Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the long and distinguished service to the country of one of my constituents, Margaret ``Peggy'' Theresa Gierie, who is turning 90 and is, I believe, among our nation's oldest federal employees.

Ms. Gierie comes from a long line of military service. She had a great grandfather who fought in the Battle of Gettysburg, her father survived gas attacks in World War I, and her husband was a U.S. Army Air Corps navigator in World War II. Ms. Gierie added to that legacy in 1945 by enlisting in the WAVES, a women's division of the U.S. Navy in which she served as a telegrapher at the Philadelphia Navy Yard. Her service earned her a World War II Victory Medal.

Ms. Gierie went on to attend college and work at several different jobs while raising three children with her husband.

At this point in her story, no one would have faulted her for taking a well-earned rest in retirement. She has done no such thing. Ms. Gierie re-entered the workforce after her husband of 50 years passed away. And since 2007, she has found a new way to serve the country--as a receptionist at the Sanford Vet Center, which offers a range of services to Maine veterans and their families.

In her time there, she has become a familiar and welcome face to the clients who often come to appointments early just to chat with her. At the same time, she handles demanding duties with a positive attitude, professionalism, dedication, and, above all, a never-ending supply of energy. She goes above and beyond for every veteran who calls or comes through the door.

Mr. Speaker, I truly admire Ms. Gierie for her incredible service, and would like to thank her for the difference she has made in the lives of Maine veterans and wish her a very happy 90th birthday.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a constituent with a story that should be heard. At 95 years old, James Watson of South Portland, Maine, is our state's oldest living veteran who was present during the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

The morning of December 7, 1941, began like many others for Mr. Watson. At the time, he was a gunner's mate first class aboard the U.S.S. Phoenix, which was anchored across the harbor from Battleship Row. He was reading the Sunday paper below deck when he felt a vibration rock the ship, then heard a call over the loudspeaker to report to battle stations.

Once topside, he saw anti-aircraft explosions in the air and smelled thick clouds of burning fuel. He knew instantly that the country was at war. What followed after was a blur. ``You're too busy to be scared. You're just mad. You're angry,'' Mr. Watson recently recounted to a local newspaper.

President Franklin Delano Roosevelt called December 7, 1941, ``a date which will live in infamy.'' And, indeed, from books, films, and photos, we can still get a sense of that day's incredible devastation and terrible loss of the life. But as the days go by, there are fewer and fewer living veterans who saw it through their own eyes and can recall what it was like to go through such an experience. Their stories are critical to ensuring that we never forget what happened there.

I appreciate that Mr. Watson has shared his memories so we can better understand and remember one of the most pivotal moments in our nation's history. And I thank him for his brave service that day, and the rest that followed.

Mr. Speaker, from my District Office in Portland, Maine, I am fortunate to have a beautiful view of Portland Harbor and Casco Bay. On a typical day, one might see cruise ships carrying thousands of visitors to our city, lobster boats setting and pulling their traps, kayakers paddling to Fort Gorges, and harbor seals popping their heads out of the water.

What's remarkable about this scene is that the bay's many uses--as a place for recreation, a source of jobs and economic activity, and habitat for marine life--coexist in a way that is not possible in many other places in the country. The bay is healthy enough to balance the needs of our community with the needs of the environment.

I rise today to recognize and celebrate a man who has worked tirelessly to strike that careful balance and maintain it. Joe Payne is the Casco Baykeeper, placing him in the very difficult job of improving and safeguarding the health of our bay. After nearly 25 years of doing that job remarkably well--as a scientist, advocate, and relationship builder--he is retiring.

Joe's accomplishments during his tenure as Baykeeper are too many to list in full, but here are some highlights. During a 1996 oil tanker spill, he pushed successfully for a quicker and more thorough response than what was initially given, preventing what could have been a disastrous impact on the bay. He launched a groundbreaking water- quality monitoring program that has mobilized 650 volunteers. He helped move 35,000 lobsters that would have been harmed or displaced by a harbor dredge. And he fought for state legislation that has kept cruise ships from dumping their wastewater into the bay.

I have had the pleasure of working with Joe over the years. Most recently, I appeared with him at a press conference where he used dye, a bowl of seawater, and a chunk of dry ice to demonstrate how climate change is making our ocean more acidic and less habitable for shellfish. The dramatic reaction was a great example of Joe's ability to draw attention to critical issues in ways that make people understand and care.

