Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, thank you very much to my colleague from Oregon for yielding me time.

Mr. Chairman, I, too, want to rise in support, today, of the Perry amendment.

I thank my colleague from Oregon and my colleague from Pennsylvania for their leadership on this important renewable energy issue.

I also want to thank the chair of the subcommittee, Mr. Simpson, whom I am fortunate to also serve on the Interior Committee with. Mr. Simpson has worked hard on this bill to increase some of the levels of funding above the abysmal levels that were proposed by the administration's budget earlier this year.

And also, to our ranking member, Ms. Kaptur, my friend from Ohio, I thank her for her commitment to renewable energy and our energy future.

The amendment before us today would provide a modest increase in funding to the Department of Energy's Water Power Program. It is a bipartisan effort, and I am pleased to be part of that. It comes from the fact that many parts of the country are seeking the real benefits of tidal energy that generates incredible power, or of hydrokinetic power that taps the power of flowing water.

In response to my colleague from Pennsylvania, in Maine, we think tidal energy is very sexy.

The Department of Energy supports private sector research, development, and implementation of hydropower, pumped storage, and marine tidal energy. It supports cutting-edge research and makes sure that the office supports all three types of water-based technologies.

Last year, nearly 100 teams competed in a competition for an Energy Department-funded wave energy prize, with 20 finalists coming from 10 States, showing the breadth of interest in this work. Congress needs to support multifaceted work at a level that will continue to allow for innovation.

Mr. Chairman, I urge all my colleagues to support renewable energy, support water power, and support the Perry amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Pingree-Carbajal- Bonamici-Langevin-Lowenthal-Cicilline-Schneider-Beyer amendment, which is widely supported.

All of the cosponsors of this amendment care passionately about the need for ocean planning, and I commend the leadership of my colleagues on this issue each and every year that we fight this battle for sensible ocean policy.

We need, as a Congress, to recognize the importance of our oceans and ocean planning. Ocean planning works, and is working already in New England, where we have a success story of fishermen, lobstermen, Native American Tribes, local communities, and other stakeholders developing voluntary regional ocean plans.

I have heard from many of my constituents working in Maine's island communities about the importance not only of ocean planning, but of eco-based management of our oceans, a core part of moving forward to a 21st century fishery.

Our fishery is changing, and coastal communities want to be attentive to changes in our ecosystems to resource development and other uses for our oceans. For example, our plan in New England ensures that there is advanced ecological data available to help decisionmakers, enhance ocean stakeholder engagement through the collection of stakeholder- driven information, and facilitates agency coordination.

The language in today's underlying bill would make it even more difficult for Federal agencies, State, and local communities to work together on the future of our ocean resources.

For those of us representing coastal districts, this rider is a bad addition to the bill, and we need to strike it.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Schneider).

Mr. Chairman, if my good colleague could guarantee me he could give me the votes on the floor, I would be happy to bring a bill like that forward to Congress.

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to my colleague from California (Mr. Lowenthal).

Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, with all due respect, I think there are frequently moments when the administration overrides the opinion of the Congress or don't always agree and the administration gets their way. Take the decision the administration made this morning on military policy, which was contrary to the vote we took just this week on the appropriations process.

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Carbajal).

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, because June is PTSD Awareness Month, I rise today to recognize an extraordinary organization in my district that is making a huge impact on the lives of Maine

veterans managing this challenging condition.

Throughout my time in Congress, I have paid close attention to effective alternative therapies for the symptoms of PTSD, from service dogs to equine therapy, from book and writing groups to yoga and acupuncture. A group in my home State of Maine, called K9s on The Front Line, has created an extraordinary model. At no cost to the veteran, volunteer police dog handlers teach participants to train their own dogs or dogs selected from shelters to be PTSD service dogs.

Many of these veterans have had years of therapy or drug treatment with limited success. Yet, in so many instances, the impact of these service dogs on both veterans and their families has been nothing short of miraculous.

