Floor Statements

Madam Chair, I rise in support of the en bloc amendment, which includes my bipartisan World Language Advancement and Readiness amendment cosponsored by Representatives Don Young, Gil Cisneros, Rick Larsen, Jimmy Panetta, Jim Langevin, and Seth Moulton.

Our amendment would direct the DoD to award three-year competitive grants to Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) schools and to local education agencies (LEAs) that host a Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps (JROTC) program for the establishment, improvement, or expansion of world language programs in elementary and secondary schools.

The future national security and economic well-being of the United States will depend substantially on the ability of our citizens to read, speak, and understand the languages and cultures of other nations.

Unfortunately, multiple studies and GAO reports have found that ``by several measures, the United States has neglected languages in its educational curricula, its international strategies, and its domestic policies.'' The U.S. puts itself at a disadvantage in our inability to communicate with our international peers.

Research has shown that the ``critical window'' for language learning is from ages 10-18, making investment in our elementary and secondary schools a top priority.

DoDEA schools and school districts with J-ROTC programs are uniquely positioned to reach children who are likely to join the military or work for our intelligence communities.

Language comprehension is not just a luxury: it is vital to our economic interests, to our diplomacy, and to our national security.

I urge adoption of this critical amendment.

Madam Speaker, I rise to include in the Record the executive summary of the North Carolina Commission of Inquiry on Torture's (NCCIT) seminal report, Torture Flights: North Carolina's Role in the CIA's Rendition and Torture Program. I do so today in recognition of the United Nation's ``International Day in Support of Victims of Torture,'' and to emphasize the continuing role of Congress as well as informed and engaged citizens in bringing to light the Central Intelligence Agency's (CIA) Rendition, Detention, and Interrogation (RDI) program.

I am reminded of this important duty by an exceptional group of North Carolinians who established NCCIT--a non-governmental and non-partisan commission--to investigate North Carolina's participation in the CIA's RDI program following the September 11 attacks, which is described in its September 2018 report.

The report found that in the first stage of the RDI program, a private company based in North Carolina used publicly-funded infrastructure to conduct over 80 percent of identified CIA rendition flights from September 2001 to March 2004. North Carolina public infrastructure was therefore involved in the detention and rendition of at least 49 individuals, without regard for the rule of law or due process. According to the report, some of these individuals turned out not to be involved in terrorism and have yet to receive official acknowledgement or redress, and some of these individuals continue to suffer from their mistreatment.

This report complements the Senate Intelligence Committee's 2014 report on the RDI program, which found that the CIA's ``enhanced interrogation techniques'' were not effective, that the program was poorly managed, and that the CIA misled Congress and the public. I commend Senator Dianne Feinstein and the other Committee members and staff who worked on this report, and I applaud NCCIT for their steadfast commitment to bringing transparency and accountability to the State of North Carolina's involvement in these activities.

Even in our darkest moments, we must always uphold core American values, including respect for the rule of law and human rights. I encourage my colleagues to read NCCIT's report, including its recommendations for local, state, and federal officials, so that we may learn from the mistakes of the past and chart a more promising course for the future.

Torture Flights: North Carolina's Role in the CIA Rendition and Torture

Program--Executive Summary

North Carolina Commission of Inquiry on Torture

In the wake of the attacks of September 11, 2001, the U.S.

government ushered in a large-scale program of secret

detention and torture that relied significantly on the State

of North Carolina. Six days after the attacks, President

George W. Bush signed a covert memorandum that authorized the

Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to seize, detain, and

interrogate suspected terrorists around the world. This

report investigates North Carolina's role in that illegal

program.

The program made use of Department of Defense facilities, a

network of ten CIA-controlled secret prisons or black sites

in six countries, and the facilities of foreign governments.

In what was called the Rendition, Detention, and

Interrogation (RDI) program, the CIA abducted and imprisoned

at least 119 individuals before the practice was officially

ended and repudiated by Executive Order in 2009. Given that

detainees were also handed over to foreign governments, and

the secrecy surrounding the program, the number of affected

individuals is likely far higher.

Within weeks of the RDI program's authorization, Aero

Contractors, Ltd. (Aero), based in Smithfield, NC, began

operating the first of two aircraft for extraordinary, or

violent and secret, renditions. Between September 2001 and

March 2004, Aero-operated aircraft--a Gulfstream V turbojet

and Boeing 737 business jet--were used in more than 80% of

identified RDI renditions. Over the full length of the

program, Aero transported 34 of the known 119 CIA prisoners,

plus at least 15 of those sent by the CIA to foreign custody,

on 69 identified rendition circuits. These flights, using

North Carolina's public infrastructure and flown by its

citizens, implicate North Carolina directly in abduction,

forced disappearance, and torture.

Since 2005, North Carolina anti-torture activists from

across the political spectrum have protested these actions.

Motivated by diverse ethical and religious beliefs as well as

a firm commitment to the rule of law, activists from North

Carolina Stop Torture Now have joined with the North Carolina

Council of Churches and many other allies. Citizens have

pressured public officials at all levels of government to

investigate the state's complicity in the CIA's illegal and

immoral program.

Citizen-led activism culminated in 2015 in the creation of

the North Carolina Commission of Inquiry on Torture (NCCIT),

a non-governmental organization dedicated to transparency and

accountability regarding the state's participation in U.S.

torture. The NCCIT launched officially in 2017 with a blue-

ribbon panel of Commissioners who have expertise in domestic

and international law, military operations, human rights,

interfaith religious dialogue, psychology, and public health.

The Commission initiated a large-scale investigation into

North Carolina's involvement in torture and rendition.

Torture Flights: North Carolina's role in the CIA rendition

and torture program details the results of that investigation

and makes recommendations for future action. The report draws

on original research and expert testimony provided at public

hearings as well as the extensive data compiled by The

Rendition Project, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism,

and the Human Rights Policy Lab of the University of North

Carolina School of Law, among other sources.

Torture Flights provides the most comprehensive research to

date on North Carolina's complicity in the rendition phase of

the RDI program. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence

``Torture Report,'' a redacted Executive Summary of which was

released in 2014 while the full report remains classified,

focused on the detention and interrogation of detainees who

were held in CIA custody. Torture Flights demonstrates that

that program depended upon both North Carolina's private

citizens and public infrastructure.

