Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 200, the so-called Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act, which would undermine the years of progress made in rebuilding fish stocks and setting effective catch limits under the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

My home State of Rhode Island is home to a vibrant fishing community that relies on healthy fish populations in order to make a living.

Traditionally, reauthorization of fisheries management programs through the Magnuson-Stevens Act has been done on a bipartisan basis with the goal of strengthening sustainable fisheries. However, this entirely partisan bill weakens critical tools, like annual catch limits, which ensure that fisheries remain full for years to come.

This bill will gut science-based management for fisheries, roll back development of effective fisheries management techniques, and reduce accountability for recreational fisheries.

H.R. 200 removes several species from science-based quotas which help ensure that catches are sustainable each year. Under this bill, hundreds of species of fish would no longer have catch limits, which would lead to drastic overfishing.

The bill also harms efforts to rebuild fish stocks by including loopholes which remove rebuilding timeframes from many fish stocks and would extend recovery timeframes for others, thereby endangering healthy stocks of fish available to fishing communities.

In the last week, I have heard from fishermen from all over my district, from Greenville to Portsmouth, who have reached out to my office to tell me that H.R. 200 will harm their way of life by threatening already depleted fish populations and increase the threat of overfishing.

The fishermen in my State need legislation that would build on time- tested tools to strengthen fisheries and prevent overfishing instead of this bill, which would set management programs back and weaken effective conservation tools.

I join with those fishermen in opposing this misguided approach to reauthorizing the Magnuson-Stevens Act. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote ``no'' on final passage.

Mr. Chairman, I again thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment offered by my friend and colleague, Congressman Langevin. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of my colleague's legislation, the Fishermen's Fairness Act, which serves as the basis for this amendment.

This amendment would provide our home State of Rhode Island with representation on the Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Management Council. This move

would allow Rhode Island fishing communities to have a voice on the council which manages stocks for species that are among the most valuable to fisheries in our State.

Rhode Island fishermen account for nearly 56 percent of total summer scup landings and 54 percent of all Atlantic squid landings, both stocks being managed by the Mid-Atlantic Council.

Squid landings are critical to Rhode Island's overall fishing economy, landing more squid than all other States combined and the second most of any other State in the country. In 2015, Rhode Island landed roughly 16 million pounds of squid, nearly 12 million pounds more than its nearest competitor.

The following year was even more significant for Rhode Island, with nearly 23 million pounds in squid landings valued at more than $29 million.

All told, Rhode Island accounts for more fish landings under the jurisdiction of the Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Management Council than any other State in the region, with the exception of New Jersey.

Yet, despite all of this, my State does not have a seat on this council, leaving Rhode Island fisheries without a say in how a significant portion of its industry is managed.

This amendment will provide a commonsense solution to this problem by adding two additional seats to the Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Management Council in order to represent Rhode Island's interests in the region.

As Congressman Langevin said, this is not unprecedented. We have done this before. In 1996, North Carolina, which also had significant fishing interests in the mid-Atlantic region, was given a seat on the council. This amendment would extend this same right to a seat at the table to my State.

I really want to thank my colleague for his work on this issue, and I strongly encourage adoption of this amendment, particularly out of a sense of comity, since we have done this in the past. Rhode Islanders deserve to be treated fairly. Our fishermen deserve a voice. I urge my colleagues to support this excellent amendment.

Mr. Speaker, the Affordable Care Act improved access to quality healthcare for millions of Americans. One of the most important protections in this law is that insurance companies can no longer deny people coverage because they have a preexisting condition.

Millions of Americans with arthritis, cancer, diabetes, mental illness, and other preexisting conditions have benefited from this requirement. And that is why it is so disturbing that earlier this month the Trump administration went to court to argue that insurance companies should no longer have to cover people with preexisting conditions.

If they succeed, it will further unravel the Affordable Care Act. It will be harder for individuals and small businesses to buy health insurance. Some experts believe that there will be even more Americans without health coverage than ever before. This is wrong. The President is putting the interests of health insurance companies and health insurance company CEOs ahead of American consumers.

Republicans in Congress should be demanding that this President stop. They should demand that their constituents have access to the best healthcare possible, but, instead, they are silent in the face of a President trying to take away coverage for preexisting medical conditions.

It is wrong. We can do better.