I wish my very best to Joe in retirement, though I will miss him in the role of Baykeeper. If I need any reminder of his leadership and legacy, however, all I have to do is look out the window.

Mr. Speaker, I voted ``yes'' on H.R. 4012, the Secret Science Reform Act of 2014. I would like to express that I intended to vote ``no'' on H.R. 4012.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join my colleagues in honoring the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF).

The Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1964 was established to assist federal, state and local governments in their efforts to create and sustain public outdoor recreation facilities.

LWCF success stories have taken place in every state in the Nation. My home state of Maine alone has received $40 million in grants for federal grant program projects since 1965. The program has helped preserve some of Maine's most treasured spaces--including the Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge, Acadia National Park, the Saint Croix Island International Historic Site, and the Appalachian National Scenic Trail--as well as many more nationwide.

As a member of the House Appropriations Committee, I will continue to fight for the full funding of the LWCF so that it can continue the great work it has been doing for the past 50 years. And I raise my voice along with those of others who are calling for a reauthorization of this important legislation.

Again, my sincere thanks go to the thousands of people across the country who work to make the LWCF a success. It is my honor to congratulate them and the LWCF program on this important milestone.

Mr. Speaker, at a time when we are finally increasing access to health coverage for millions of Americans, those who need it the most are left without.

Nearly every day, I hear from constituents in my State of Maine who are suffering because they are caught in a political battle over the expansion of Medicaid. These people are our friends and neighbors, and many of them have chronic conditions, injuries, or mental illnesses that prevent them from working. But because they live in States that have chosen not to expand the program, they have been left without any affordable options.

Instead, people are putting off getting health care until their needs are critical. Hospitals and health centers end up picking up the tab, and our economy continues to be strained.

In Maine, almost 70,000 people are struggling without health care because Medicaid hasn't been expanded. I call on Governors across the country, including my own, to think about these people rather than politics when they make decisions about health care in their States and expand Medicaid now.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize an honorable World War II veteran in my state whose bravery saved the lives of many during combat on Okinawa.

In 1945, Roland Glenn helped to lead the men of his company to capture key Japanese positions by scaling an escarpment in the face of intense resistance. The unit needed the element of surprise, and for the enemy to believe that they were facing a large group of American soldiers (instead of the 35 that made it up the escarpment). The unit's success in this dangerous situation is due, in large part, to Mr. Glenn's leadership and bravery.

The plan to overtake the enemy position was difficult and had little room for error. Many of these soldiers were young men, afraid and far from home. It was not only Mr. Glenn's ingenious plan of attack that saved many lives; he also encouraged them to keep going, empowering them and boosting their morale. Together, these brave men were able to beat the odds and win the battle.

Since his time in the Army, Mr. Glenn has worked as a peace activist, continuing his service to our country. He was then, and continues to be, a great leader and patriot. I wish Mr. Glenn all the best and thank him wholeheartedly for his service to our nation.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment that is offered here today, which would block funding for the implementation of National Ocean Policy.

The National Ocean Policy seeks to improve the coordinated management of our oceans and coasts and to address the most pressing issues facing our

oceans, resources, and coastal communities.

In fact, just 2 weeks ago, there were over 100 different ocean users meeting in Massachusetts to help develop New England's ocean plan. This included lobstermen from Maine, my home State; science educators from New Hampshire, fishermen from Massachusetts, clean energy representatives from Rhode Island, and recreational fishermen from Connecticut, all meeting with Federal and State agencies to talk about how to improve their options for their local businesses, build resiliency for coastal communities in the face of extreme weather events, and maintain the health of the ocean that provides us with goods and services we need and enjoy.

The National Ocean Policy does not call for ``zoning'' the ocean. Rather, it is a strategy to increase efficiency by bringing stakeholders together and giving citizens and businesses a voice in the decisionmaking process. This policy provides a way for the Federal Government to hear from and to coordinate activities with States, communities, and business owners.

Many State and local interests are eager to coordinate with the Federal Government, and this policy is already helping to make that happen.

Let's be clear. The policy is really about helping agencies like NOAA fisheries work more closely with fishermen and the Navy to coordinate with port communities. Why should we consider prohibiting these critically important relationships between businesses, States, and Federal interests?

The National Ocean Policy helps to ensure that our resources, our culture, our history, and the economic vitality of our communities are fully considered in the decisions concerning our oceans.

I urge my colleagues to join me, and I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline).

I want to thank my colleague from Rhode Island for his articulate thoughts and for reinforcing what those of us in coastal communities truly believe.