I am proud to honor my constituents at K9s on The Front Line for improving the lives of Maine veterans with PTSD.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor my constituent, Tom Allen, a proud World War II veteran from Augusta, Maine. At 94 years young, Tom continues to impress those who know him with his commitment to out-ski, and out-kayak the grips of old age and the passing of time.

When the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, Tom was a student at Harvard University in Boston, Massachusetts. He, like so many other brave men from his generation, felt the need to serve his country. In June of 1942, seven months after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, Tom willingly left Harvard and joined the United States Marine Corps. Recognizing his academic strengths, the Marines sent Tom to language school where be became proficient in Japanese. Upon the completion of his training, and with the war in full swing, Tom was sent to the Pacific Theatre where he first served in Saipan. In 1945, just months after the atomic bomb destroyed the city, Tom was reassigned to an intelligence position with the Second Marine Division and sent to Nagasaki, Japan. Among his many duties as an interpreter, Tom was tasked with working directly with the Japanese to uncover where they held their war materials in hopes of demilitarizing the Japanese War Machine. A year later Tom was honorably discharged from the Marines and chose to return to Harvard to complete his undergraduate education.

At a relatively young age, Tom had accomplished more than most people do in their lifetime. His resume of resilience and his sense of determination are some of the many positive qualities Tom has maintained into his later years. Two years ago, at the age of 92, Tom was seen skiing in the mountains of western Maine. Less than a year later, at the age of 93, Tom slipped into a kayak for a paddle around Boothbay Harbor.

Mr. Speaker, I truly admire Tom for his willingness to interrupt his Harvard education to answer our nation's call to serve. Lastly, I would like to thank him for reminding us all that age is simply a state of mind and that nothing is out of one's reach.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to honor an outstanding public servant, federal employee, and advocate in Maine's 1st District upon her retirement. After many years of service in the Washington headquarters of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Sally Blauvelt came to Maine six years ago to become the Field Office Director for USCIS.

Sally has been instrumental in creating relationships with stakeholders serving the immigrant community in Maine. She has embodied

the principles of common good, service to others, and social equity, engendering a respectful and customer-service focused environment in the local field office. And she has mentored a committed team of individuals who understand the challenges and hopes of those needing help and information, seeking to be of service whenever possible. Without fail, visitors to the USCIS office in my district are treated with dignity and respect.

Sally Blauvelt understands that the arrival of new Mainers from across the globe adds diversity, vitality, and energy to communities across my state. I am sincerely grateful for her many contributions to my constituents, to Maine, and to our nation.

My state has been all the better for Sally Blauvelt's decision to make Maine her home, and it is my honor to represent her in the U.S. Congress.

Mr. Speaker, the Ocean Passages maritime educational program and the state of Maine, home port of the schooner Harvey Gamage, would like to congratulate Commodore Lic. Jose Miguel Diaz Escrich and the Hemingway International Yacht Club of Havana, Cuba, on the occasion of its 25th Anniversary, being celebrated this month.

For 25 years, the Hemingway International Yacht Club has welcomed scores of international visitors from around the world--and consistently promoted stronger ties between Cuba and the United States through cooperative sailing and maritime programs.

Drawing on the long history of shared Cuban-American nautical traditions, symbolized above all by Ernest Hemingway's love of the sea and his adoption of Cuba as his second country, the Hemingway International Yacht Club has sought to keep alive the importance of Cuba's rich marine heritage.

The schooner Harvey Gamage first sailed into Marina Hemingway in Havana in Feburary 2016--and members of the Ocean Passages program have worked closely with Commodore Escrich in promoting the participation of American sport fishing boats in the annual Hemingway International Billfishing Tournament.

As Ocean Passages grows its educational and training programs in Cuban waters, we look forward to deepening that cooperation across the ocean we share. As the Maine poet Richard Blanco wrote in Cosas del Mar on the occasion of the restoration of bilateral diplomatic relations:

. . . Today, the sea still telling us,

the end to all our doubts and fears

is to gaze into the lucid blues of our shared horizon,

to breathe together, to heal together.