Mr. Speaker, every single day, seven children and teens are killed by gun violence; 40 more are shot and survive. Most of the time, the incident could have been prevented if the gun involved was unloaded and locked away safely.

Mr. Speaker, 1.7 million American children live in a home with a loaded, unlocked gun, and three out of every four children ages 5 to 14 know where guns are kept in their home.

That is why today I am introducing a resolution to recognize June 21 as National Ask Day, the first day of summer, to encourage parents to ask a simple question to anyone who is responsible for their children in another home after school: Is there a loaded, unsecured gun in your house? Asking this simple question will help save lives and reduce the level of gun violence in our country.

This is a commonsense idea that both Democrats and Republicans should be able to agree on, because no matter our politics, we all believe that our children should be free from the scourge of gun violence.

Again, this is National Ask Day. We are asking everyone to just ask a simple question. Wherever your children are going after school, whether to another residence or to a family member or friend, ask the simple question: Is there a loaded, unlocked gun in that house? And be sure that it is secured. Help save the lives of so many American children.

Mr. Speaker, in my home State of Rhode Island and all across America, people are working harder than ever just to get by. Wages are flat and costs continue to rise. In fact, just last month, gas prices hit a 3-year high. It is obscene. Working people have been getting ripped off at the pump for years.

One of the biggest reasons is that countries in OPEC and other foreign oil cartels work together to inflate the cost of gas. Some folks think there is nothing we can do about this.

That is why, last month, along with Congressman Steve Chabot, I introduced the No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act, or NOPEC Act. This is a commonsense bill that will help bring down the cost of gas by making members of OPEC and other foreign oil cartels subject to U.S. antitrust laws and preventing them from price gouging. It prohibits those same companies from withholding their supply of oil in order to raise prices.

Earlier this week, our bill was approved by the House Judiciary Committee. I look forward to this bill coming to the floor and its swift passage. It is long past time that we deliver some much-needed relief to working people in this country.

Mr. Speaker, America has a long and wonderful tradition of welcoming people from all over the world who are fleeing violence and famine and war and repression. It is, in fact, one of the founding values of our country, and the words on the Statue of Liberty remind us of that:

Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me.

I lift my lamp beside the golden door.

What we are here tonight to do, Mr. Speaker, is to raise our voices and be sure the American people understand what is underway in our country.

The Trump administration has put forth a program they call zero tolerance. And just to explain what this means, people who are fleeing gang violence, persecution, incredible deprivation, domestic violence, travel a long distance, come to America for the hope of being safe.

We have laws in this country that say if, in fact, you are legitimately fleeing violence or persecution and you can demonstrate that, you are eligible for something called asylum. It is an international requirement. It is in our law. This is a lawful process.

They come to America, to the golden door. And what is happening now in this country, parents are being ripped from their children, separated, mothers hearing their children in another room crying out their names, pleading for their mothers, and there is nothing they can do because they are being detained.

Is this who we are?

This is not what we expect of the greatest democracy in the world. It is not only against the law, it is not only in violation of international obligations, imagine, the United States is being condemned by the United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees and Human Rights because of this conduct.

It has been described as torture of children, torture being defined as an act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as punishing him or her for an act he or she or a third person has committed. This is torture on kids, to rip them from their parents.

And we, today, in the Judiciary Committee pleaded with the chairman: Bring this matter before the Judiciary. We have oversight responsibility for this process. We have a right to know what is going on.

But we had a hearing today on a Texas water district issue, a permit issue, but we couldn't find time to bring the officials responsible for this before our committee.

This is a practice which does violence to children, which is tearing families apart, and for which there is no legal justification. And we have pleaded with our colleagues on the other side of the aisle: Raise your voices. The world is watching America in this moment, and we are undermining our standing in the world, the values that we promote around the world, and we are particularly doing tremendous damage to these children and families that are being separated.

We have asylum laws for a reason. Those have been enacted by the Congress of the United States, and they should be respected by these officials in the Department of Homeland Security and ICE and by the Attorney General of the United States.

It is hard to describe the heartache and the pain and the suffering that this illegal, unconstitutional, despicable policy is causing; and our colleagues, my friends on the other side of the aisle, have not so much as raised a peep. They are responsible in their silence for the continuation of this program.

