Floor Statements

Mr. Chair, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 8294.

Before I get into the details of the Interior-Environment section of the bill, I thank Chairwoman DeLauro and Ranking Member Granger for their leadership on the Appropriations Committee.

I also extend my sincere thanks to Chellie Pingree, the chair of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Subcommittee. Chair Pingree has been a fair leader, and I appreciate the work she has done on the many bipartisan priorities in the Interior bill, and to her staff for their tireless efforts.

The Interior bill provides funding for many important and critical programs that help conserve and protect our Nation's most critical natural, cultural, and environmental resources. More than that, it makes investments that matter to communities, businesses, and industries across the country.

The bill provides strong support for our National Parks, helps fight catastrophic wildfires, addresses our aging infrastructure, and fully funds the Payment in Lieu of Taxes, or PILT program.

I am grateful for my home district in Ohio that the bill provides increased funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. The GLRI funding is critical in our work to restore and protect the lakes for future generations.

Finally, I am pleased the bill advances longstanding efforts to increase the Federal commitment to honor our treaties and trust responsibilities with the American Indians and Alaskan Natives by providing a $12.6 billion investment in Indian Country; and a new provision that will help ensure sovereignty of Tribal laws.

Unfortunately, while I am supportive of many of the bipartisan components of the bill, I am unable to support it today given serious spending and policy concerns.

First and foremost, the bill fails to recognize the situation the country is now in and reverse this administration's assault on conventional energy production.

It eliminates longstanding, bipartisan provisions and adds new, controversial policy riders that would weaken U.S. energy and mineral security by limiting domestic development of these and other natural resources.

Given the rising energy costs and unprecedented prices we are seeing at the gas pump, it is now more important than ever that we continue to support our all-of-the-above energy strategy.

New provisions would prevent and disincentivize domestic production, only making us more dependent on our adversaries. Simply put, these provisions undermine the American energy sector and fail to put American industries and the American people first.

Similar riders were dropped from the final conference agreement last year, and the same must be done again before this bill can be signed into law.

We must also address the spending in this bill before we can reach a final agreement. With a top-line increase of nearly $7 billion in double-digit increases across many of the agencies, the spending is simply irresponsible in the absence of a broader, fiscally responsible Federal budget.

With record-high inflation under this administration, now is the time to limit spending. The Federal Government must make the tough choices to live within its means and work to rein in Federal spending to protect families from inflationary pressures and future generations from crippling debt.

It is the combination of these funding and policy reasons that I cannot support the bill at this time.

I look forward to supporting amendments to improve H.R. 8294, including one to remove a harmful rider on trophy permits, and my amendment to add limits on the burdensome SEC climate rule.

The SEC, which has no mandate to regulate carbon emissions, wants public companies to disclose new climate-related information, including greenhouse gas emissions. These requirements have already lessened investor enthusiasm for domestic drilling and oil protection.

At the same time, my friends on the other side of the aisle ask our energy producers to expand capacity--which, of course, requires investment.

Make no mistake, this rule will impact businesses of all kinds--small and large, public and private, energy and non-energy.

Under this rule, many public companies will be required to disclose not only their greenhouse gas emissions, but also the emissions of businesses upstream and downstream in their value chain.

Congress created the SEC to protect investors, maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets, and facilitate capital formation--not to set climate policy.

Unfortunately, the agency has lost its focus. I look forward to the debate on these key issues across all our appropriations bills and am committed to working with Chair Pingree and our colleagues as the fiscal year 2023 process moves forward to craft legislation that can receive bipartisan support.

Until then, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this package.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of my amendment to H.R. 7666 which would add the text of the Military Suicide Prevention in the 21st Century Act to the underlying bill.

Madam Speaker, with over 108,000 Americans dying from a drug overdose last year, all of us are uniquely aware of the opioid crisis ravaging our country.

Similarly, Americans have watched as the crisis at our southern border has turned into an outright catastrophe. There is a threat that both these crises pose, and it has gone unaddressed for far too long: secondary exposure to fentanyl. Secondary exposure occurs when an individual is unintentionally exposed to fentanyl and the drug enters the bloodstream through accidental absorption.

This happened in my home State of Ohio. A police officer overdosed after brushing fentanyl off his uniform following the arrest of a drug dealer.

