuals, it is also a second chance at life. Ostomy surgery can provide a path forward for people facing serious illnesses and conditions, including colorectal cancer, inflammatory bowel disease, traumatic injuries because of domestic abuse or military engagement, and any other number of medical challenges. These procedures can be lifesaving and life-restoring, allowing individuals to return to their families, their workplaces, their communities, and the activities they love.

Yet too often, people living with an ostomy face misunderstanding, stigma, and unnecessary barriers. Ostomy Awareness Day provides an important opportunity to educate the public, dispel misconceptions, and remind us that an ostomy does not define a person or diminish the quality of a life.

In Maine, approximately 3,400 people are living with an ostomy. They are our neighbors, friends, family members, coworkers, veterans, caregivers, students, and community leaders. Their experiences demonstrate the strength and resilience of people who have overcome significant medical challenges and continue to live full and meaningful lives. Additionally, the United Ostomy Associations of America (UOAA) is based in my home state. Established in 2005, UOAA's mission is to promote quality of life for people with ostomies and continent diversions through information, support, advocacy, and collaboration. UOAA also has 260+ Affiliated Support Groups across the United States. Between 725,000 and 1 million Americans are living with an ostomy.

I also want to recognize the families, caregivers, physicians, nurses, certified ostomy nurse specialists, and other health care professionals who provide essential care and support to those living with an ostomy. Their compassion and expertise make an enormous difference in helping patients adjust to life after surgery and thrive.

This year's Ostomy Awareness Day theme, ``One Community--Stronger Together,'' is a fitting reminder that no one should have to navigate life with an ostomy alone. Awareness, education, peer support, and access to quality care can help ensure that every person who needs an ostomy has the resources and support necessary to live with confidence and dignity.

On Ostomy Awareness Day, we celebrate the resilience of the ostomy community and recognize the medical advances and dedicated professionals that have made these life-saving surgeries possible. Most importantly, we affirm that an ostomy is not the end of a person's story--it can be the beginning of a healthier and more hopeful chapter.

I am proud to stand with the Maine ostomy community and with ostomy communities across our Nation. I encourage my colleagues and all Americans to join me in raising awareness, breaking down stigma, and celebrating those whose lives have been saved and restored through ostomy surgery.

I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing October 3, 2026, as Ostomy Awareness Day.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the lives of Sandy and Ole Jaeger. Sandy and Ole met in Denmark in 1960 and were married for 65 years, many of which they spent in their home in Georgetown, Maine. They both passed away this year at the age of 90.

One of my favorite parts of serving as a Member of Congress is hearing from my constituents. It is fair to say Sandy and Ole were some of my most engaged constituents in Maine's 1st District. They believed more than anything in the importance of speaking up for the changes you want to see in local, state, and federal government.

I met Sandy and Ole when they volunteered for my campaign when I ran for Senate in 2002. Over the years, they have contacted me and other legislators, made phone calls, and written hundreds of letters to the editor on countless issues. Most recently, Sandy and Ole shared their own experiences in order to stand up for the rights and dignity of Maine's elderly population.

Sandy and Ole never stopped advocating for the causes they believed in and gave their time and support to local organizations including Boy Scouts, Association of Special Children and Families, AARP, Natural Resources Council of Maine, Age Friendly Georgetown, and the Maine Coalition to Fight Prostate Cancer. They dedicated their lives to making Maine communities more vibrant and connected.

Sandy wrote to me in March of this year through her work with the Coalition to Fight Prostate Cancer. She added at the end of the note, ``P.S. Ole died in September. We were married for 65 years and loved it all.'' Maine is better off thanks to the tireless advocacy and bountiful love of Sandy and Ole.

We are so grateful for their activism and the compassionate and giving lives they led in our state. I extend my deepest condolences to their family, including their children, Eric, Carl, Joseph, and Anna Sofia.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the leadership of Mary Rich as the Deputy Chief of New Gloucester Rescue. Across more than 32 years of dedicated public service, Mary has played a vital role in the success of the department and the safety of New Gloucester residents.