We will continue to raise our voices to do everything that we can to bring the attention of the American people to this travesty because, only by the American people contacting their Members of Congress, demanding that this policy change, speaking out against this horrific brutality that is occurring in detention facilities all across this country--this does not reflect the values of our country. It does not reflect our shared values of respecting the human dignity of every person, of this special place that children have and the special responsibility that we have for children.

We have a responsibility to do something about it, to stop this, to bring the Attorney General before the Congress of the United States, to hold him accountable for this horrific behavior and, once again, demonstrate to the world that we are a country that lifts people up, that respects human rights, that honors children, and that demonstrates a commitment to family values. This zero tolerance policy does violence to all of that.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for giving me an opportunity to be heard.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment, which would strike $65 million for the development of the W76-2, or low-yield, nuclear warhead and move that funding to the nuclear nonproliferation account.

The development of these warheads is based on the fallacy that nuclear war can be small and contained using smaller, lower yield weaponry. The idea that a nuclear war can be contained or minimized is dubious at best and terrifyingly dangerous at worst.

Former Secretary of State George Schultz has affirmed this, saying that ``nuclear weapons are nuclear weapons'' and that the only logical path of a nuclear strike is escalation to higher yield weapons.

This sentiment was recently reiterated in a letter signed by Secretary Schultz and nearly three dozen other current and former national security experts and officials, including former Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar and former Secretary of Defense William Perry, opposing the development of these types of warheads.

Further development of these types of weapons creates a greater possibility for a nuclear confrontation that will be impossible to contain. Instead of making us safer, it will only increase the chances that countless lives could be wiped out in an instant.

This is an excellent amendment. It will make America safer.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the excellent amendment by the gentlewoman from California.

Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of this amendment which would remove the provision in this bill which prohibits funding from being used to implement National Ocean Policy.

This provision represents yet another in a long line of attempts by House Republicans to weaken an effective, common sense policy that protects our nation's oceans.

National Ocean Policy allows federal agencies to coordinate implementation of more than 100 ocean laws, and allows state and local governments to have a say in the ocean planning process.

In my home state of Rhode Island, the Ocean State, a strong National Ocean Policy is vital to our economy.

Rhode Island's ocean economy generates more than $2 billion annually, including more than $1.4 billion from the travel and tourism industries, and nearly $94 million from the commercial fishing industry.

On top of this, Rhode Island's Ocean economy supports more than 41,000 jobs.

My state, as well as all coastal states, depends on clean, viable oceans to support these industries, which is why it is such a terrible idea to undermine the development of a strong National Ocean Policy.

National Ocean Policy does not create any new regulations, supersede existing regulations, rather, it helps coordinate the implementation of and compliance with existing regulations in order to ensure a more efficient and effective decision making process.

The funding prohibition in this bill would undermine good, effective policy, and would undermine effective stewardship of our nation's oceans and coastlines.

I strongly support this amendment to remove the provision, and encourage its adoption.

Mr. Speaker, there is nothing that demonstrates the deeply held American value of living a retirement with dignity than the promise of Social Security and Medicare. These are benefits that America's seniors have earned after a lifetime of hard work so they can enjoy their retirement years with dignity and economic security.

But yesterday we learned the Medicare trust fund will be depleted in just 8 years, 3 years earlier than expected. The Social Security trust fund will run dry just 8 years after that.

A few months ago, our Republican friends passed a huge tax cut for the wealthiest Americans and most powerful corporations. And how do Republicans want to pay for it: by cutting Social Security and Medicare.

That is a bad deal for the American people. They deserve better.

When Democrats take back the majority, we are going to deliver A Better Deal for the American people. We are going to put working people first and we are going to ensure a secure retirement for everyone who works hard in this country. Most importantly, we are going to return the promise of America.

Mr. Speaker, President Trump promised to drain the swamp. In reality, he has made corruption much worse here in Washington.

Yesterday, we learned that a foreign government paid the President's personal attorney $400,000 for a meeting with President Trump; the Secretary of the Treasury requested a government plane for his honeymoon; the VA Secretary took a $125,000 taxpayer-funded trip to Europe with his spouse; and the Republicans who control Congress have done nothing about it. They are putting politics ahead of our country by turning a blind eye to this administration's corruption, and they are focusing on getting things done for their wealthy donors instead of their constituents.

The culture of corruption must end. That is why, early this week, Democrats introduced A Better Deal for our democracy: a bold, comprehensive proposal to bolster our Nation's ethics laws, overhaul our campaign finance system, and create more transparency and accountability so government works for all of the American people.

