Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 218.

Mr. Chair, today, we are passing one of the most critical pieces of legislation to come before any Congress--the Farm, Food, and National Security Act, or the 2026 Farm Bill. This is the next step forward in strengthening America's safety net for our farmers and safeguarding our Nation's food security.

North Carolina is fortunate to be one of the most agriculturally diverse states in the country. Agriculture contributes more than $113 billion to our state's economy and remains our number one industry. However, its importance cannot be measured in dollars alone--a secure food supply is essential to our national security.

This bill protects North Carolina agriculture from crazy state- imposed laws designed to ultimately lead to the elimination of animal agriculture. Additionally, the bill expands support for specialty crops and enhances disaster assistance for hurricane-prone states. It also addresses pressing issues in our rural communities, such as water contamination challenges.

I would like to thank Chairman Thompson for his leadership and steadfast commitment to advancing a Farm Bill that supports the farm families who provide the safest, most abundant food and fiber supply in the world. I would also like to thank the very hard-working House Agriculture Committee staff for all of their work. This accomplishment would not have been achieved without them.

I urge my colleagues in the Senate to advance this legislation so that our Nation's farmers can continue to farm and meet the food and nutritional needs of America and the world.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague and friend for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, boy, do I have many stories that I could tell, but I will not. No one cared more for the people of California and for America than Doug. As a fourth-generation rice farmer, he was the true embodiment of the steward of the land and a great steward of common sense, too, I might add.

He understood the needs of rural America and had such a genuine desire to serve the people who lived there. Doug and I worked closely on many issues, but one of my fondest memories was hosting him in North Carolina for an agriculture roundtable. He engaged with my constituents, speaking their language, and truly listening to their concerns.

Doug LaMalfa stood tall, both literally and figuratively, for the people who feed this country. To know Doug was an honor and a privilege. His absence will have a profound void in this Chamber. This body and the Nation will miss him deeply.

Mr. Speaker, my prayers are with his wife, Jill; his children; his grandchildren; the entire LaMalfa family, including his great staff. I thank them for sharing him with us in service to our country.

Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 356.

Stated against:

Madam Speaker, today marks a monumental day for the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina, the effects of which will transcend generations. The Lumbee have fought tirelessly for decades to achieve full recognition by the U.S. Congress. Today, that day has arrived.

The Lumbee Fairness Act, which I offered as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act, will soon head to the President's desk, as part of the annual defense bill, for his signature, providing full Federal recognition. This is a historic milestone, decades in the making, and a moment of celebration for a community that has never wavered in its resolve.

This amazing achievement would not have been possible without the steadfast leadership of Chairman John Lowery and generations of Lumbee. Their voice has been heard, and their commitment and perseverance have brought us to this historic moment.

I commend and thank President Trump for his tremendous support, as well as our current Senators Thom Tillis and Ted Budd, former Senators Elizabeth Dole and Richard Burr, and my many colleagues here in the House who continually supported this effort.

Madam Speaker, I thank them all, for the Lumbee are a great and honorable people who deserve Federal recognition with all the rights and benefits that come with it.

Mr. Chairman, listening to our friends on the other side of the aisle reminds me of what one of my favorite Presidents of the United States said, Mr. Reagan. He said: You know, our friends on the other side of the aisle, they know so much that just isn't so.

Mr. Chair, I am proud to support this much-needed effort to modernize our Nation's water permitting system. I thank Chairman Graves, Water Resources and Environment Subcommittee Chairman Collins, and many members of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure who have worked to develop this package.

I also appreciate the inclusion of three bills that I authored: The Nationwide Permitting Improvement Act, the Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act, and the Improving Water Quality Certifications and American Energy Infrastructure Act.

Each addresses well-documented breakdowns in our Nation's permitting process which delay critical projects, drive up costs, and do nothing to actually improve water quality.

The Nationwide Permitting Improvement Act narrows the scope of the Clean Water Act section 401 certifications to actual water quality impacts and establishes timelines and procedural guardrails of State- level review to prevent misuse and delay.

The Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act removes the need for duplicative National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits for pesticide use if the pesticide is already EPA approved and used according to label requirements, which will reduce costs without weakening environmental protections.