Mary began her career as an Advanced Emergency Medical Technician, rising over time to Deputy Chief. She has overseen tremendous change during her tenure--including the merging of the Fire and Rescue Departments, the launch of a new ambulance transport service, and the expansion of per diem staffing to provide 24/7 EMS coverage. The growth of the department would not have been possible without Mary's steadfast determination and tireless advocacy on behalf of the Rescue team and broader New Gloucester community.

In 2025, she was honored with the New Gloucester Chief's Award of Emergency Medical Services for her leadership, and her family has proudly carried on her legacy of public service. Her daughter Molly Fitzgerald and her son-in-law Hale Fitzgerald have also served on the Rescue team. Mary's years of contributions to the department have left New Gloucester a safer community, better equipped to respond to and prevent emergencies.

I commend Mary for an outstanding career dedicated to protecting public safety. I wish her the best of luck in her next chapter.

Mr. Chair, I thank the ranking member for yielding me the time.

Mr. Chair, I am sorry to say that this is a terrible farm bill. As a result of this bill, more people will go hungry, more farmers will lose assistance to the conservation programs that are already oversubscribed, and more farmers who are struggling to make ends meet will find it more and more difficult to hang on to their farms.

I have a lot of concerns about this bill, but I would like to use the limited time I have to show some strong support of Representative Luna's pesticide amendment. I am proud to say that her amendment, which was made in order, mirrors the language of the bipartisan amendment I sponsored with Representative Massie. I thank Representative Luna for also working on this important issue.

Our amendment to strike the pesticide liability shield sections from the farm bill has drawn broad bipartisan support, both within this Chamber and across America.

The harmful language that the Republicans on the House Agriculture Committee included in the farm bill is a handout to Big Agriculture and Big Chemical. It preempts States' rights to regulate pesticide usage or labeling. It provides a liability shield for pesticide manufacturers. Put simply, this language puts chemical company profits over the health of Americans.

More than 200,000 Roundup-related healthcare claims have been made against Bayer. Behind the numbers are real people--husbands, wives, farmers, even pets--with heartbreaking stories. People suffering from non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and other devastating cancers are racking up outrageous medical bills.

What is worse, chemical manufacturers spend time and money developing additional uses for these same chemicals, beyond killing weeds. We see glyphosate now used to kill weeds to dry crops before harvest, and it means it makes its way into more and more of our food system. That means the bread, the hummus, and the pasta we are eating are more likely to contain this toxic and dangerous chemical. More and more people are ingesting it without even realizing it.

If this language is not removed, we will have handed companies like Bayer exactly what they have spent millions of dollars and lobbying power on: legal immunity.

Earlier this year, I successfully sought to strip this similar language from the FY 2026 Appropriations Interior funding bill. Unfortunately, the work we did in that committee did not deter Bayer, which, armed with 53 lobbyists and millions of dollars, immediately got to work to get their get-out-of-jail-free card elsewhere: on this farm bill and at the Supreme Court.

Mr. Chair, Democrats and Republicans and citizens across this country agree: Keep this language out of the farm bill. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, even though I am not opposed to it.

Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for bringing up this amendment. The bill this amendment is based on has already passed the House by voice vote and now sits idly in the Senate.

I am glad my colleagues are paying attention to this issue and are supportive of promoting precision agriculture for our farmers.

Mr. Chair, I urge all Members to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for both supporting this amendment, which I also supported, and speaking in favor of it.

Pesticide preemption has received an extraordinary amount of attention in the past year, as is appropriate when the Federal Government considers overriding States' rights.

Litigation on this topic was discussed at the Supreme Court on Monday. A dominant pesticide manufacturer just announced a possible settlement of $7.25 billion. President Trump has invoked national security powers to mandate the production of glyphosate.

There is opposition to Federal preemption of State liability laws on both sides of the aisle. Yet, the Republican majority insisted at every turn on including these provisions in what should be a bipartisan farm bill that delivers for farmers and families.

This amendment is not extreme. It would not ban pesticides or require any additional regulatory burden on the manufacturers. Quite literally, it would preserve the status quo and allow the Supreme Court to examine this issue separately and the complicated legal issues at its core.