Further, Torture Flights builds on the Senate's work by

addressing renditions themselves as an integral component of

a system to break individuals down through violent

interrogations. As the report details, Aero transported at

least 49 individuals, who were forcibly seized without any

due process, in a manner that itself amounted to torture and

cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Preparation for

``rendition'' involved physical and sometimes sexual assault,

drugging, and sensory deprivation. Rendition flights were

experiences of prolonged pain, dread, and terror. The

whereabouts of the individuals flown by Aero, who were

citizens of 16 countries and included a 16-year-old student

and a pregnant woman, were not disclosed, not even to their

families. They were ``disappeared'' for months if not years,

causing agony to them and their loved ones. Even today, the

fates of eight of those rendered by Aero remain unknown.

Many of the prisoners were taken to CIA ``black sites,''

where they experienced beatings, prolonged stress positions,

temperature extremes, long-term isolation, various water

tortures, mock execution, and sexual abuse. In violation of

international law, the CIA transported some prisoners to

foreign custody where they were subject to torture and abuse.

Kidnapping, torture, and secret detention occurred without

respect for victims' innocence or guilt and absent any legal

process for them to contest their abductions.

Survivors of the RDI program and their families continue to

suffer from these experiences. Torture and prolonged

detention have left lasting physical, emotional, and social

injuries. This in turn harms relationships and livelihoods,

which then amplifies the psychological damage. To resume

meaningful and secure lives, survivors need medical,

psychological and social support, guaranteed legal status,

and economic opportunity.

This report also carefully considers the moral and legal

responsibility of North Carolina for its involvement in CIA-

sponsored activities. The federal government has

international law obligations under both the Convention

Against Torture and the International Covenant on Civil and

Political Rights not only to prevent torture, but also to

provide accountability and redress for torture. It did none

of these and therefore has failed to meet its international

obligations. Given that the federal government has abdicated

responsibility, North Carolina can and should fill the gap.

Its role as home to Aero obligates it to do so. State and

federal laws against conspiracy and corruption are among

those instruments that apply to Aero's activities.

As this report documents, Aero's central role in the CIA

rendition and torture program is beyond dispute. But instead

of holding Aero accountable, the State of North Carolina and

Johnston County until now have effectively endorsed its

activities. This support has taken the form of hosting the

company's headquarters at the Johnston County Airport and

providing it with various airport and other county services.

Since Aero's participation in criminal abduction and assault

was publicly revealed, the State of North Carolina has made

several grants to the county airport, at least one of which

was specifically used to fortify the perimeter of only Aero's

corner of the facility.

Torture Flights concludes with specific recommendations

directed at federal and state officials as well as toward

North Carolina citizens, whose engagement has kept the

spotlight on Aero's activities and whose continued attention

is needed to ensure accountability. The recommendations seek

to increase transparency about the program and accountability

for the illegal actions; provide acknowledgment, redress and

reparations to its victims; and prevent the future use of

torture. As the report notes, additional research is also

needed on the involvement of other North Carolina private

corporations and public airports in extraordinary renditions

in order to complete the record of the RDI program. At the

broadest level, the goal is to ensure that neither the

federal government nor the state of North Carolina engage in

or support torture again.

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

Mr. Chairman, section 193 simply ensures that when TIFIA loans are repaid by local funds, they are treated as part of the local share of transportation projects. That sounds like common sense to me.

Let me address some of the concerns addressed by my colleague from Georgia.

First, this provision was included in the bill with the full support of the authorizers, the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

Second, when my colleague was in the majority, I would remind him there were no concerns with making permanent authorizing changes on the Transportation appropriations bill, and it did not matter if a highway reauthorization bill was on the horizon.

Third, section 193 is not a significant departure from current law. Today, the Department of Transportation may--may--determine that a TIFIA loan repaid from non-Federal funds--that is, local funding--can be designated as part of a non-Federal share of Transportation projects costs. This is particularly important for large, complex projects, which are seeking to piece together local, State, and Federal funding from multiple sources.

The gentleman claims to be concerned about small communities losing their fair share of Federal capital investment grant funding, but he should know that we have appropriated ample funding for all projects in the grants pipeline. The bill includes more than $430 million for smaller projects, which are often projects in small and midsize communities, in addition to the $500 million that was appropriated last year.

To provide greater certainty to States and local communities, section 193 requires the Department to consider if a TIFIA loan has been repaid by local funds. That is just common sense. If a local government is going to use local revenue to repay a loan, why wouldn't that count as a local share?

For an administration that speaks so often about innovative financing, public-private partnerships, and local communities taking on more when it comes to improving our Nation's infrastructure, it makes no sense to discourage State and local governments from contributing to the overall cost of a project. I strongly urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.

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

Mr. Chair, I appreciate my colleague's concern about the committee of jurisdiction, so I am happy to be able to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), the chairman of that committee.

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

Mr. Chair, if our colleague says that the word ``may'' was put in to prevent a perversion of the process, I will simply say, as Mr. DeFazio has made very clear, we put in the word ``shall'' to prevent a clear and present perversion of the process.

Mr. Chair, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, pursuant to section 3 of House Resolution 445, as the designee of the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), I offer amendments en bloc.

Mr. Chair, the amendments included in the en bloc amendment were made in order by the rule.

Mr. Chair, I support this amendment. I urge its adoption, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Foster).

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Malinowski).

Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, pursuant to section 3 of House Resolution 445, and as the designee of the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), I offer amendments en bloc.

Mr. Chair, the amendments included in this en bloc were made in order by the rule. They have been agreed to by both sides. I support the amendment, and I urge its adoption.

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

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York (Miss Rice).

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

Mr. Chairman, we are prepared to close, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for raising this issue.

I want to note that the underlying bill provides $1 million for the Transportation Research Board to conduct a study to review all aspects of the transportation of liquefied natural gas in rail tank cars, and it requires the Department to incorporate findings and recommendations from this study into any rulemaking on the transportation of LNG in rail tank cars before issuing a final rule authorizing such shipments.

Mr. Chair, I plan to vote for this amendment, and I look forward to continuing to work with my colleague on this issue.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment.

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Virginia (Ms. Wexton).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Virginia (Ms. Wexton).

May I inquire how much time I have remaining.

Mr. Chairman, I am baffled and distressed that my colleagues seem so intent on targeting such a vulnerable population.

This Equal Access in Accordance with an Individual's Gender Identity in Community Planning and Development Programs rule simply ensures that all Americans have access to HUD services regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, or marital status.

This amendment strikes protections for homeless youth seeking help in shelters. It also strikes eligibility for other HUD programs and for FHA loans. Mr. Chairman, research shows that same-sex couples and transgender individuals experience significant discrimination when seeking housing.

LGBTQ youth comprise up to 40 percent of the homeless population. Let me, again, remind my colleagues of the risks faced, as Ms. Wexton has stressed, the risks faced by transgender, homeless youth when they are living on the streets.