Ernest Hemingway donated his 1954 Nobel Literature prize medal to the people of Cuba, saying ``this award belongs to the people of Cuba, because my works were created and conceived in Cuba, in my village of Cojimar, of which I am a citizen.''

It is in that spirit that Ocean Passages and the state of Maine congratulate Commodore Escrich and the Hemingway International Yacht Club and look forward to fruitful cooperation for many years to come.

Mr. Speaker, I thought the Republican plan for repealing the Affordable Care Act and dropping 24 million Americans from healthcare coverage could not get any worse, but I was wrong. The latest iteration of TrumpCare still drops millions from their coverage, but will now make coverage worse and more expensive for those who can get it.

I believe all Americans deserve protections for the coverage of essential health services and preexisting conditions, not just Members of Congress. Swiss cheese insurance plans that don't cover ER visits or prescriptions and charge you more if you have ever been sick aren't worth the paper they are printed on.

This bill undermines our healthcare system in so many damaging ways. And for what?

Let's not forget that the bill includes nearly $600 billion in tax breaks for drug companies, insurers, and the wealthy. Millionaires would get an average annual tax cut of more than $50,000 while hardworking families and older Americans would struggle to afford meaningful coverage.

I won't stand for a bill that endangers the well-being of my constituents to benefit the very wealthiest Americans. I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my constituent, Jill Job Saxby, I'd like to include in the Record her proposal for evaluating the ethics of any health care plan that potentially risks access to care for millions of Americans. I submit that the American Health Care Act does not fulfill these considerations and I urge my colleagues to take seriously the ethical implications of their vote.

Under this proposal, will more of the most vulnerable

Americans be able to access quality, affordable health care?

Health care is a basic and universal human need, which, if

denied, harms persons and diminishes the community. The most

vulnerable are those with the least power, status and

resources in society. In the case of health care, the most

vulnerable are those who suffer poorer health and shorter

life expectancy because of poverty and social inequities that

create barriers to accessing quality medical care and all the

other contributors to good health (clean environment, healthy

food, paid sick leave, reliable child-care and

transportation). The most vulnerable would also include those

with pre-existing conditions and lack of access to preventive

care.

The Golden Rule Test: Am I willing to trade places with

those whose lives will be most profoundly affected by this

proposal?

The Golden Rule is found in all major world religions. It

rests on the moral assertions that: 1) every human life has

inherent worth and dignity and 2) because we are all in

relationship with one another, my actions (or inactions)

towards others have moral consequences for myself and for the

larger community.

The Golden Rule requires us to respond to suffering not

merely with charity, but with justice. Charity is given by

those who can afford it, out of surplus. Justice requires

living in right-relationship with all persons, at all times.

A just proposal will decrease social inequities and assure a

single standard of care, with equal accessibility, to all

persons.

Does this proposal treat health care as a fundamental human

need giving rise to a human right to care and alleviation of

suffering?

Health care is a basic and universal human need. Meeting

that need is a precursor to a person's ability to exercise

and enjoy the inalienable rights that our nation has

recognized from the beginning: life, liberty and the pursuit

of happiness.

There is a compelling ethical argument to be made that

health care, by its very nature, should not be treated as a

commodity to be bought and sold. We already recognize this in

some of our long-standing public policies: We do not allow

the purchase and sale of human organs for transplant. We have

strict rules governing human clinical trials. We provide

charity care. We restrict the freedom of sellers by

regulating providers' education and licensing. We protect

buyers with privacy laws. Such laws recognize that health

care intersects with a dimension of human existence that is

universally worthy of protection against the forces of the

free market.

Therefore, we must ask: how does it address the downside of

free market forces, especially rising inequality? Who

benefits? Who loses? Does it prioritize profits (a market

good) or human health/alleviation of suffering (a common good

and a human right)?

Mr. Speaker, since the Republicans in Washington have not held a single public hearing on TrumpCare, I asked my constituents directly for feedback at a Maine healthcare townhall. Not one of the hundreds of constituents spoke in support of the legislation. Instead, many said they will be among the millions of Americans who will lose their coverage under this bill.