Mr. Chairman, I just want to say one more time that this is critically important policy for our country. I am fortunate to represent a State that has some of the highest level of shoreline of any State in the Nation. We have fishermen. We have economic interests on the shore. Everyday, I hear from my constituents who are deeply concerned about the changes that we are facing, whether it is the sea level rising, changing in the fisheries, loss of species, economic issues involving our coastlines, working waterfront--these are serious issues. This represents people's livelihoods. Coastal communities, businesses, our economic interests are here at stake. I can't imagine the idea that we would move backward in National Ocean Policy and that we would lose the opportunity to coordinate on these critical interests, that we would do anything that would endanger the economic development and the economic and cultural future of our communities, our fisheries, and so many businesses that States like mine are completely dependent on.

I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and recognize that we have severe issues ahead of us and we have a lot of work to do.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment blocks funding for the Department of Energy's Climate Model Development and Validation program. This is climate science denial at its worst.

The world's top scientific institutions are all telling us that we have a rapidly closing window to reduce our carbon pollution before the catastrophic impacts of climate change cannot be avoided.

So far, the world has already warmed by 0.8 degrees Celsius, and we are already seeing the effects of climate change. Most scientists agree that 2 degrees Celsius is the maximum amount we can warm without really dangerous effects, although many scientists now believe that even 2 degrees is far too much, given the effects we are already seeing. But absent dramatic action, we are on track to warm 4 to 6 degrees Celsius by mid-century. That is more than 10 degrees Fahrenheit.

The International Energy Agency has concluded that if the world does not take action to reduce carbon pollution by 2017--just 3 years from now--then it will be virtually impossible to limit warming to 2 degrees Celsius.

How do we know all this? There are multiple lines of evidence, including direct measurements. But scientists also use sophisticated computer models of how the atmosphere and oceans work and how they respond to different atmospheric concentrations of heat-trapping gases.

For projection of future emissions and their impacts, scientists have made numerous advances by collaborating across academic fields, including climatology, chemistry, biology, economics, energy dynamics, agriculture, scenario building, and risk management.

These projections are critical as they provide guideposts to understanding how quickly and how steeply the world needs to cut carbon pollution in order to avoid the worst effects of climate change.

The goal of the DOE's climate model development and validation program is to further improve the reliability of climate models and equip policymakers and citizens with tools to predict the current and future effects of climate change, such as sea level rise, extreme weather events, and drought.

Mr. Gosar's amendment scraps this program. It says no to enhancing the reliability of our climate models. It says no to improving our understanding of how the climate is changing. It says no to informing policymakers about the consequences of unmitigated climate change. I think that is absolutely irresponsible.

The amazing thing is that the base bill already zeros out the funding for this program; but, apparently, that isn't enough to satisfy the Republicans' climate denial.

So Mr. Gosar has offered this amendment to just reiterate the point that the House Republicans reject the overwhelming scientific evidence about climate change. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Madam Chair, I support this amendment offered by my colleague from California, which would strike the anti-National Ocean Policy language contained in H.R. 4899.

The National Ocean Policy seeks to improve the coordinated management of our oceans and coasts, and to address the most pressing issues facing our oceans, resources, and coastal communities. In fact, right now, there are over a hundred different ocean users meeting in Massachusetts to help develop New England's ocean plan. Lobstermen from Maine, science educators from New Hampshire, fishermen from Massachusetts, clean energy company representatives from Rhode Island, and recreational fishermen from Connecticut are meeting with federal and state agencies to talk about how to improve their options for their local businesses, build resiliency for coastal communities in the face of extreme weather events, and maintain the health of the ocean that provides us with the goods and services we need and enjoy.

The work and research conducted under the National Ocean Policy supports tens of millions of jobs, which in turn generate billions of dollars for our coastal communities. The National Ocean Policy improves government efficiency and decision outcomes by bringing a variety of government agencies together at a single table. The planning and coordination done according to this policy involves stakeholders in the policy-making process, helping to produce relevant policies supported across sectors. This policy also balances the needs of a variety of interests, ensuring that the fishing industry and working waterfronts are preserved while new energy businesses and other economic sectors are developed.

The National Ocean Policy helps to ensure that our resources, our culture, our history, and the economic vitality of our communities are fully considered in decisions concerning our oceans.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the wise stewardship of the oceans and our ocean economy by supporting the Lowenthal amendment.

Thank you very much, Mr. Welch.