This population is much more likely to experience physical, emotional, sexual abuse, intimate partner violence, sexual exploitation, or trafficking. LGBTQ youth have over twice the rate of early death compared to other youth experiencing homelessness.

When these young people arrive at a shelter, they are not a safety risk for others. On the contrary, they are desperate. They are vulnerable. Many are homeless because their families rejected them for being transgender. We should be doing everything we can to ensure they have alternatives to living on the streets, and that when they ask for help, they are not turned away and revictimized.

Secretary Carson assured our committee and our colleagues on the Financial Services Committee as well, that HUD would not revoke these protections. But right after he made those assurances, the announcement came that he was doing just that.

Our subcommittee has repeatedly asked the Department to provide a report detailing their strategy for continuing to ensure that LGBTQ individuals have access to HUD programs, and that they plan for disseminating this information to housing providers. They have yet to provide such a strategy or such a plan, leaving us with no choice, Mr. Chairman, but to enshrine the Equal Access in Accordance with an Individual's Gender Identity in Community Planning and Development Programs rule in law, and to permanently reinstate the Department's guidance to ensure that providers have the tools they need to protect and to serve this vulnerable population.

This heartless amendment would lead to more discrimination, more homeless LGBTQ youth, and more vulnerability to abuse and violence.

We simply must vote ``no,'' and I urge my colleagues to do so, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

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

Mr. Chair, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Ms. Clark).

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support-- in strong opposition to this amendment.

Our subcommittee has repeatedly asked the Department to provide a report detailing their strategy for continuing to ensure that LGBTQ individuals have access to HUD programs and the plan for disseminating that information to housing providers. HUD has yet to provide any strategy or any plan. So that is why we have acted. It has left us no choice but to act.

This House took great strides a few weeks ago in passing the Equality Act, and we are certainly not going to turn around today and take those rights away. I am offended we have not one, not two, but three amendments designed precisely to take those rights away.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to oppose this discrimination and to oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask how much time is remaining.

Mr. Chairman, this incredible amendment would target some of our most vulnerable people in our society today.

A study by True Colors United found that among homeless transgender youth, 75 percent had been victims of physical, emotional, or sexual abuse; 25 percent had been victims of intimate partner violence; and 20 percent had been victims of sexual exploitation or trafficking.

Mr. Chairman, more than 300 domestic violence and sexual violence organizations have signed a national consensus statement agreeing it is appropriate to serve transgender women alongside other women according to their gender identity.

They agreed there is no safety issue despite the rhetoric heard today. In fact, transgender women are much more likely to suffer abuse themselves.

So let's not turn that safety issue on its head. Let's reinstate the guidance, let's enforce the rule, and let's make certain that in this society people are treated equally and fairly.

Mr. Chairman, let's reject this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, as the designee of Chairwoman Lowey, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Napolitano) for the purpose of a colloquy.

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman and the colleagues she mentioned for bringing up this important issue. It may impose legal and financial challenges to certain States. Certainly it is an important issue for my friend from California and for her State, so I will be happy to work with her and the FAA to find a mutually acceptable solution.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise as the designee of Chairwoman Lowey, and I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Raskin) for the purpose of a colloquy.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank our colleague from Maryland for highlighting this issue of aviation noise and the need for the FAA to be responsive to community concerns.

Noise we know is an unfortunate and unpleasant side effect of the investments, the jobs, and the mobility gained from aviation service. We received numerous requests about noise from colleagues this year, and we underscore the FAA should make every feasible effort to assist airports, airlines, and local communities mitigate noise for the health and benefit of those affected.

Mr. Chair, I thank our colleague for raising this issue, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I rise to support this amendment.

The Indian Community Development Block Grant program provides Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Villages the opportunity to compete for a flexible source of funding to address pressing housing and community needs in Indian Country.

We know the needs continue to exceed the funding available. In fiscal year 2017, HUD was able to fund only 62 percent of the eligible applications it received. That is why we provided in the bill $75 million, a $10 million increase over last year, for the program. This amendment would further increase that to $80 million.

Mr. Chair, I support this amendment and the strong investment it would

make possible, but I do want to express a note of concern about the offsetting cuts to HUD's Cybersecurity and Information Technology Fund.

HUD is facing daunting challenges to upgrade its technology infrastructure. As we head into conference negotiations with the Senate, I am hopeful we can reach a comprehensive, bipartisan agreement that makes it possible to boost funding both for critical housing programs and for IT modernization at HUD.

Again, I urge adoption of the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. Chair, I strongly oppose this amendment.

Mr. Chair, this amendment indiscriminately cuts programs in transportation and housing with, apparently, very little thought as to the relative merit of the programs contained in the bill.

The amendment would result in less affordable housing and less support for Habitat for Humanity, public housing, homeless veterans, housing, the elderly, the disabled, and the Department of Transportation and its agencies responsible for the safety of our roads, our bridges, our aviation, our pipelines, and our waterways.

It would reduce funds available to pay the bills submitted by State and local governments for their transportation programs. These programs are the legal responsibility of the Federal Government.

The base bill enables us to continue to make progress in restoring our infrastructure. This amendment would roll that back.

This amendment would not encourage DOT or HUD to do more with less. It would force them to do less with less.

Our colleague describes this as a modest amendment. Well, let me just ask how modest these cuts are for his home State of Wisconsin.

Mr. Chair, is $3.1 million for CDBG funding, which could have been used to rehabilitate housing or improve water mains and sewers, a modest cut?

$12.4 million in Wisconsin funding for CDBG dollars, the money that would be generated, is that modest?

Or is $1.5 million in HOME funding in Wisconsin, $1.8 million in funding for transit in Wisconsin, or $1.3 million in funding for highway infrastructure in Wisconsin?

Our colleague may want to inquire back home as to how modest those cuts are.

The amendment is particularly galling since the gentleman voted for the 2017 tax bill, a $1.5 trillion tax cut, most of which went to the top 1 percent.

He is concerned about the deficit. That tax bill alone adds $1.9 trillion to our deficit from 2018 to 2027.

Why is it more important to give tax cuts to the wealthy than it is to build affordable housing and other infrastructure like roads and bridges that all of our citizens need and that they benefit from? It doesn't make sense.

Mr. Chair, I strongly urge Members to oppose this damaging and indiscriminate amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, as to the tax cut, I will simply quote very reliable figures from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: The top 1 percent of the population received 34 percent of the benefits of the tax cut.