One of those voices was Ed Saxby of Cape Elizabeth, pictured on the board next to me. Ed stood beside his wife and granddaughter as he bravely spoke about his own battle with cancer. He said that the odds of survival are against him because TrumpCare will take away the tax credits he needs to afford healthcare coverage as a retiree living on a fixed income.

Ed's wife, Jill, asked me if those who are championing TrumpCare would be willing to trade places with those whom it will harm.

I pose that question today to my Republican colleagues. If you can't answer in the affirmative, you should not be voting for this terrible bill.

Mr. Speaker, the Affordable Care Act has saved thousands of Mainers from losing their lives or going bankrupt simply because they got sick. Quality of care has improved through preventative care, without cost sharing for consumers. Overall costs have been lowered.

Republicans have had 7 years to come up with an alternative healthcare plan that preserves the progress we have made under the Affordable Care Act--one that would not take us back to a time when many without employer-sponsored insurance or a clean bill of health could get coverage.

But after all this time, they have come up with a plan that will cost older Americans up to five times more than younger enrollees; will charge the uninsured 30 percent more to buy coverage; and it will defund, not defend, Planned Parenthood; cut Medicaid significantly; and still has no price tag.

We owe it to Americans to have an open debate on this proposal, and I expect my Republican colleagues not to forget the millions of Americans for whom the Affordable Care Act has been a lifesaver.

In January, I asked my constituents to share their Affordable Care Act stories. Within a few days, more than a thousand stories were submitted. Some shared their ongoing challenges. I agree there are opportunities to strengthen the Affordable Care Act and make it affordable, but the overwhelming number of people shared compelling stories of how the Affordable Care Act has improved their lives.

I am honored to share a few of those powerful stories today, and I hope my Republican colleagues are listening.

Eleanor from Belfast, Maine, said:

``I am a 63-year-old small-business owner who has health insurance for the first time in my adult life since passage of the Affordable Care Act. The same is true for my partner of 17 years. She was diagnosed with breast cancer this year and has recently undergone a mastectomy with follow-up care. After her diagnosis, I went for my first-ever mammogram.''

The Republican plan puts these preventive services at risk.

Matthew from Brunswick, Maine, said:

``Five years ago, I left a comfortable job with good benefits to start my own business. Those first years were tough on my family. My wife and I were able to put our children on Maine's Dirigo Health, but we had to do without. . . . Today, through God's grace, hard work, and the support of my wife; my business is prospering. Food assistance is a thing of the past and we're actually contributing more in taxes now than we ever did before. We still have to watch what we spend but we're breathing a lot easier. Each year that I've made more money our subsidy has gone down, and that's just as it should be. That subsidy still matters though. If the ACA were eliminated today and I had to buy health insurance on the open market I'd be paying an extra $4,800 a year. That's real money.''

Under the Republican plan, small-business owners like Matthew may not be able to afford care for their family.

Ret, a 9/11 first responder from Rockland, Maine, said:

`` . . . The ACA means that as a self-employed resident of the state of Maine, I can actually acquire coverage with a pre-existing condition. After working search and rescue/recovery at Ground Zero in 2001, I developed a lung condition necessitating costly medication. Before the ACA, I was terrified of losing my job and losing health care because of my pre-existing condition.''

Under the Republican plan, those with preexisting conditions, like our 9/11 first responders, may not get affordable coverage.

Elisabeth from Phippsburg, Maine, said:

``In 2014 . . . my husband died from early-onset Alzheimer's. I was 50 when

my husband was diagnosed. Eventually I left the workforce to care for him . . . and, of course, lost my employer-provided health insurance at the same time. The ACA has provided me with options ever since then; options that I never had before its passage. In 2014 I had three joints replaced; life changing surgeries that restored my active lifestyle and removed chronic pain from my life. These were only possible because I was able to access health insurance as an individual, at a reasonable cost.''

The Republican plan for increasing costs for older Americans threatens people just like Elisabeth.

These stories matter. These lives matter. We must all keep them in mind as we look to change the Affordable Care Act.