Mr. Chair, I am very proud to sponsor this amendment, along with my colleagues from Vermont, New Hampshire, and my fellow Mainer, to exempt pipeline reversals from the provisions of this bill.

In my opinion, the way this bill is currently written, it is extremely irresponsible because it basically exempts cross-border pipeline projects from the National Environmental Policy Act and would reduce not only critical Federal reviews, but also limit the vital public input that NEPA brings. That would raise great concerns for the constituents in my district who have a lot that they want to say in the public input process.

The amendment scope is limited to pipeline reversals and would at least make it clear that the underlying bill's waivers do not apply to the so-called Portland Montreal Pipe Line and other pipeline reversals. The Portland Montreal Pipe Line proposal threatens the entire southern Maine watershed, where 15 percent of my State's population gets its drinking water.

Oversight by NEPA is essential for this pipeline and any other, and I strongly oppose any attempts to waive NEPA or other reviews for this project. That is why I am here, to urge all my colleagues who care about ensuring that there is strong oversight and environmental review to support this amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a wife- and-husband team in my District for being selected as the Small Business Administration's Maine Small Business Person of the Year for 2014.

Mary Allen Lindemann and Alan Spear founded Coffee by Design (CBD) in Portland, Maine, 20 years ago with one part-time employee. From its humble beginnings, CBD has become a Maine institution. Today it employs 55 people, sells its coffee wholesale to numerous clients across Maine and the country, and has five locations, including a beautiful new 45,000-square-foot roastery, office, cafe, and training facility.

All this growth has not detracted one bit from the company's commitment to locally roasting, blending, and brewing a superior cup of coffee.

As much as for the taste of its coffee, though, people in Maine love CBD for its community mindedness--locally and internationally. Giving herself the title of ``Community Builder,'' Mary Allen has made sure that CBD takes great care of its employees, supports and leads many community causes, and creates a welcoming and compassionate feel for all who come into the company's coffee houses. As ``Chief Bean,'' Alan travels the world seeking coffee sources that use sustainable practices and treat farmers fairly. Under their leadership, CBD has shown that businesses can have a heart without sacrificing success.

I appreciate the SBA for recognizing CBD and other small businesses for their leadership, as well as supporting their growth with the help of local banks and other partners. My sincere congratulations to Alan and Mary Allen as well as all the other Maine businesses being recognized this year.

Thank you for yielding me the time and for recognizing that it is the great State of Maine.

Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment, which would block funding for the implementation of the National Ocean Policy.

This important policy seeks to improve the coordinated management of our oceans and coasts to address the most pressing issues facing our oceans, our resources, and our coastal communities. I happen to live on an island 12 miles off the coast of Maine, so I am well aware of the need for the improved coordination between Federal agencies and the inclusion of stakeholders in the policymaking process.

The National Ocean Policy brings together a variety of agencies at a single table, and it improves government efficiency and decision outcomes.

The work and research conducted under the National Ocean Policy supports tens of millions of jobs, which, in turn, generate billions of dollars for our coastal communities.

For example, in Maine, working waterfronts are critically important to Maine's coastal economy. These working waterfronts are critical for a variety of water-dependent activities, like ports and fishing docks, that are at the heart of our coastal culture and economy.

These water-dependent businesses, many of which are icons in Maine, are struggling to maintain their access to water in the face of increasing development pressure.

The National Ocean Policy will provide a framework to preserve waterfront access to traditional groups like fishermen. It is an extremely important issue for fishermen and the residents of Maine.

One of the constituents in my district, Richard Nelson, a lobsterman, says: ``The ocean is our workplace, our cultural heritage, and it economically sustains us and our extended communities.''

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting wise stewardship of our Nation's oceans and our ocean economy by opposing this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I want to oppose the amendment offered here tonight because I think we shouldn't be prohibiting any new catch share programs because it is such an important tool to manage our Nation's fisheries. This effectively supersedes the Regional Fisheries Management Council process that was already set up by Congress.

We have a lot of families in Maine who have very deep ties to the ocean, generations of Mainers who have worked in the fishing industry, but fisheries are facing a crisis.

Every year, our fishermen struggle to make a living on fewer fish and fewer trips going out fishing. The New England Fisheries Management Council is working very hard to develop solutions for these challenges by implementing catch share programs as an effective way to manage the fisheries.