The threat of secondary exposure is consistently faced by one group in particular: Customs and Border Protection agents. CBP officers have seized over 340,000 pounds of drugs this fiscal year, including 5,300 pounds of fentanyl. That is enough to kill 2.4 billion people.

Madam Speaker, today, I am calling on my colleagues to pass my bill to better protect those working to secure our borders: H.R. 5274, the Prevent Exposure to Narcotics and Toxics Act. Known as the PREVENT Act, my bill would require CBP to issue containment devices to all frontline border security personnel and provide training on their proper use.

Congress already requires CBP to provide Narcan to all officers at risk of secondary exposure, making this legislation a simple but necessary extension of the tools we provide those who defend our borders. Containment devices are a critical safety technology that allows first responders to safely store fentanyl and other dangerous substances in a secure device.

They not only protect agents from secondary exposure, but also better preserve narcotics for forensic analysis, improving the integrity of investigations and the chances of further legal action against traffickers.

The crisis at our southern border has exploded to unprecedented levels, and with it, we have seen a shocking rise in the amount of fentanyl flowing into the United States. While those of us in Congress may differ on how we believe this crisis should be solved, we can agree that the men and women working to stop deadly drugs from reaching our communities deserve to be protected on this job. The PREVENT Act provides them with that protection.

Madam Speaker, I am proud to have introduced this bill and will always have the backs of the CBP agents working to keep our country safe. These men and women put their lives on the line every day. The least Congress can do is ensure they have what they need to do their jobs as safely as possible.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to highlight a significant milestone for a group of men and women in my district who work on some of the most complex components of our nation's nuclear reactors. With their unmatched skills and diligence, the men and women at the BWXT facility in Euclid, Ohio have surpassed five million work hours without a single accident.

While they belong to a workforce that is so accustomed to safety, those who work at the Euclid plant have jobs that demand exacting requirements and have unforgiving tolerances. They are producing the control rods used in the Navy's reactors that power our submarines and aircraft carriers. These hardworking Buckeyes follow in a long line of great Americans fabricating our Navy's powerplants as far back as the Great White Fleet. Their commitment to delivering flawless equipment to our Navy is among the many reasons the United States remains unmatched on, and underneath, the seas.

To surpass the equivalent of 570 years without a single accident at a facility such as BWXT's in Euclid speaks to the highly skilled and trained workforce employed there. Madam Speaker, please join me in congratulating these workers on such an impressive milestone and thanking them for their contributions to our nation's technical and advanced manufacturing operations.

Madam Speaker, it is with a heavy heart that I honor the life and memory of Rhonda Ferguson, and express my deepest condolences to her family, friends and colleagues.

A Northeast Ohio native, Rhonda was an incredibly accomplished woman. She was the first in her family to graduate college, graduating from Northwestern University with a degree in Industrial Engineering. She then earned her Juris Doctorate from Case Western Reserve University. It came as no surprise to those who knew her that Rhonda went on to have an extremely successful, storied career.

In 2019, Black Enterprise magazine named Rhonda one of the most powerful Black women in corporate America. The following year, she was hired as the Executive Vice President, Chief Legal Officer, General Counsel and Secretary of the Allstate Corporation. Her colleagues warmly refer to her as a visionary force and a passionate friend, coach and mentor whose leadership helped ignite Allstate's transformation and create societal impact.

However, Rhonda's legacy as a well-respected mentor and trailblazer in the workplace would be incomplete without her unwavering commitment to her family. Rhonda cared deeply for her husband, Clayton, and their two children, Kristen and Clayton. I have no doubt that her memory will live on through all of them.

Kelly and I offer our prayers and condolences to Rhonda's husband, their children, and her parents, as well as her extended family and friends as they navigate their tragic loss during this difficult time.

Madam Speaker, please join me in honoring the life and memory of Rhonda Ferguson.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of my bill, the Drug-Free Communities Pandemic Relief Act.

The unfortunate reality is that while the COVID-19 pandemic ravaged our Nation last year, so did the opioid crisis.

More than 93,000 overdose deaths were reported in 2020.

Meanwhile, enough fentanyl has been seized at our southern border this year to kill the entire U.S. population seven times over.

And just the other week, the DEA warned that counterfeit pills laced with this deadly synthetic opioid are spreading across all 50 States.

These statistics are harrowing, and the stories of loss they cause are heartbreaking. All of us have loved ones, friends, or neighbors in our communities that have been impacted.