The question of Federal preemption also sits next to a truly poisonous provision that would waive all other laws for registered pesticides, including the Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act.

Registration under EPA's pesticide process provides instructions for use but does not include any requirements to guard against contamination of our air and water supply.

Let's be clear: The Clean Water Act already includes a broad exemption for agricultural stormwater runoff because Congress knew that some amount of pesticide runoff was inevitable.

However, the EPA is obligated to separately permit intentional uses of pesticides that enter our waterways, as the Sixth Circuit decided in 2009.

It is astonishing to me that my Republican colleagues wrote this bill to abolish that protection for rural communities' water supplies.

I want to acknowledge the bipartisan effort by Members in Congress and invested citizens on the outside whose relentless efforts are why this amendment was even allowed to be debated today.

Mr. Chairman, I thank Representative Luna for her tireless efforts on this front, and I hope my colleagues will heed her example and vote for this amendment. I urge all Members to support this.

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, even though I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman from South Carolina for introducing this amendment and wholeheartedly support it. An Office of Seafood will be an important resource for coordination across the aquaculture sector.

I am fortunate enough to represent the State of Maine, so fishermen are an important part of our economy, our culture, and the communities that we all live in. I am lucky enough to live in the heart of lobster harvesting territory, so I know firsthand how important the fisheries are to our State and to everybody who hopefully will come to visit our State and enjoy our delicious seafood.

I have been listening to Representative Thompson throughout the night talk about how he did a lot of listening tours and traveled around the country, and I was very privileged to have him come and visit in the State of Maine. While he was there we made sure, even though it was an agriculture listening tour--because the office of aquaculture

is an important part of the USDA--that he got to visit an oyster farmer, that he ate some of our delicious seafood, that included scallops, oysters, maybe a little bit of lobster, and I think even a bit of seaweed he managed to choke down, and we were appreciative of him trying all of the many seafood in our State.

I have always been surprised, as a member of the Agriculture Committee and getting to know the USDA, knowing that aquaculture resides there, there are fishery issues that come up there, and fishermen often don't get the same opportunity to utilize the resources as farmers do.

We all in this country understand the important role that farmers play in producing American food, and we appreciate them so much, but sometimes we forget that fishermen need to have access to many of the same resources. Fish is an important part of our diet. We should eat more of it, and we should certainly eat more domestically produced and harvested seafood.

I think this office will go a long way to provide our fishermen with a central source of outreach and information that focuses on the seafood industry.

This amendment codifying the office will give the security needed to create working relationships within the USDA and across the seafood sector. I have heard from many people in the seafood industry and the fishermen ever since this was originally announced by the USDA and Secretary Rollins, encouraging me to support this, to do anything I could to make sure that this was a stable entity within the USDA. So I appreciate the opportunity to speak on this amendment and talk about the importance of making sure it is permanent and our fishermen continue to have this access.

Mr. Chair, I support this amendment to create this additional office, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, it is my distinct honor to recognize Patrick Keliher as the 2025 recipient of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission's Captain David H. Hart Award. This recognition honors Pat's remarkable leadership and contributions toward improving Atlantic Coast marine fisheries.

As former Commissioner of the Maine Department of Marine Resources, Pat spearheaded countless initiatives--from restoring passage for sea- run fish species like Atlantic salmon to rebuilding working waterfront properties after historic storms ravaged our coast. His efforts have strengthened our environment, commercial fisheries, and coastal communities.

While Commissioner, Pat engaged stakeholders on some of the toughest issues facing our state. He worked diligently to understand the concerns of Maine's fishing communities and translate those concerns and recommendations into public policy. He skillfully facilitated a pause on federal whale regulations and continuously explored opportunities to protect Maine's heritage lobster industry, while securing funding for broader fisheries and marine mammal research. Further, he helped steer Maine's fisheries and marine economy through crisis during the pandemic.

Pat embodies transformative public service. His tireless work ethic, commitment to the health of our coast and coastal economy, and collaboration across industries have made our state a better place in innumerable ways. I could not imagine a more deserving recipient of this honor.