This results in success stories, many that we have seen in Maine. Take a look at Port Clyde, one of our largest inshore fisheries communities. The fishermen in this sector have developed a fishermen's cooperative, Port Clyde Fresh Catch, as a way to market their fish using environmentally conscious fishing methods.

The result is sustainable fish, better quality fish, better prices for the fishermen. Membership in the sector has led to a profitable and sustainable on and offshore fishing industry.

I just want to say that fishermen in New England are not being forced into enrolling in the catch share programs. They can choose to stay in the common pool fishery or join a sector, but if we remove catch share as a management option, we would only be hindering fisheries management efforts around our Nation, stifling the creativity and innovation within the fishing industry, and preventing fishermen from working in an industry that is safer and more profitable.

Catch shares work. I have seen the benefits firsthand in Maine. I don't think we should be denying fishing communities the chance to improve their industry by removing a management option.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this rule.

This legislation would authorize over $520 billion to the Department of Defense, not including over $79 billion in war funding, which I oppose; yet, for such a large bill, there are many amendments that my colleagues wanted to offer that will never see the House floor because of this very limited rule.

One issue that, I think, deserves discussion is the inclusion of an $800 million authorization for an unbudgeted 12th LPD-17 class ship. While we are still addressing the effects of the sequester, which I voted against, I have concerns about this provision.

In particular, I am concerned that the committee does not address the fact that there is a Navy shipbuilding agreement in place regarding the DDG-51s and the LPDs.

This agreement requires that the Navy obligate funding and support for another DDG-51 destroyer if another LPD is awarded. Under a different rule, we may have been able to have had an open discussion about this issue and about so many others.

I urge my colleagues to oppose this rule.

Mr. Speaker, I'm proud to be from a state that features some of the most beautiful and diverse natural landscapes in the country. From the mountains to the sea, with deep woods in between, Maine has many places that inspire a sense of wonder for the world around us.

That said, they are not always easy to reach. For that reason, I'm grateful for organizations and volunteers in our state who work so hard to protect these special places while building trails and other accommodations so the public can enjoy them.

I would like to recognize one of these groups in particular for recently restoring a key section of the Appalachian Trail, which stretches from Georgia to Maine. With partner organizations and dedicated volunteers, the Maine Appalachian Trail Club rebuilt the trail up White Cap Mountain, whose summit boasts some of the most spectacular views in the state. Support from the Federal Recreational Trails Program--an absolutely critical source of funding that has helped build thousands of miles of public trails across the country-- was also critical to the project's success.

The difficulty of the rebuilding should not be understated. The trail is in a remote location on very rugged terrain. But the club's care and hard work have resulted in a path that will last for many years, accommodate more hikers, and limit environmental impacts on the mountain. Thousands of hikers have already used the newly refurbished trail.

Mr. Speaker, projects like this that benefit our community and deepen our appreciation of nature should not go unrecognized. My sincere congratulations go to the Maine Appalachian Trail Club on a job well done.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize a tireless and visionary leader in my state who is retiring after several decades of working to improve the lives of homeless Mainers.

In 1985, Don Gean took over as director of the York County Alcoholism Center, which was housed in a crumbling former jail. Today, that organization is called the York County Shelter Programs, an innovative network of facilities and services that serves 400 clients. Among its facilities are a bakery where clients learn vocational skills while preparing the food served at several shelter sites; a working farm that produces eggs for the bakery and houses one of the largest solar arrays in the state; and 36 residences for transitional housing. Under Don's leadership, the organization has come a long way from a condemned jail.

Early on in his tenure, Don resolved that his organization needed to do more than provide beds and meals if it was going to make a lasting impact on its clients. To that end, he developed a range of vocational, medical, mental health and substance abuse programs to give people the support, tools, and self-confidence they needed to turn their lives around. Today, the shelter's recidivism rate is an astonishingly low 5.3 percent. It has become a model program for dealing with the challenges of homelessness.

But the best way to mark Don's legacy is in the words of the people he served. One man who first came to the shelter in 2007 now owns his own home and regularly volunteers for the organization. ``This is a lifesaving organization,'' he said. ``Don is a big part of saving people's lives, but he won't tell you that. He'll take no credit.''

I had the pleasure of serving with Don in the Maine State Legislature in the early 1990s, where he became a statewide leader on the issue of homelessness. He was then and continues to be a practical, shrewd, and effective advocate, but above all a kind, good-hearted person who reminds us that no one in our society should ever be written off.

I wish Don all the best in his retirement and thank him wholeheartedly for his incredible work.