As a former Geauga County prosecutor, I saw firsthand how addiction has devastated communities in northeast Ohio and know how important it is to support local efforts that reduce and prevent youth drug use.

That is why I introduced the Drug-Free Communities Pandemic Relief Act with my friend and colleague on the other side of the aisle, Congressman Kilmer.

Recognizing that local problems need local solutions, the Drug-Free Communities Program provides funding to local coalitions that engage multiple sectors of their communities in order to reduce and prevent substance abuse disorder among younger Americans.

No other drug prevention program has consistently achieved the same reduction in youth drug use than the Drug-Free Communities Program has.

However, hundreds of coalitions have been unable to meet the program's local matching requirements due to financial difficulties caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

My bipartisan legislation will address that challenge and ensure these coalitions have the resources and flexibility they need during these difficult times to combat the crisis of addiction gripping our country.

With more Americans dying from drug overdoses than ever before, it is critical that we do everything we can to support and empower those working on the front lines in our communities to reduce and prevent addiction among our children.

I strongly urge all my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this bill today.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 4502.

Before I get into the details of division E, the Interior and Environment section of the bill, I want to thank Chairwoman DeLauro and Ranking Member Granger for their leadership on the Appropriations Committee.

I would also like to extend my sincere thanks to Chellie Pingree, the chair of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Subcommittee.

Chair Pingree has been an excellent leader, and I am glad I have had the opportunity to serve alongside her as ranking member on the subcommittee.

The fiscal year 2022 Interior and Environment bill includes many bipartisan initiatives to conserve and protect our Nation's natural and cultural resources and to increase the Federal commitment to honor our treaties and trust responsibilities with American Indians and Alaska Natives.

I am grateful for my home district in Ohio, and the States in the Great Lakes Basin, that the bill provides increased funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. This funding is critical to our work to restore and protect the lakes for future generations.

Robust funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative is essential as we continue our efforts with Federal, State, Tribal, local, and nonprofit partners to delist Areas of Concern, address shoreline erosion, improve water quality, prevent harmful algal blooms, and control invasive species.

I am also especially pleased that the bill makes critical investments in Indian Country, a longstanding bipartisan priority of this subcommittee.

The $12.1 billion across the bill will help support healthcare, education, law enforcement, and other operational programs throughout Indian Country.

Chair Pingree and her staff have worked hard to accommodate requests from Members on both sides of the aisle in this bill that will be appreciated by our constituents, regardless of party.

Unfortunately, while I am supportive of the bipartisan components of the bill, I am unable to support the bill in its current form.

First and foremost, the bill adds several new controversial policy riders that would curtail U.S. energy independence by limiting conventional energy and natural resource development.

Limiting our domestic supplies of much-needed natural resources does not decrease our demand for them; it only makes us more dependent upon foreign nations to obtain them, which is not only a national security concern but also an economic security, environmental, and human rights concern.

Our economy continues to depend upon on an all-of-the-above energy strategy, and these added provisions would undermine our ability to meet that demand.

Similar riders were dropped from the final conference agreement last year, and the same must be done again before the bill can be signed into law.

The Interior bill also eliminates or weakens several longstanding provisions that were once again enacted on a bipartisan basis last year. Adding these provisions back will be essential to reaching a bipartisan agreement.

The bill before us today proposes a $7 billion increase in discretionary spending, with many agencies receiving double-digit percent increases.

As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, Congress has provided trillions of dollars in economic stimulus and relief to help Americans tackle unique challenges.

On the heels of this unprecedented spending, as we continue to restore our way of life and reignite our economy, it is imperative that the Federal Government makes the tough choices necessary to live within its means.

So it is for a combination of these funding and policy reasons that I cannot support this bill at this time and in its current form.

Madam Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this package.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in favor of H.R. 1996, the SAFE Banking Act of 2021, and I am proud to help lead this commonsense, overdue effort.

The vast majority of States, including my own, have enacted laws that, to varying degrees, permit their residents to use cannabis. However, the Federal Government has not only infringed on the inherent right of these States to implement those laws, but also stifled medical research, diverted law enforcement resources needed elsewhere, and hindered legitimate businesses, businesses that provide vital services to cancer patients, veterans, and those seeking opioid alternatives for pain management.

Because of the Federal interference in this arena, cannabis companies are not afforded the same access to financial services as every other legal business in our country.