I commend Pat for his unparalleled career of service and congratulate him on this award.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today because of something deeply

troubling that is happening to one of the most treasured cultural institutions in our country, the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Yes, it is the John F. Kennedy Center.

Over the weekend, the President announced on Truth Social, of course, that he intends to shut down the Kennedy Center for approximately 2 years for so-called renovations. Since then, he has talked about leaving the building's steel fully exposed, raising questions about whether this is a renovation at all or something far more drastic.

Let's take a step back. The Kennedy Center is not a private real estate project. It is not a campaign prop. It is not a vanity playground for demolition. It is a national cultural institution, created by Congress in 1958, and later dedicated to President John F. Kennedy after his death. It opened in 1971 as a living memorial to a man who believed the arts were essential to democracy itself. The name, the mission, the existence all come from statute, law. No social media post, no board reshuffle, and no personal declaration has the legal authority to change that.

For more than 50 years, the Kennedy Center has been a place where Americans of every background could come together to experience excellence in music, theater, dance, and culture. It was built to foster national unity, artistic expression, and America's creative spirit, not to feed the ego of a single individual.

Unfortunately, over the past year, we have watched the systematic takeover, with board members fired, loyalists installed, programming politicized, and artists walking away in droves. The consequences were immediate.

Though Donald Trump's hand-picked leadership has been suspiciously tight-lipped about the Center's finances, they reportedly oversaw an 82 percent decline in theater subscriptions, a 57 percent drop in ballet packages, and a $1.6 million loss in ticket sales in just a matter of months.

The decline was not because the building had suddenly become dangerous. It is because artists and audiences rejected what the Kennedy Center has been becoming. Now, rather than reverse course, the President's solution is to close it for 2 years?

According to reporting this week, many board members, staff, performers, and even Trump-appointed officials were blindsided by this announcement. There was no plan presented, no consultation, no transparency.

The New York Times reports that budget documents describe needed maintenance, yes, but nothing that required shutting down the entire institution. In fact, the very official overseeing facilities said that just 2 months ago, there were no serious discussions about closing the Center.

What changed? What changed is that the Center could no longer sustain programming. Artists were pulling out, performances were being canceled, ticket sales were collapsing. With every bad story detailing what the Center has become under President Trump's control, the more of a headache and source of embarrassment it became for the President.

Now this renovation begins to look less like infrastructure work and more like a cover story for institutional failure.

As the top Democrat of the Appropriations Subcommittee that oversees the Kennedy Center's funding, I can tell you this: We have repeatedly asked for financial information, for meetings, for transparency about what is happening inside the center. Our requests have been ignored.

That should alarm every Member of this body because this is not just about a building. It is about whether Congress is going to allow a President to seize control of a congressionally created institution, run it into the ground, and then unilaterally shut it down without oversight.

Sadly, this is part of a much broader pattern. We have seen this administration's attacks on the National Endowment for the Arts, their attacks on the National Endowment for the Humanities, their interference in museums, including the Smithsonian, their political litmus tests for cultural programming, and now the attempted transformation of the Kennedy Center into a monument to one man's personal brand.

The Kennedy Center is the only memorial in Washington dedicated to President John F. Kennedy, a President who believed that art belonged to the American people, a President who believed culture was a public good. This takeover, and the incompetence that has come with it, is an insult to that legacy.

The law is very clear: The Kennedy Center's name and mission are established by statute. Changing that requires an act of Congress, and I will do everything in my power to make sure this institution stays the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, it is my distinct honor to recognize Annie Watson as the 2026 recipient of the Maine Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry Commissioner's Distinguished Service Award. This recognition honors Annie's remarkable leadership and service in Maine's agricultural community.

Since opening an organic dairy farm in Whitefield with her husband, Michael Moody, in 2013, Annie has dedicated her life to building strong and resilient local food systems in our state. She is currently President of the Maine Dairy Industry Association and has served in leadership roles of the Northeast Organic Family Farm Partnership, Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association, and the Agricultural Council of Maine.

There are many challenges that come with operating a small farm-- brutal physical work, tight budgets, long hours, unpredictable weather--the list goes on. This work demands adaptability, determination, and resilience. Annie exemplifies all these traits and more. She is a leader. She has not only grown a successful dairy business but uplifted the voices of farmers across Maine and the Northeast through her advocacy.