As to the constitutional point, if I hear that correctly, the point is that these programs should be eliminated. Constitutionality raises the issue as to whether this should, perhaps, be zero funding, as opposed to these indiscriminate cuts that would do so much damage to the State of Wisconsin and to the entire country.

Mr. Chair, I urge opposition of the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I am prepared to claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I want to strongly support this amendment and commend the gentleman for offering it. He is highlighting horrible conditions with the situation in Alexander County, Illinois.

HUD's IG has concluded that HUD should have done more to oversee this decades-long situation, these deteriorating conditions at the Alexander County Housing Authority and has made multiple recommendations to address the situation and to ensure that something like this doesn't recur.

In fiscal year 2018, our House THUD report requested that HUD work with the community to find adequate housing for displaced residents, and to quickly investigate the root causes of the situation.

The base bill, I am happy to say, does fund the IG account above the request level, partly to help with work on this issue. And we have also increased funding in the Public Housing Operating and Capital Funds to provide more resources to public housing authorities for capital improvements and better management.

Mr. Chairman, we are continuing to monitor this situation. We expect HUD to implement the Inspector General's recommendations as quickly as possible. So I urge adoption of the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I suppose if you liked a 4.6 percent across-the-board, indiscriminate cut, you will love 14 percent, even more draconian, and equally indiscriminate.

I won't repeat what I said a few minutes ago about the drastic effects a cut of this magnitude would have on the range of housing and transportation priorities for this country. But I will look at a particular State, the gentleman's own State, Indiana, and just mention what some of the consequences would be. I hope this is useful information.

The gentleman's amendment would cut $10.2 million in CDBG funding for Indiana, which could have been used to rehab housing, to repair streets and sidewalks, provide senior and youth programs. The amount of additional funding generated by CDBG dollars in Indiana is estimated to be--the cut, the effect is estimated to be $40.6 million in money taken out of the Indiana economy.

Home funding, the most flexible affordable housing funding we have, $4.8 million taken out of that funding in Indiana.

Transit projects in Indiana take a whopping loss of $23.8 million.

Highways in Indiana, highway infrastructure, a loss of $5.1 million; and so it goes.

These are cuts that would reverse the progress we have made.

A lot of people are talking infrastructure these days, including our President. This bill is actually doing something about it. We are making long overdue investments in this country's infrastructure, and that includes the housing infrastructure.

Yet, colleagues who--I don't know what they have said about this as a national priority. Certainly, if they offer an amendment like this, or vote for an amendment like this, they are marching back down the hill in terms of the progress we have made and hope to make.

So this amendment, I would think, has very little to recommend it for any Member who wishes to invest in our country's future, and I urge its rejection.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I am happy to strongly support this amendment, and I thank my colleagues for offering it.

I want to make a comment on what is going on over at HUD. Secretary Carson assured our committee that Dreamers were not being denied FHA loans, that there was no change to the policy, no plan to change the policy. Now, HUD has confirmed that FHA will no longer make loans available to Dreamers.

This is the latest in what is becoming a disturbing pattern of HUD telling Congress one thing and then doing another. They haven't been forthcoming, to say the least, on this issue.

This amendment reverses that decision, that HUD decision that would effectively block a key part of the American Dream, homeownership, to this population.

Dreamers are already in limbo, Mr. Chair. Let's not make these young people pay a further price for our failure to act.

Mr. Chair, I thank my colleagues for the amendment and urge its adoption.

Mr. Chair, I rise as the designee of Chairwoman Nita Lowey, and I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) for the purpose of entering into a colloquy.

Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague from Texas for those questions, which highlight the issue of historic preservation and NEPA review.

As part of its evaluation and approval process, the Department of Transportation must consider the effects of proposed projects on areas of historical significance. Under the law, the Department must make an assessment of any effects of a project on historic properties and evaluate options to avoid, minimize, and mitigate negative effects. This assessment must be completed in consultation with State and local partners, as well as civic and community leaders.

Mr. Chair, I look forward to working with the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) on issues of historic preservation.

Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas for any comments she might have.

Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for her kind words and also for her relentless efforts, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Amendment No. 267 Offered by Mr. Krishnamoorthi

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to rise in support of this amendment and commend my colleague and a number of colleagues, actually, for offering it.

The recent news reports about the Secretary of Transportation are disturbing. It is critical that anyone who serves in public office follows the law, and if the law clearly states you can't use your public office for personal gain, that is what following the law requires. We expect all Federal employees to follow the law, and this amendment reminds them that it is their obligation to do so.

So I thank the gentleman again for raising this issue.

Mr. Chair, I would urge adoption of the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding and wish to express support for her amendment. I commend her for offering it.

Our underlying bill provides $2.8 billion for HUD's Homeless Assistance Grants program. That is the highest funding level in that program's history. It includes more resources for Emergency Solutions Grants to rapidly rehouse and prevent homelessness, and the bill includes targeted investments for survivors of domestic violence and for youth experiencing homelessness.

In addition, section 231 of the bill creates a mechanism that allows HUD to more readily use recaptured funds from the small number of projects that

might not utilize their resources. We expect this provision will give us an additional $90 million to use as grantees fight on the front lines to end homelessness.

So we have added resources. More can and must be done, and our colleague's amendment reflects that reality. We are going to pair this with sustained investments in affordable housing, and we are determined to reduce housing insecurity across the Nation.

So I am proud of what our bill accomplishes in this area. I commend the gentlewoman for her amendment additionally emphasizing our homeless challenge, and I urge adoption of our colleague's amendment.

I thank my colleague for yielding, and I am happy to express support for her amendment and for highlighting this issue.

Remote towers can be a cost-effective way to provide additional safety and operational benefits to the National Air Space program. The underlying bill, in fact, includes report language encouraging the FAA ``to use remote tower technology as a means to enhance safety, reduce costs, and expand air traffic control services at rural and small community airports.''

I appreciate the gentlewoman's leadership on this issue. I urge adoption of her well-considered amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague for yielding and for offering this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I am willing to accept this amendment, take it to conference, and work out what the most appropriate level of funding is.

I want to acknowledge strong support of this Chamber from both sides of the aisle for the BUILD program. That is the one discretionary program within DOT that allows States and local communities to seek funding for major multi-modal transportation projects.

As our colleague has underscored, technical assistance and planning support is often essential to that process, especially for communities with more limited resources or expertise.

These planning grants are important. The underlying bill provides $15 million for competitive grants for planning, preparation, and design. The amendment sets that figure at $20 million. These resources are going to lead to increased investments in our communities, they are going to create jobs, and spur economic growth.