With banks refusing to accept their money out of fear of Federal repercussions, these businesses are forced to operate in all cash. They pay their workers in cash, store cash in vaults on-site, and hire armored cars and trucks to transport cash to pay taxes.

As a former prosecutor, I can tell my colleagues that this is a serious public safety issue.

But it is not just cannabis companies that are paying the price for this antiquated policy. Small businesses that provide services to State-legal cannabis companies can also be targeted by the Federal Government, such as plumbers, electricians, and even soil and fertilizer businesses.

Regardless of where you stand on the legality of cannabis, I think we can all agree that it shouldn't be that hard to sell a bag of dirt.

At a time when small businesses are just beginning to recover from the economic destruction caused by COVID-19, the Federal Government should be supporting them, not standing in their way. Congress must provide financial certainty to these businesses and safety to their employees.

Many of my colleagues have shied away from this issue because they are under the impression that it doesn't impact their constituents. But as I have outlined here today, it most certainly does.

The American people across the majority of States, both red and blue, have voted to enact sensible cannabis reforms. I encourage all of my colleagues to respect the will of their constituents and the rights of their States and begin engaging in these reforms.

It is past time we address the antiquated cannabis policies and remove unnecessary red tape. I strongly urge

my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote in favor of the SAFE Banking Act so we can take a step in that direction.

The Federal Government can no longer afford to fail on an issue that our States have taken the lead on.

Madam Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 84.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the heroic actions of one of Painesville's own, Josh Robertson, a Cleveland Heights Police Officer, who selflessly braved a life-threatening blaze to rescue a 6-year-old child from a burning home on July 6, 2019.

When Officer Robertson arrived at the scene of the fire, he encountered a frantic young mother whose son had been trapped in the burning house. Without any hesitation, Officer Robertson jumped into action and crawled inside to rescue the child, who was lying unconscious among the flames. According to the Fire Chief, it is unlikely that the boy would have survived another five minutes. Officer Robertson's heroic actions single-handedly prevented the unspeakable tragedy of a mother losing her son.

It is stories like these that remind us of the irreplaceable role that our law enforcement officers and first responders play in our communities. I am extremely proud to have such a courageous officer from Ohio's Congressional District 14; Northeast Ohio is lucky to have Officer Robertson protecting its citizens.

Madam Speaker, please join me in applauding the bravery and selflessness of Officer Robertson.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of those provisions of H.R. 2740 that reflect the President's proposals to continue funding for Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grants and State Opioid Response Grants, two programs under the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

Substance use disorders have ravaged large parts of this country, including parts of my home state of Ohio.

Madam Speaker, over the next 24 hours, about 130 Americans will die from an opioid-related overdose, close to 84 infants in Ohio will be born suffering from the horrific symptoms of drug withdrawal, and over 20 million people across the country will continue to battle with addiction.

In 2017, it is estimated that over 19.7 million Americans battled a substance use disorder. That's not to mention the approximately $740 billion annually that drug abuse and addiction costs American society in lost workplace productivity, health care expenses, and crime-related costs.

There is no one-size-fits-all solution to this crisis. Both addiction and addiction treatment are extremely complex. However, Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grants and State Opioid Response Grants have helped countless communities across the country. To be sure that these funds are being used efficiently, they must be directed toward those programs which employ an evidenced-based approach to treatment and recovery. In particular, community-based recovery support programs, like SMART Recovery in my own district, have proven crucial in encouraging those suffering from addiction to stay on the proper path to recovery.

One of my top priorities has been ensuring the federal funding Congress has provided to combat the opioid epidemic effectively supports the life-saving work our local communities carry out on the front lines of this crisis. While there is still work to be done, it is encouraging to see that Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grants and State Opioid Response Grants are helping organizations in Northeast Ohio and across the country save lives.

That is why I am proud to rise in support of these provisions.

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the Democratic en bloc amendment.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment includes language which would take a major step back in unleashing our domestic potential to procure critical minerals and reduce our reliance on foreign competitors like China and Russia. The amendment also includes language which would limit access to the healthiest beverage option in our national parks-- water.

Should we limit drinking water options available to park visitors especially in parks where the temperatures can easily reach triple digits?

The answer is no.

Finally, I offer a few observations that I believe we should keep in mind as we discuss ethylene oxide. Ethylene oxide is a critical tool to ensure that medical devices are sterile and safe for patients. For many materials, that is certain plastics, ethylene oxide is the only safe option for sterilization. Other sterilization methods--radiation and steam heat--will degrade the materials and cause the device to lose its integrity.