Annie recognizes the interconnectedness of our farms and communities, and has steadfastly devoted herself to strengthening these ties, carrying on Maine's agricultural legacy, and bolstering our food system and economy.

In the words of Annie herself, ``Maine farms are not just part of our scenery--they are part of our soul.'' We are so lucky to have her leadership in our state. I thank Annie for all her work to empower our farming community and feed Maine's soul.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the consolidated appropriations act.

First, I thank Ranking Member DeLauro for yielding me the time, but also for her leadership and perseverance in this challenging time.

I thank Mr. Simpson for his collaboration and partnership in this committee, and I also thank Chairman Cole for the work he has done on this committee.

Mr. Speaker, I will give the most applause and great thanks to our committee staff, Rita Culp, Jocelyn Hunn, and Michael Schmeltz, who put in many long hours, as we know, and worked over the holidays. We wouldn't be standing here today if they and so many others on both sides of the aisle hadn't put in this work.

I am pleased we were able to reach a bipartisan agreement to produce a bill that protects Tribal lands and the environment, invests in our Tribal communities, supports the arts, and rejects billions in extreme cuts proposed by the administration.

Rather than handing the Trump administration a blank check through another stopgap measure, this bill imposes precise, legally binding spending requirements that constrain executive overreach.

This will provide much-needed funding and certainty to public land management agencies, like the National Park Service, that have suffered tremendous disruption over the past year.

The bill also protects funding for programs important to combating and adapting to climate change. It rejects House Republicans' effort to gut funding for renewable energy and funds USGS climate science.

Funding for the Environmental Protection Agency's environmental justice, a top target for this administration, is included at $30 million. The continuation of these grants is a sharp rebuke of this administration's attack on communities of color and low-income communities facing high pollution burdens.

The bill also protects the arts and humanities, maintaining the enacted funding level for the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities, which the administration tried to eliminate entirely. This funding will support the arts in communities across the country.

Finally, this bill supports Native American families by investing in a strong and resilient Indian Country, including through education, public safety and justice, and healthcare programs.

Importantly, this bill strips out every single partisan poison pill rider that the Republicans tried to jam into the process, including the pesticide liability shield that would have let chemical giants evade accountability.

This bill is significantly better than a continuing resolution. It is not all that we would want or all that we should be delivering, but its investments will improve the lives of Americans.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the bill.

Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to speak in celebration of a group of workers and artists who entertain live audiences in every state across the country: the theatrical chorus. I am pleased to recognize 2025 as ``A Chorus Year.''

From Oklahoma! to Hamilton, some of the greatest art to come out of the United States has been musical theatre, and a staple of this art form is the chorus.

The chorus has always been more than a group of singers and dancers filling up a stage. It is an integral part of theatrical storytelling, as well as a major player in labor history. The historic actors strike of 1919 that established union protections for live performers succeeded in large part because of the women and men of the chorus who formed their own union and walked off Broadway stages in large numbers to join the fight.

And 2025 is a particularly auspicious year to celebrate the chorus. This year marks the 70th anniversary of the merger between Chorus Equity Association and Actors' Equity Association into the Equity that exists today, protecting the rights of actors and stage managers in live theatre across the U.S.

I want to recognize not only the talent of chorus performers, but their great skilled labor and tireless work ethic. They make it all look easy, but their ongoing contribution to American culture and a healthy entertainment industry is born of fierce commitment and dedication to their craft. They exemplify the best of America: many people working as individuals to build something amazing together.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a remarkable organization in my state that has been providing essential services and advocacy for individuals with vision impairment and blindness for 120 years. The Iris Network is one of Maine's oldest and most respected nonprofit agencies, known for its

steadfast commitment to accessibility, independence, and empowerment.