Mr. Chairman, I applaud the gentleman's efforts to highlight the importance of planning grants, and I urge adoption of the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague for yielding and I wish to support his amendment, particularly to stress the emphasis he has given to low- and no-emission buses. They do improve the environment. They improve public health, they reduce greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution, and also reduce long-term maintenance costs for transit.

Our bill provides robust funding for these grants to State and local governments of $145 million. That is $94 million above the authorized amount.

Meanwhile, we are offering strong support for the bus and bus facilities program. That provides vital resources that improve bus fleets in communities large and small. Between the transit infrastructure grants and funding provided via trust funds, the bill provides $678 million in competitive grants under that program.

These are both important programs for transit grantees. I look forward to working with my colleague to ensure robust funding in public transit.

Mr. Chairman, I urge the amendment's adoption.

Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for yielding. I am happy to offer support for her amendment.

Mr. Chair, the Family Self-Sufficiency program helps low-income families living in subsidized housing. It allows them to enhance their job skills and to increase earnings to improve their economic security.

Currently, there are more than 75,000 families enrolled in FSS, which is just a fraction of the number that should be--the families living in assisted housing, many, many more than that.

Mr. Chair, I am proud of the fact that our base bill already increases this program, providing $100 million for Family Self- Sufficiency. That is a $20 million increase from current funding. This amendment would do even better, would make FSS available to even more families, so I applaud my colleagues for offering this.

I want to register some concern about the offset in this and other amendments in terms of the Office of the Secretary and other departmental staff. They do have to do their work, and we have to consider the cumulative effect of amendments, but we will do that as the process moves along and we go to conference.

Mr. Chair, the situation can be addressed. This is a useful and helpful amendment, and I am happy to support adoption.

Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining.

Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for yielding. I am happy to offer support for her amendment and to take advantage of the opportunity this offers to say something about the BUILD program.

Mr. Chair, it is unique, as our colleague has stressed. It provides the kind of flexible funding to States and localities that can address complex multimodal projects.

My district has benefited greatly from this. The city of Raleigh has successfully built Union Station, a state-of-the-art rail and public transit facility that is already transforming that area of downtown.

Unfortunately, despite the diverse set of eligible projects, the current administration has heavily favored road projects only when awarding BUILD grants. This has most significantly affected transit. On average, it received about 32 percent of the awards during the previous administration.

Under the Trump administration, this has plummeted to less than 10 percent, and at the same time, the Department has completely abandoned bicycle and pedestrian improvement projects and actually eliminated this as an option for primary project type for years 2017 and 2018.

So, the underlying bill provides $1 billion for BUILD--that is a $100 million increase--but it places greater emphasis on investments in transit, passenger rail, pedestrian improvements, and multimodal projects. It also maintains a 50-50 parity between urban and rural awards, while directing the Department to consider the full range of benefits from a project, regardless of location in an urban or rural area.

Mr. Chair, I commend my colleague for offering this amendment. I am happy to support it and look forward to continuing to work with her on this issue.

Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. Chair, I thank our committee chair, and I am happy to rise in strong support of the section of this bill with which I have had the most to do--namely, appropriating for the Departments of Transportation and Housing and Urban Development for the next fiscal year. It will make vital investments on behalf of the American people.

I thank my partner, Mario Diaz-Balart, who formerly was chairman of this subcommittee, for his continuing cooperation and his collaborative approach.

Of course, I also want to express appreciation for our full committee chair, Mrs. Lowey, and for our ranking member, Ms. Granger, for their cooperative approach to the kind of collaboration that inevitably must go into these appropriations bills.

I am pleased to report also that, in serving the interests of Members of this body, we were able to accommodate 90 percent of the Member requests from both sides of the aisle.

Division E of the measure is what we are talking about, and that is the so-called T-HUD section. It seriously invests in America's infrastructure. It makes transportation and housing safer. It demonstrates our commitment to the most vulnerable among us. It mitigates and responds to the impacts of climate change.

Our bill includes $75.8 billion in discretionary funding. That is an increase of $4.7 billion over the 2019-enacted level and a $17.3 billion increase above the President's totally inadequate budget request.

Mr. Chair, our Nation is in the midst of an affordable housing crisis. This bill dedicates new resources to address it. Section 8 vouchers, for example, are fully renewed. We increased funding for the HOME Program by $500 million and provide the Community Development Block Grant program with $300 million above last year's level. The HOME funding alone translates into more than 30,000 additional units of affordable housing.

Our renewed focus on housing and community development does not come at the expense of vital transportation programs. On the contrary, the bill includes $1 billion for BUILD grants, formerly called TIGER grants.

We provide more than $3 billion in additional discretionary resources above the FAST Act authorization for highways, transit, and aviation projects. This funding will benefit every State and territory in the Nation. We also robustly fund Amtrak, competitive rail grant programs, and port and maritime infrastructure.

Along with these investments, our bill reflects a renewed commitment to safety. A diverse list of hazards, including rising accident rates on our Nation's highways, the high-profile MAX 8 airline crashes, and lead and carbon monoxide hazards in federally assisted housing, requires us to redouble our efforts. We do that in this bill by providing new resources at several points to meet these problems head- on.

We also prioritize assistance for vulnerable populations. Nearly $240 million is provided for construction of new housing units for the elderly and for people with disabilities. Programs serving veterans, the homeless, people with HIV/AIDS, domestic violence survivors, and youth aging out of foster care are robustly funded, including resources for new vouchers.

Critically, the bill prohibits HUD from repealing the equal access rule that protects LGBTQ people. It also prohibits the department from moving forward with its particularly heartless proposal regarding mixed-status families in Federally assisted housing, which would result in the expulsion of tens of thousands of children whose immigration status is perfectly legal.

Finally, I am proud that this legislation lays the groundwork to fully integrate resiliency principles not only in disaster recovery but in the full range of Federal programs under the bill's jurisdiction. For example, it requires HUD grantees to consider storm and hazard mitigation as part of their planning process.

So, in closing, Mr. Chairman, this year's T-HUD bill makes forward looking investments in our housing and transportation infrastructure while ensuring concerted attention to safety, to the needs of the most vulnerable, and to resilience. This bill, I am convinced, will benefit all American communities, urban and rural, and it lays the foundation for economic growth and opportunity.

Mr. Chairman, I urge support for the legislation.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Dr. Debbie Yow, Athletic Director at North Carolina State University (NCSU), who is retiring this month. Dr. Yow joined the Wolfpack in 2010 with the responsibility of leading the athletics department of the largest university in North Carolina. In her eight-year tenure, Dr. Yow has worked to make NCSU's athletics department one of the best in the nation--both in the classroom and in competition.