That is the Better Deal the American people deserve; that is the Better Deal Democrats will deliver; and that is why Democrats are fighting for it.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

We pride ourselves on being the most deliberative body on the planet, and all of us come here to contribute our best ideas to improve the lives of the American people.

You wonder why this place doesn't work? It is the whole set of exclusion of ideas from nearly half this body.

I am one of those people who has offered just about 25 amendments that were blocked by the Republicans. What are they afraid of? Debate your ideas. Make your arguments. Vote. Be held accountable.

Some of the things they blocked, the amendments I offered: an amendment to increase student loan interest tax deductions in our tax bill; a provision to end tax breaks for companies that ship American jobs overseas; an amendment to increase funding to combat violent extremism; and an amendment to increase funding for fire departments in the SAFER grants. Those are just four examples.

Their practice, they marked an important moment in history, not a good moment: the most closed Congress in the history of the United States, excluding from consideration debate, argument, and accountability.

Vote on these things so the American people know where you stand. That is what we have here, over 1,000 ideas proffered by Democrats that our Republican colleagues won't even bring to the floor for consideration so the American people know where they stand on a range of important issues.

This is a dark day for Congress, the most closed Congress in our history. It means the voices of the American people as reflected in nearly half of this body are not being considered, debated, and voted upon by the Congress.

It is wrong. It is negatively impacting the lives of the American people. There are real consequences. It is not just that we want our own amendments considered. It is because we understand it will benefit the American people.

I urge my colleagues to have some self-reflection on what they are doing here.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I rise in strong support of the FIRST STEP Act. I supported this bipartisan bill in committee because it will help more ex-offenders reenter the workforce. It will reduce recidivism.

The FIRST STEP Act is just a first step in fixing our criminal justice system. We all realize there is a lot more to do and a lot more we must do, but this is an important start.

I would remind everyone that the bill allows prisoners to earn an additional 7

days off their sentence each year they demonstrate good behavior. It funds important job training, drug treatment, and education services. It prohibits the shackling of pregnant women and improves compassionate release.

These are all very good provisions. It will not only reduce recidivism; it will enhance the safety of our communities by making sure folks have the ability to enter drug treatment, enter job training, and avail themselves of educational services. These are all commonsense ideas. I hope that everyone will support this legislation.

I want to thank, particularly, my colleague Hakeem Jeffries for his strong leadership in these difficult negotiations, and I urge my colleagues to vote for the FIRST STEP and then commit themselves to continuing to build on this, because there is much more work to do in sentencing reform and criminal justice reform broadly.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the bank lobbyist act, which reverses the progress we have made since Wall Street brought our economy to the brink of collapse in 2008.

This is yet another giveaway from our friends on the other side of the aisle to the wealthy donors who bankroll their campaigns, and, once again, working people will get screwed.

Congress established the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to protect the middle class from the big banks and corporate special interests. Since 2010, the CFPB has returned nearly $12 billion to consumers in all 50 States.

It has been a big step forward for working people, but this bill turns the clock back. Republicans are going to let the banks write the same risky loans that got us into the Great Recession in the first place. This is a bad deal for the American people. They deserve better.

Let's defeat this bill and put working families first.

Mr. Speaker, due to a flight delay I was forced to miss tonight's votes. Had I been present, I would have supported the three bills considered under suspension of the rules. I would have voted ``aye'' on H.R. 4830, the SIT-REP Act. I would have voted ``aye'' on H.R. 4451, the Homeless Veterans' Reintegration Programs Reauthorization Act. I would have voted ``aye'' on H.R. 3832, the Veterans Opioid Abuse Prevention Act.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening in support of National Police Week, an important celebration of the men and women who serve our communities as members of law enforcement.

This week, we also observed Peace Officers Memorial Day and remembered all of those members of the thin blue line who have lost their lives so the rest of us can be safe.

Throughout my life, I have had the opportunity to work with so many brave Rhode Island police officers, and I am particularly proud that when I was mayor of the city of Providence, as a result of a citywide community policing model, we saw the lowest crime rate in the city in 40 years. That was because of the wonderful trust that had been developed between the community and the police department, and the police department being willing to fully engage in the life of the community. Police officers served on housing boards and community center boards and became part of the community, and, of course, that work continues today.