Founded in 1905 as the Maine Institution for the Blind, with the support of Helen Keller, the organization initially focused on teaching trades to help blind and visually impaired individuals enter the workforce. Over time, its mission has evolved to offer comprehensive training programs that meet people where they are--equipping them with the skills and confidence to live independently. These programs cover a wide range of daily life skills, from kitchen safety to technology use. The Iris Network offers services at its Portland facility and travels throughout the state to support individuals in their homes. Further, they offer holistic guidance to assist organizations businesses, and employers in making their environments welcoming and equitable. Their dedication to accessibility can be found in every aspect of their work.

In addition to its training programs, The Iris Network operates a thriving residential community. In 2006, they opened Iris Park Apartments, a Level I assisted living facility that now serves over thirty residents. Iris Park offers a safe, supportive, and empowering environment where technology is thoughtfully integrated, appliances are adapted with sensory guides, and community-building activities--like braille bingo--foster connection and independence.

The Iris Network exemplifies the positive impact that comes from uplifting others. I extend my heartfelt gratitude to The Iris Network for 120 years of dedicated service and for improving the lives of countless Mainers. Their leadership, compassion, and unwavering commitment to accessibility deserve our deepest admiration and commendation.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend from Connecticut for yielding the time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to this reckless attack on public media contained within this rescission bill and the millions of Americans who rely on and treasure their local public television and radio stations.

Every State will feel the impact of this $1.1 billion rescission. In fact, 70 percent of these cuts will directly impact local public media stations, $770 million, including more than $4 million to my State alone.

In rural states like Maine, local stations and networks like Maine Public are often the most accessible and sometimes the only source of news and information.

Whether it is children's programs like Sesame Street and Daniel Tiger, high school basketball tournament coverage, or trusted news shows like Maine Calling, public media has been a vital part of Mainers' lives for generations.

Speaking of lives, these stations literally save lives. They send out information regarding wildfire evacuations, missing child alerts, and winter storm warnings. Storm warnings are pretty common in Maine. If there is an emergency in your town, chances are the local media station is sounding the alarm and giving the information people need to stay safe.

The purpose of public media is to inform, educate, and engage. It makes people's lives better, and it has undoubtedly made our country stronger.

This President wants nothing more than to destroy it.

This is not about fiscal responsibility or finding waste, fraud, and abuse. Mr. Speaker, do you know how much these services cost each taxpayer per year? They cost less than $2. That is less than one cup of coffee.

It is certainly not about cutting something people don't like because 76 percent of Americans support public media. In this political climate, that kind of consensus is unheard of.

This is about one thing: the President's vendetta against the free press and his authoritarian desire to control the media.

Public media enriches our lives, nourishes our minds, and makes our communities safer. It deserves to be preserved and protected, not gutted to score political points.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this rescission.

Mr. Speaker, I rise along with Congressman Jared Golden to recognize the leadership of Maryalice Crofton as the Executive Director of Volunteer Maine. During her 30 years of dedicated public service, Maryalice has engaged thousands of volunteers across the state to tackle local challenges and strengthen their communities.

Under her leadership and innovation, Volunteer Maine has helped bridge the gap between persistent areas of need and state resources. Initiatives include the Maine Service Fellows program which connects passionate college graduates with service opportunities in rural, underserved communities, and the Maine Service Exchange, which matches nonprofits with skilled consultants via an online platform. During her tenure, she has also supervised 4,265 AmeriCorps members in over 3.9 million hours of service supporting and improving housing, education, environmental conservation, healthcare, childcare, and emergency preparedness initiatives in Maine.

Her tireless efforts have contributed to Maine's ranking as one of the top five states in the Nation for organized volunteerism. By facilitating government, nonprofit, and private sector collaboration and promoting the development and training of Maine's volunteer-force, Maryalice has laid the foundation for Mainers to serve their communities for years to come.

I commend Maryalice for an outstanding career dedicated to promoting civic engagement and volunteerism. I wish her the best of luck in her next chapter.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, I oppose this full-year continuing resolution and urge my colleagues to reject it. If we vote ``no'' and reject this CR, then we can go back to work and negotiate a regular, full-year spending bill.

This full-year continuing resolution is not a responsible way to govern. The bill does not set funding levels for individual programs, and because it doesn't, it creates another dangerous opportunity for President Trump and Elon Musk to defund congressional priorities, and we all know what a disaster that has been for our country: an illegal, unconstitutional disaster.