Dr. Yow's tenure as the athletic director has been marked by the unprecedented academic success of NCSU's student-athletes. This past year, an all-time high of 59 NCSU student-athletes were named academic All-Americans. Overall, the students reached a record graduation rate. Under Dr. Yow's tenure, the Wolfpack also made remarkable improvements in competition. In the last three years, an average of 79 students were named competitive All-Americans, an all-time high for NCSU student- athletes. From 2010-12, the school made the biggest single jump of any Atlantic Coast Conference school in history, improving from No. 89 to No. 37 in NACDA rankings.

Dr. Yow has received numerous accolades for her outstanding leadership. The National Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics recently selected her as the 2018-19 Under Armour Athletic Director of the Year and named her the 2019 James J. Corbett Memorial Award Recipient, which is the highest honor one can achieve in collegiate athletics administration. Both Street and Smith's Sports Business Journal and the Chronicle of Higher Education have cited Dr. Yow as one of the 20 most influential people in college athletics. Additionally, she was selected to serve on the President's U.S. Department of Education Commission on Opportunities in Athletics, to review the status of Federal Title IX regulations, and was inducted into the North Carolina Sports Hall of Fame in 2006.

Prior to serving as athletic director at NCSU, Dr. Yow served as athletic director at University of Maryland, where she was the first female athletic director in the ACC. Before becoming an administrator, she served as the women's basketball coach at University of Kentucky, Oral Roberts University, and the University of Florida. Yow also served as a high school coach at Williams High (Burlington, NC) and Eastern Guilford High (Gibsonville, NC). She received a bachelor's degree from Elon University and a master's degree from Liberty University. Yow also has been awarded honorary doctorates from Elon, Liberty and the United States Sports Academy.

Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing Dr. Debbie Yow for her outstanding contributions to NC State University and to thousands of student athletes.

Madam Speaker, I rise to recognize the 25th anniversary of Safe Kids North Carolina. Housed within the North Carolina Department of Insurance (NCDOI), Safe Kids was founded in

1994 with the mission of preventing unintentional child injuries, which are the number one cause of death for children in North Carolina and the United States.

Today, the organization leads a state-wide network of 48 local Safe Kids coalitions representing children's hospitals, health departments, fire departments, EMS services and non-profits. This network gives Safe Kids North Carolina a strong presence to provide injury prevention services to communities throughout the state. It is the largest Safe Kids Worldwide state coalition in the United States

One of Safe Kids' focus is ensuring parents keep their children safe on the road. Their network of local coalitions held over 100 car seat check events last year and operates 96 permanent car seat inspection stations to make sure car seats are properly installed and to educate parents on child passenger safety. Additionally, last fall, in the aftermath of Hurricane Florence, the organization hosted a series of Child Passenger Safety Seat Take Back events to help families replace, free of charge, car seats damaged by the region's extensive flooding. At these events, Safe Kids North Carolina made over 400 car seats available to needy families in the hardest-hit parts of the state.

In addition to car safety, Safe Kids North Carolina has been a pioneer in drug takeback measures. The organization works with communities and families to decrease the incidence of childhood unintentional medication ingestions. Since 2010, Safe Kids North Carolina has joined with the North Carolina Bureau of Investigation, local law enforcement agencies, and community partners in Operation Medicine Drop, which has resulted in the safe disposal of more than 152 million pills of unwanted medication. In the years since Operation Medicine Drop began, the organization has supported over 3,000 events and helped to establish 250 permanent disposal locations across North Carolina. In this program, Safe Kids North Carolina and NCDOI are a model for other states to follow.

Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in commending Safe Kids North Carolina for its work over the past 25 years to protect the health and safety of all North Carolina children.

Mr. Chairman, I thank our Appropriations chair for yielding this time, and I rise in support of this disaster supplemental, which will provide $17.2 billion in long overdue assistance for North Carolina and for other States and territories that have suffered from devastating natural disasters.

North Carolina has been hit by two hurricanes in as many years, with thousands of people displaced, homes destroyed, and livelihoods lost.

Meanwhile, typhoons, tornadoes and wildfires, have wreaked havoc on millions of Americans in the South, the Midwest, California, and several territories, including Puerto Rico.

The bill before us ensures the Federal Government will remain an active partner in the recovery effort. It provides comprehensive resources for: flexible community development block grants, highway and bridge repairs, Army Corps construction along our coasts and rivers, Department of Agriculture crop and livestock relief, repairs to our military installations, and many other critical recovery activities.

We all know that these resources are desperately needed. We all know that they should have been provided months ago. The House passed a similar package back in January that stalled in the Republican- controlled Senate.

The President has complicated our efforts, to put it mildly, and he has complicated them in a particularly unfortunate way. He is obsessed with Puerto Rico. He is determined to punish the island for offenses, real or imagined. This has stymied bipartisan and bicameral efforts to help all Americans recover, Puerto Ricans included.

And now the President's latest move is to insist that this disaster recovery bill should become a vehicle for his border priorities.

The administration is even holding back money that has already been appropriated, including nearly $16 billion in HUD Community Development Block Grants, held up by the White House and OMB for political purposes.

This has slowed the recovery, not just in Puerto Rico, but in my home State, North Carolina, in Florida, in Georgia, Texas, South Carolina, and the Virgin Islands.

It is time for the President to stop playing politics with disaster funding, and it is time for Republicans in the House and Senate to show some backbone, to say to the White House, ``enough already;'' to join with Democrats to help communities in need.

I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation.

Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition to this amendment, though I am not, in fact, opposed.

Madam Chair, I want to thank the gentleman from California for introducing this amendment and highlighting the issue of the FHWA not granting extensions when they are needed and when they are justified.

It is important to highlight the issue, and as chairman of the Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Subcommittee, I am aware of the issue and aware of the delays that affect certain Federal highway emergency relief projects in California.

Now, the amendment as drafted would have no practical effect on the funds to administer the program because they are not provided in this particular bill, but I look forward to working with the gentleman and coordinating with the Appropriations Committee, with the authorizing committee, to address this issue in a tangible way.

Madam Chair, I have no objection to the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I thank my colleague for yielding.

Madam Chair, I do want to speak in strong support of this amendment which may well be the most important amendment to be offered this morning. I certainly think that with respect to my home State of North Carolina where thousands of residents are eagerly awaiting the issuance of the Federal Register notice which this amendment references.

This notice will unlock billions of dollars, CDBG disaster mitigation funds, to rebuild communities in North Carolina, Texas, Florida, South Carolina, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Georgia, and other locations.