We all share the goal of patient access to safe medical devices, clean air, and clean workspaces. I am committed to working with my colleague and others to encourage more sustainable and efficient use of

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

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

Mr. Chairman, apparently there is an individual who is en route who would like to speak on this amendment, but at this point in time I do not have a witness right here, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition to the amendment.

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

Sport hunting is an important recreational activity for countless Americans and has been for centuries. President Teddy Roosevelt, a champion of the conservation movement, went on hunting expeditions around the world.

This amendment would negatively impact the people of Zimbabwe, Zambia, and Tanzania. The money generated from trophy hunts helps the local populations by providing jobs and funding for community services.

One of the countries listed in the amendment is Zimbabwe. The Communal Areas Management Plan for Indigenous Resources, or CAMPFIRE, program in Zimbabwe attempted to create economic incentives for communities and landowners to conduct habitat and ecosystem restoration. At one point, CAMPFIRE generated more than $20 million, of which almost 90 percent came from trophy hunting, allowing communities to establish management over the habit and resources within the range area.

Another country mentioned in the amendment is Zambia. Zambia's Administrative Design for Game Management Areas program has served as a model for locally accruing trophy-hunting revenue, as the program receives 67 percent of the trophy-hunting revenue in game management areas. Fifty-three percent of the program revenue is directed toward wildlife management. The remainder goes to community development.

There is also a lack of sufficient data on the effect of hunting species that would lead us to support efforts like this amendment. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, many scientific studies on trophy hunting's effects on wildlife populations contain disclaimers of insufficient data to measure the effect of hunting on a species.

Certainly, improvements can be made in these and other countries to further conserve species and benefit local communities. However, this amendment would take us in the wrong direction. Instead, we should focus our efforts on habitat loss and fragmentation, illegal poaching, and conflict with humans.

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

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

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), my distinguished colleague.

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Duncan).

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

Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I might consume.

I rise to support the en bloc amendment.

Mr. Chair, I thank Chairman Lowey for her support and Chair McCollum for working with us to include provisions important to Members on both sides of the aisle.

Included in this en bloc amendment are several water provisions that I support, including grants to States to reduce pollution in our waterways.

The amendment also supports the maintenance of the Great Lakes Advisory Board, which helps to ensure that transparent and credible views guide Great Lakes Restoration Initiative investments.

Finally, the en bloc amendment includes language prioritizing funding for grants to fight domestic violence in American Indian and Alaska Native communities.

Mr. Chair, I support the bipartisan en bloc amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hudson), my distinguished colleague and friend.

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

Madam Chair, I rise in support of this amendment. When it comes to ANWR, there is no such thing as a noncontroversial policy provision. This one found its way into the Interior-Environment spending bill at a time when longstanding bipartisan provisions have fallen out.

As I mentioned during general debate on this spending package, we need to remove these poison pill riders before we can reach a longstanding bipartisan agreement. That is why I support the amendment to strike this controversial policy position.

Madam Chair, I urge a ``yes'' vote on this amendment.

Mr. Chair, I rise in reluctant opposition to the gentleman's amendment.

Under Article I, section 9, clause 7 of the Constitution: ``No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law.''

That function resides within the appropriately named Appropriations Committee, and I take great pride in having served on this committee.

Every year, we dedicate a great deal of time to crafting and amending the annual spending bills to fulfill this constitutional responsibility and to keep the Federal Government operating.

We spend countless hours hearing from agency officials, outside advocates, and our fellow Members of Congress about our budgetary needs. We make tough choices regarding prioritization.

That is why I must oppose this amendment and I oppose the previous amendment.

Rather than evaluating the worthiness of each individual program, the amendment would indiscriminately cut funding across the board.

Such drastic cuts could harm bipartisan efforts to improve healthcare for American Indians and Alaska Natives; combat invasive species like Asian carp and zebra mussels; prevent devastating wildfires; address the maintenance backlogs at National Park Service and Fish and Wildlife Service sites; and provide payments to local communities under the Payment in Lieu of Taxes, or PILT, program.

Therefore, even though I share some of the gentleman's concerns about the excessive spending in these bills, I must oppose the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, as the designee of the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Granger), I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. LaMalfa).

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

Madam Chair, I rise today in opposition to this appropriations bill at this time, in its current form.