Madam Speaker, title X family planning services are an essential lifeline for Mainers who need access to high-quality preventive and reproductive care, from cancer screenings to STI testings, to birth control. The resolution we are debating today threatens access to these critical services.

Every year, Maine's network of title X providers serves more than 22,000 individuals in nearly every county, including some of the most rural and underserved communities in our State. Sixty-five percent of last year's patients had outcomes that qualified them for free or reduced-cost services.

Family planning health centers often end up being their patients' primary source of health care. Providers are trusted members of the community. The care they deliver is high quality, and often they are the only affordable local option. Without title X funds, thousands of women and men throughout Maine would struggle to access and afford alternative primary care.

At a time when Republicans want to repeal the Affordable Care Act without a replacement plan, it is more important than ever to preserve title X as a cornerstone of our safety-net healthcare system.

Mr. Speaker, on Roll Call Vote 77 to H.J. Res 40 which took place on February 2, 2017, I was not present. It was my intention to vote No on that resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I was unable to be present and voting in the House of Representatives on February 13, 2017 due to weather conditions in my home state of Maine that prevented me from travel. If I had been present and voting, I would have voted Aye on Roll Call vote 86 and Aye on Roll Call vote 87 to H.R. 244 and H.R. 974 respectively.

Mr. Speaker, just hours before President Trump's inauguration, I met a young woman in my district from Djibouti who was named Fozia. Fozia had worked with our military as an interpreter. She came to the United States for the freedom and safety she could not find in her home country; but as a Muslim and immigrant, the rhetoric she heard during the election had made her question whether she was welcome here.

Since President Trump has issued his backdoor ban on Muslim immigrants and a halt on all refugees, I have thought of Fozia often as well as thousands of other refugees and asylees who have undergone arduous journeys and thorough vetting to make Maine their home.

These good people have enriched our State in many ways--raising families and filling a vital need in our aging workforce. They live in New England cities with French names that were built by Irish laborers, reminders of the many generations of immigrants who came here for a better life and who helped make our country great.

President Trump's order is likely unconstitutional, but without a doubt, it is un-American. This Congress is guilty of the same sin if we don't do everything in our power to stop it.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize a tireless advocate in my state who is retiring after nearly two decades of working to improve the lives of his fellow Mainers.

In 1997, Rufus Sames began his 19-year career with the Maine Department of Labor, starting as a Claims Taker and ending as a Labor Program Specialist. Through it all, he has lifted the burdens of claimants, employers, and advocates with prompt help, good information, and a deep understanding of the stresses individuals and families face navigating the maze of benefits following job loss and transition.

For years, whenever my staff has had a question about unemployment benefits in my state, Rufus was there to respond, often with a message sent in the wee hours of the morning when he arrived at his desk at the crack of dawn. He has been tireless, good-hearted, efficient, and effective, and will be missed immeasurably.

Public servants like Rufus are unsung heroes. He has touched many lives with his can-do spirit and deep commitment to serving the people of Maine.

I wish him all the best in his retirement and thank him wholeheartedly.

Mr. Speaker, I think just about every one of us in Congress went through security at an airport in our home State this week, and like millions of Americans who fly every day, we are protected by 40,000 TSA officers that we depend on to keep us safe.

But now, we are on the verge of stopping paychecks to all of those officers and 50,000 Border Patrol agents and 40,000 Active-Duty Coast Guard members who are needed to protect our shores. In my State and many others this winter, they are being called upon to break up the ice and keep our harbors open.

It is not just the people who keep us safe. It is FEMA. Just like much of the country, we have suffered from one of the hardest winters in memory in Maine, but if the Department of Homeland Security is shut down, then FEMA will not be able to process any new disaster relief applications from our States.

This winter has created a crisis for my State and for many local governments. Let's not add to that with a manufactured crisis of our own by forcing the Department of Homeland Security to shut down, just because some people don't like President Obama's immigration policies.

We have the votes right here in the House to pass a bill to fund DHS. Just let's take a vote on it.