There are many, many stories about the extraordinary heroism and dedication and hard work of our men and women in uniform, but very often their really heroic work is in these untold stories.

One of those stories I would like to talk about tonight is a story that really exemplifies the important work that police do in our communities that makes a real difference in the lives of those they serve.

Earlier this year, the Pawtucket Police Department went above and beyond the call of duty to help a family in the city of Pawtucket. Hilary Bilbraut and her family were getting ready to celebrate their daughter, Destiny's, ninth birthday. Destiny, who suffers from a rare blood disorder that causes high fevers, had been eagerly waiting for her birthday trip to Legoland in Florida, where she could take pictures with her beloved camera.

Instead, Destiny and her family came home to an apartment ransacked by thieves. They took everything they could get their hands on. They took the family television. They took Destiny's camera. They took her tickets to Legoland. They even took her birthday cake.

In describing the aftermath to police, Hilary said the thieves stole more than just that: they stole Destiny's peace of mind. Since the break-in, she had been haunted by nightmares and constantly crying.

Pawtucket Police Officer Brian Beech was the first to respond to the break-in. Officer Beech was heartbroken by Destiny's story. He immediately began reaching out to his fellow officers for donations to help replace the stolen items.

Working together with Sergeant Kenneth Dolan, officers of the Pawtucket Police Department raised $400 to replace the television. One of the officers donated his camera.

They contacted Queen B's Cakery in Johnston, who donated a birthday cake. They even reached out to Legoland, who put together a trip to replace Destiny's stolen tickets, complete with a limousine ride to the airport.

Destiny was ecstatic. She was already talking about returning the gesture.

When asked why they went above and beyond, Sergeant Dolan said: We wanted to show her that there are more good people in the world than bad.

Mr. Speaker, this is just one example showing exactly why police officers do what they do. The men and women of our Nation's law enforcement deserve our utmost respect and our deepest gratitude.

I look forward to working with my colleagues here in Congress, members of the Rhode Island State and local law enforcement agencies, and local community leaders on the ways we can continue to support our great men and women in uniform.

I want to thank Congressman Knight for organizing this Special Order hour this evening. Our last evening had to get postponed, but I really appreciate, Mr. Speaker, the opportunity to offer a few thoughts this evening during National Police Week to say thank you again to the men and women who serve in our community to keep us safe, who do incredibly dangerous work and without whom we would not have safe communities.

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to affordable healthcare and prescription drugs, President Trump and the Republicans are forcing the American people to swallow a raw deal.

They have voted to dismantle protections for preexisting conditions. They have voted to raise out-of-pocket expenses. They have voted to take away health coverage from 23 million Americans. And they gave billions of dollars in tax breaks to pharmaceutical companies and other healthcare organizations. Last week, President Trump outlined his plan to further line the pockets of big drug companies and their CEOs.

Democrats have A Better Deal. Our plan will fundamentally reform the pharmaceutical industry, will put government on the side of consumers and middle class families--not giant corporations--by cracking down on outrageous prescription drug price increases, allowing Medicare to negotiate lower prices for drugs, and requiring drug manufacturers to publicly release hard data justifying any significant price increase.

This is the kind of deal the American people deserve: A Better Deal that will produce higher wages, lower costs, and the tools to succeed in the 21st century--not the raw deal that the President and the Republicans are offering on prescription drugs.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule and the underlying Republican farm bill, which could devastate working families, seniors, and the vulnerable who rely on food assistance.

Currently, more than 41 million Americans receive benefits through the Federal food assistance program known as SNAP. Close to two-thirds are children, the elderly, and the disabled. However, this partisan bill would reduce SNAP benefits by $23.3 billion, denying hundreds of thousands of American families who rely on this food support. Millions more will see their benefits reduced because Republicans are recklessly increasing the burden on recipients and changing eligibility requirements.

In December, Republicans passed a tax bill benefiting the wealthiest Americans and the most powerful corporate special interests. This Republican tax scam increases our national debt by $2 trillion over the next 10 years, and now our Republican colleagues are hypocritically trying to pay for these huge tax cuts for the wealthy by taking away resources for Americans who need them most.

Republicans are using this formerly bipartisan process to continue to undermine the well-being of children, the elderly, and the disabled to give gifts to the wealthy. This goes against everything we stand for as a country.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose the rule and to oppose the bill.

Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 185.