Now, to be clear, while the underlying bill addresses the damage from Hurricane Florence which hit North Carolina last September, this Federal Register notice we are discussing addresses damage from Hurricane Matthew and from other storms, 2016 and 2017 disasters, where we are still awaiting relief and recovery.

Secretary Carson promised during our subcommittee hearing last month that the notice we are talking about today would be released on May 1, and as far as HUD was concerned that was achieved. But now it is OMB, it is the White House. They prevented this notice from being released. This so-called review appears to be a change in practice. That is not acceptable.

North Carolina residents have endured two hurricanes in the past 3 years. They and other storm victims around this country should not have to endure more stalling and more slow-walking from President Trump.

This amendment sends a message that Congress is tired of the administration's delays and that we are serious about helping communities in need. So I couldn't more strongly support this amendment. I commend my colleague and the bipartisan group who have offered it.

Madam Chair, I urge support of the amendment.

Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition, although, in fact, I do support the amendment.

Madam Chair, the Federal Highway Administration's latest estimate for the Emergency Relief program identified $1.3 billion in projects in disaster-affected areas. This bill actually contains something more than that: $1.65 billion. But the FHWA estimates do not yet account for the damage from the Midwest floods.

This amendment would rectify that. It would provide the FHWA with additional resources to address the damage from the flooding in Iowa and other affected States, and then any excess funds would remain available for future disasters.

I thank our colleague for offering this amendment. I think it is needed, and I support its adoption.

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to join numerous colleagues in honoring the life and legacy of James H. Billington, the 13th Librarian of Congress, who died on November 20, 2018.

Before Jim Billington's appointment as Librarian of Congress in 1987, he served thirteen productive years as director of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Before that, and throughout his career, he was a researcher and author, continuing to produce serious scholarship on Russian history and culture.

Jim was the inspiration behind the Open World Leadership Center, a unique Library of Congress--Legislative Branch initiative which for twenty years has administered thousands of exchange visits to the United States of professionals and other leaders from post-Soviet and post-communist states. As a current board member of Open World, I have deepened my appreciation of Dr. Billington's legacy and of the way the Center can compliment and support the House's work, through the House Democracy Partnership (HDP), to promote parliamentary development in emerging democracies.

Like many members of Congress, I have enjoyed a cordial and productive working relationship with Jim Billington for years--from the Legislative Branch Appropriations subcommittee, to Open World, to encouraging Congressional Research Service engagement with HDP's partner legislatures, to the building of programs such as American Memory--the national digital library--and the John W. Kluge Center's program for visiting scholars. In recent years, Jim and his wife Marjorie have been a welcoming presence at the wonderful Library of Congress dinners, sponsored by David Rubenstein, featuring authors of major studies in American biography and history.

Madam Speaker, Jim Billington lived a full and consequential life of scholarship, institutional innovation, and public service. We miss his cordial and collegial presence as we mourn his passing and appreciate his wide-ranging legacy. We extend gratitude and good wishes to Marjorie and their family in the hope that the outpouring of affections and appreciation will offer solace and support at this time of loss.

Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague and I rise in strong support of H.R. 1. It is a comprehensive, once-in-a- generation blueprint for reforming our democratic

system, ranging from gerrymandering to voter suppression, and voting rights to the dominance of unaccountable big money in our politics. It is an urgent priority rightly numbered H.R. 1, and basic to everything else we need to do. If our democracy doesn't work, nothing works.

It represents a culmination of issues I have worked on during my entire time in Congress, particularly, the way moneyed interests can corrupt our politics and how they drown out the voices of everyone else.

The For the People Act will modernize our Presidential public financing system. It will establish a new public matching system for congressional races to empower small donors. It will crack down on improper super-PAC coordination with campaigns.

H.R. 1 also includes my legislation to repeal the IRS dark-money rule, and it expands my original stand-by-your-ad provision to require corporations and other groups to disclose the top funders when they run political ads over the air or on the internet.

These reforms will empower American voters and encourage more diverse candidates to run for office, and will help break the stranglehold of big money on our politics.

Let's deliver on the promises we have made to restore integrity, accountability, and transparency to our democracy. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 1.

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding and for calling this Special Order to pay tribute to our departed friend and colleague, Walter Jones, Jr.

Walter died on February 10, his 76th birthday. He lived a full life of service: four years in the National Guard, ten years in the North Carolina General Assembly, and nearly a quarter century in this U.S. House of Representatives.

Walter and I met long before either of us served in the House. We worked together on the Jimmy Carter Presidential campaign of 1976. I have a photo on my desk of a very youthful-looking group of campaign workers to prove that.

Walter, of course, went on to chart a different course politically, a course that was uniquely his own. In fact, he found himself frequently at odds with, if not one party, then the other, but by the same token, he sometimes found possibilities for alliances and cooperation in unexpected places, and he didn't hesitate to take those opportunities.

Madam Speaker, tonight we are going to hear from a wide range of colleagues, an amazingly diverse group of colleagues that reflects the friendships that Walter had in this Chamber. That was also reflected in the delegation that went to Greenville for Walter's funeral service on February 14. He was an independent man and he just had friends all over the place.

Now, that independence was rooted in Walter's strong convictions and his personal sincerity. He actually, I think we would all agree, stood out. In an age in which sincerity is sometimes in short supply in our Nation's politics, he earned respect and admiration on both sides of the aisle.

The outpouring of tributes and remembrances that we have seen and will see tonight is a testament to that fact.

Much has been said about the personal encounters Walter had with veterans of the Iraq war and the families of those who never returned and how those encounters led him to reassess his past and present policy circumstances.

Walter sent over 10,000 letters to families of fallen troops and he memorialized those who died from North Carolina's Camp Lejeune with photos outside his office.

Walter's determined and effective voice for the military and especially his beloved Marines and his deep love for his home State of North Carolina are going to be missed in these Halls and in the coastal farming and military communities in the Third Congressional District.

So we express heartfelt condolences to Walter's wife Joe Anne, daughter Ashley, his loyal staff who are joining us in the Chamber here tonight, his countless friends, neighbors and community members, the lives he touched along the way.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a tribute from one from his longtime staff members, Ray Celeste, Jr.

A Tribute to Congressman Walter B. Jones

(By Colonel Ray Celeste Jr., U.S. Marine Corps (Retired))

I had the pleasure and good fortune to have served with

Congressman Walter B. Jones for almost eight years in his

D.C. office as his Military Legislative Assistant. He was an

American icon of virtue and American values. He loved America

and his constituents deeply. He worked tirelessly on their

behalf for many decades. He stood up against injustices that

many of them faced.