It is the duty of Congress to negotiate regular spending bills. This means that we actively decide on every individual program's funding level and that we make adjustments where necessary.

For example, the Indian Health Service needs an additional $345 million just to maintain current direct healthcare services. This continuing resolution fails to provide those funds, so Tribal communities will experience a lower level of healthcare service.

A regular bill also gives very specific directions to agencies to carry out specific work. For example, in prior years in the Interior bill, we have directed the EPA to conduct PFAS research that will help farmers, ranchers, and rural communities manage the disastrous impact PFAS has had like in my home State of Maine. Under the continuing resolution, without our direction, the administration may decide that work should stop.

As ranking member of the Subcommittee on the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies of the Appropriations Committee, I am deeply concerned that the Republican majority is giving the administration a free pass to abandon programs that protect the public from pollution, that safeguard human health, and that address the climate crisis.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote.

Mr. Speaker, it is my distinct honor to recognize an organization that has done so much to make Maine a national leader in energy efficiency.

This past October, in recognition of its efforts to accelerate the replacement of fossil fuel appliances with more efficient electric alternatives in our state, Efficiency Maine received the ``Leader of the Pack'' award from the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy. The fact that this award is only given once every five years is a testament to just how impactful Efficiency Maine's programs have been.

Between 2010 and 2023, the share of Maine households that used heating fuel as their primary heat source fell from 70 percent to 50 percent. That's a remarkable improvement--and the programs offered by Efficiency Maine have played a significant role in this trend. Its initiatives in the areas of consumer-education, income-differentiated rebates, pilot programs for new technology, and close collaboration with local tradespeople have been truly remarkable.

By promoting the transition from fossil fuel-dependent heating systems to those that rely on clean, renewable energy, Efficiency Maine is helping our state reduce its carbon footprint--proving that ``going green'' can mean ``saving green,'' too.

Organizations like Efficiency Maine are absolutely critical to helping citizens embrace the power they have to bring about a greener, more sustainable future for our country. I thank them for their incredible work, their tireless service, and their steadfast commitment to Maine's growing green economy.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call on the House to prioritize disarmament diplomacy.

Mr. Speaker, 2024 marks 80 years since the world was introduced to nuclear weapons. In that time, there have been several instances when complete catastrophe was at our doorstep. At the height of the Cold War, we narrowly avoided a nuclear exchange during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Thanks to extraordinary leadership, the United States and Soviet Union were able to pull back from the brink at the very last minute.

Years later, early warning system errors, once again, brought us within minutes of a nuclear exchange, and we are not the only countries that have nearly ended life on Earth through nuclear escalation.

Today, there are close to 13,000 nuclear weapons across the globe, a figure that continues to rise at an alarming rate because the world is turning away from nuclear nonproliferation treaties. Nine countries currently own nuclear weapons, while six others have them stored within their borders.

While many of these countries are historically rational actors within the international community, countries that see nuclear weapons as the ultimate deterrent, the ever-changing state of the world today demands that we not remain complacent. Not all nuclear states are rational actors, and there is no guarantee that rational nuclear states will always remain rational.

As Putin continues to attack Ukraine and threaten Europe and the United States with nuclear war, the world is made less safe. When Kim Jong Un supplies Putin with soldiers to fight in Ukraine, North Korea inches closer to launching a nuclear strike. In the Middle East, where ISIS-K is reemerging in Pakistan amid political and economic instability, the prospect of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of bad actors grows by the day. Years after the Trump administration decided to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal, we risk yet another adversary developing a nuclear arsenal.

As democracy deteriorates across the globe, even the United States is not impervious to nuclear weapons falling into the hands of extremists.

The world today is far different from what it was at the end of World War II, yet our policy toward nuclear weapons has not fundamentally changed. Now more than ever, we must pursue nuclear disarmament. Rather than bringing the world closer to disaster, let us prioritize disarmament diplomacy and make real progress to creating a safer, better world for our children, our grandchildren, and all generations to come.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for organizing this Special Order hour, and I encourage all Members of Congress to cosponsor H. Res. 77.