Before I get into details, I want to thank my friend and colleague Betty McCollum, the chair of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Subcommittee, for her leadership. I have had the honor of serving with her as the ranking member on the subcommittee with jurisdiction over appropriations contained in division C of this bill.

Throughout the 16 hearings and briefings on the important issues under her jurisdiction, Chair McCollum has set the tone for civility, fairness, and, on many topics, bipartisanship. Foremost among those topics is the Indian Country.

Roughly one-quarter of this bill is dedicated to programs for American Indians and Alaska Natives, whose ancestors paid in advance with their lives and their land for the basic services which this bill helps to provide.

These are true have-to-do Federal programs, and they continue to be a nonpartisan priority in today's hyperpartisan environment.

In addition, I thank the chair and her capable staff for making a genuine effort to accommodate bipartisan Members' requests in this bill, as well as other requests addressing matters back in our districts that will be appreciated by our constituents, regardless of their party. In particular, for Great Lakes districts like mine, her work has been extraordinary.

However, there are several matters in this bill which concern me greatly and will need to be addressed before we can reach a bipartisan agreement. Foremost among these concerns is a proposed 5 percent overall increase for the Interior and Environment programs in the absence of any new governmentwide budget agreement.

Current law mandates a 9 percent overall decrease to programs in this bill beginning October 1, 2019. Even if the bill before us today were to be enacted, all these programs would still be cut on that date. That is why the bill before us today is completely unrealistic and nothing short of a fairytale.

Of course, House Democratic leadership knows this already. That is why this bill contains so many Member requests: to pressure Members into voting for it and to use a strong vote count to pressure the Senate and the President to agree to more spending.

All this bill is really doing is giving supporters false hope and stealing the resolve of those of us who are truly concerned about driving our Nation further into debt.

To be clear, there are critical programs in this bill that need more funding, but decisions about increases must be made in the context of a larger budget agreement so that increases can be offset elsewhere.

The other area of this bill which concerns me is policy. This bill drops several longstanding, bipartisan policy provisions which will need to be added back before we can get to a future bipartisan agreement.

Meanwhile, this bill also adds in several new poison pill riders and directives limiting domestic energy and mineral production. Limiting our own supplies of much-needed natural resources does not decrease our demand for them. It only makes us more dependent upon other nations to obtain them in order to meet that demand, which is not only a national security concern but is also an economic security concern. We cannot protect American jobs if we cannot supply them with the energy and raw materials.

So it is for a combination of these funding and policy reasons that I cannot support this bill at this time, in its current form, but I am committed to working with my colleagues as we move through the fiscal year 2020 process to craft a bill that can receive bipartisan support and keep government operating, continue our shared commitment to Indian Country, and conserve our Nation's natural, cultural, and environmental resources that we all care so deeply about.

Until then, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this package today.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Col. Scott Colson Marcy, a decorated military officer with twenty-seven years of service, and express my profound condolences to his family and friends on his passing.

Born in Conneaut in 1950, Scott was a clear leader from a young age. Upon graduating high school, he was accepted into the Class of 1972 at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point only to be diagnosed with Hodgkin's lymphoma just two years later. Through sheer determination and strength, he became the first cadet in West Point's history to be readmitted after battling cancer, graduating as a second lieutenant with the Class of 1973.

Throughout his storied military career, Scott served honorably both on and off the front lines all over the world, from an armored cavalry troop commander in Germany, to the Director of Strategy, Plans, and Policy in Italy, for a U.S. Joint Task Force with Allied Forces Southern Europe in the War for Kosovo, to an advisor to the Army National Guard, to the Director of Alaska Operations for the ground based missile defense program. Over the years, Scott also held teaching positions at the U.S. Military Academy, Dickinson College, and the Naval Postgraduate School, helping to shape the minds of our nation's next generation of leaders. By the time he retired from active duty in 2000, Scott's exemplary service had earned him several prestigious awards, such as the Bronze Star, the Army Commendation Medal and the National Defense Service Medal.

Equally as impressive as Scott's career was the family he built alongside it with his wife, Suzanne, and their son, Preston. As the son of a veteran myself, I cannot speak more highly of Scott's commitment to his country and his loved ones. In 2013, Scott fully retired to spend time with his family, enjoy fishing, boating, traveling, visiting friends and perfect the art of making sauerkraut. He is survived by both his wife and son.

Madam Speaker, please join me in honoring the life, service, and legacy of Col. Scott Colson Marcy.