He had an iron-will to do what was best for his

constituents. His will was strong and unflinching. We, as

part of his staff, worked to ensure we represented the

congressman as best as possible and to be as helpful as

possible to him and our constituents of the 3rd District. His

constituents' services were renowned.

Congressman Jones was the epitome of a public servant. He

was always working for the betterment of his people. He was

their divine servant. He greatly appreciated the sacrifices

our military veterans have made for our great Nation.

He also appreciated the sacrifices their families make. The

general public sometimes overlooks these sacrifices. He did a

lot of work in promoting the proper education of military

children who are autistic through the use of Applied Behavior

Analysis (ABA).

Congressman Jones worked tirelessly to help treat service

members and Veterans who suffer from Post-Traumatic Stress

Disorder (PTSD) and those that suffer from Traumatic Brain

Injury (TBI). He promoted the use of Hyperbaric Oxygen

Therapy (HBOT). He did not think this was a cure-all for PTSD

or TBI, but as one of treatment methods that that should be

available to service members and Veterans. He authored a

legislative provision that was adopted in the Fiscal Year

2017 National Defense Authorization Act (FY 2017 NDAA). This

provision allows for the use of HBOT to be used as a

treatment method for PTSD/TBI by the Department of Defense

(DoD).

He was shocked at the overuse of drugs to treat PTSD/TBI

where there was no conclusive clinical trial done that proved

a certain regime of drugs could cure or alleviate the

horrible mental and physical impacts of PTSD/TBI. In some, if

not many cases, it made matters worse. He was shocked at the

over reliance on the use of drugs.

Congressman Jones looked for holistic methods to treat

PTSD/TBI such as the use of service dogs. He also admired the

positive influence influences of yoga and combat acupuncture.

Congressman Jones was the Republican lead on the

legislation to honor Purple Heart recipients and other

American heroes by giving them access to Department of

Defense commissaries and recreation facilities. The Purple

Heart and Disabled Veterans Equal Access Act of 2018 extends

access to commissaries and Morale, Welfare, and Recreation

(MWR) facilities to Purple Heart recipients, all veterans

with a service-connected disability, Medal of Honor

recipients, former prisoners of war, and veteran caregivers.

Commissaries are grocery/department stores on military

installations that sell food and some household items. MWR

facilities offer a range of services on bases including

libraries, outdoor recreation, dining, golf courses, and

sports and fitness centers. It was adopted in the Fiscal Year

(FY) 2019 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

Two words sum up Congressman Walter B. Jones. He was highly

principled and he was a statesman. He thought we, as a

Nation, must look at what is best in the U.S.'s interests

first. He was not an isolationist, but he did think the U.S.

was allowing itself to be taken advantage of by our allies.

Congressman Walter B. Jones was a once in a lifetime member

of Congress. God bless him, his wife Joe Anne, and their

daughter, Ashley. Semper Fidelis.

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding.

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for presiding over this remarkable series of tributes. It has been a memorable evening--more than I could have anticipated--in the array of colleagues who have paid tribute and in the kind of emotions stirred in all of us, I think, by the memory of a good friend and a good man, but also a sense of the values and the affection that binds us together here.

It is too bad, perhaps, that it took an occasion of this sort to bring this out. But I will never forget it, and we will never forget Walter Jones and what he meant to all of us, so I thank the gentlewoman so much.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this conference agreement-- bipartisan and bicameral--averting a second reckless Trump shutdown.

This legislation represents the best possible deal to responsibly fund our government and secure our border, while holding true to our values as Americans.

This agreement denies the President billions of dollars for an unnecessary wall. It includes a number of provisions to hold the administration accountable. And it boosts funding for humanitarian support for migrants, alternatives to detention, and family case management.

The bipartisan agreement also includes six additional appropriations bills beyond Homeland Security. For example, the Transportation-HUD bill, on which Chairman Diaz-Balart and I worked cooperatively for many months, is included in this package.

It increases the Trump budget for infrastructure by $23 billion, and it includes investments that were totally eliminated in the Trump budget: community development block grants, the HOME program, New Starts for transit, and the BUILD program. All these are made whole, having been, of course, eliminated in that earlier Trump budget.

These six bills were all caught up in the Trump shutdown. They are now salvaged by this agreement. The deal is not perfect. We know that. But it represents the best way to reject the President's outrageous border demand, keep our government open, and address our pressing national needs.

Mr. Speaker, let's send this bill to the President's desk. Then let's fight to overturn this phony ``national emergency.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today, along with my colleagues in the North Carolina delegation, to remember and honor the life of Representative Walter Jones, Jr., a treasured colleague, a conscientious public servant, and a personal friend to many across this Chamber.

Walter died on February 10, his 76th birthday. He lived a life full of service: 4 years in the North Carolina National Guard, 10 years in the North Carolina General Assembly, and nearly a quarter century in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Walter and I met long before either of us served in the House. We worked together on the North Carolina Presidential campaign of Jimmy Carter in 1976. I have a photo on my desk of a very youthful-looking campaign team to prove it.

Walter went on to chart a different course politically, a course that was uniquely his own. In fact, he found himself frequently at odds with if not one party, then the other. But by the same token, he sometimes found possibilities for alliances and cooperation in unexpected places and did not hesitate to take those opportunities.

This approach was rooted in Walter's strong conscience and his personal sincerity. He stood out in an age when sincerity is sometimes in short supply in our Nation's politics, earning him respect and admiration on both sides of the aisle. The outpouring of tributes and remembrances we have seen in recent days is a testament to that fact.

Much has been said about the personal encounters Walter had with veterans of the Iraq war and the families of those who never returned, and how these encounters led him to reassess his past and present policy stances.

Walter sent over 10,000 letters to families of fallen troops, and he memorialized those who died from North Carolina's Camp Lejeune with photos outside his office.

Walter's determined and effective voice for our military--certainly, the Marines especially--and his deep love for his home State of North Carolina will be missed in these halls and in the coastal, farming, and military communities that make up the Third Congressional District.

We extend heartfelt condolences to Walter's wife, Joe Anne; his daughter, Ashley; his loyal staff; and the countless friends, neighbors, and community members whose lives he touched along the way. Our State, our Nation, and the institution of Congress will be poorer without him.

We will miss Walter's reliable and cordial presence right here in this center aisle.

Mr. Speaker, before we observe a moment of silence in Walter's honor, I yield to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx), the senior Republican in the North Carolina delegation.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for those remarks.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Massie).

Mr. Speaker, I ask that we observe a moment of silence.

Mr. Speaker, I send to the desk a privileged resolution and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 9 a.m. tomorrow.