Finally, the Improving Water Quality Certifications and American Energy Infrastructure Act codifies the historic nationwide permit process under section 404, extends permit validity to 10 years, and clarifies jurisdiction over dredge-and-fill discharges, providing predictability for infrastructure and energy developers.

Together, the enactment of all these bills will result in clear rules and predictable timelines that will cut costs and promote economic growth while maintaining environmental protections. That is how you battle inflation.

Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the amendment offered by Mr. Babin.

Let's be very clear about this. This amendment builds directly on the critical Clean Water Act section 401 certification reforms that I authored in the underlying bill. These are reforms that refocus the 401 certification process on its original and proper purpose, and that is: protecting water quality.

Unfortunately, in recent years, certain States have abused this process, using it as a tool to block or indefinitely delay infrastructure projects for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with water quality.

Mr. Babin's amendment strengthens judicial review for 401 certifications on major energy infrastructure projects by curbing frivolous lawsuits and, two, ensuring expedited consideration when legitimate challenges are brought.

Mr. Chair, that is all there is to it. It is very simple and straightforward. It is actually exceptionally pro-environment, and I support this amendment.

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, even though I am not opposed to it.

Mr. Chairman, although I claim time in the opposition, I do not oppose the amendment. I rise, in fact, in support of the amendment No. 8 offered by my colleague from California (Mr. Peters), as it would allow the United States section of the International Boundary and Water Commission, or IBWC as they call it, to receive additional funding from other Federal and non-Federal partners to support water and wastewater infrastructure.

This amendment will give the IBWC access to additional funding sources, enabling it to properly maintain these assets and, in turn, support cleaner training waters for our warfighters while strengthening security along our southern border.

This amendment is the same text as H.R. 1948, which was favorably reported out of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and passed the House by voice vote earlier this Congress.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, this is a good amendment. I urge adoption of it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, I rise in support of my amendment to include the Lumbee Fairness Act in the bill before us today, providing the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina the full Federal recognition they have been unfairly denied for decades.

Throughout recorded history, the Lumbee Tribe, comprised of nearly 60,000 members, has called southeastern North Carolina home. Despite their long history and cohesive culture, the Lumbee have never had access to the same Federal benefits enjoyed by every other federally recognized Tribes.

During what is referred to as the termination era, Congress passed the Lumbee Act of 1956 recognizing the Tribe yet denying them the Federal rights and protections afforded to other federally recognized Tribes.

Beginning in 1978, the Federal Government began rectifying the damage done during this era. Since then, Congress has stepped in, reversed its previous actions, and recognized 23 Tribes through legislation reestablishing their relationship with the Federal Government.

Legislation to rectify this for the Lumbee Tribe has been introduced in Congress more than 30 times with broad bipartisan support. In the past two Congresses, in fact, the House passed this legislation under suspension, most recently on December 17, 2024.

Outside of Congress, the Lumbee Fairness Act has the support of 236 Tribes across the country that have repeatedly cited the unfair treatment of the Tribe under the 1956 Lumbee Act.

Today, Congress can take a major step forward to end the unfair and unjust treatment of the Lumbee Tribe once and for all.

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

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Harris).

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McDowell).

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Moore).

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

Mr. Speaker, I missed the Roll Call vote on H.J. Res. 106. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 225.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 163.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2390, the Maritime Supply Chain Security Act, takes a critical step toward strengthening our port infrastructure and national security by expanding the eligible use of the port infrastructure development program to include the replacement of Chinese port hardware and software, most notably Chinese cranes and the software used to operate them.

As we all know, our country's ports serve an absolutely critical role in our national supply chain, moving millions of tons of goods each year, facilitating trade, which supports American businesses and consumers across the country. Any disruption to these supply chains results in increased costs for American families and shortages of essential goods, just as we witnessed during and after the outbreak of

Madam Speaker, I thank my friend, the Chairman, for yielding me the time.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.J. Res. 61, which would repeal the Biden-Harris EPA's rule amending National Emission Standards on the domestic rubber tire manufacturing industry.

This rule would impact 11 facilities in nine States, including 1 in my district in Fayetteville, North Carolina, which has been manufacturing tires since the 1960s, produces 20,000 tires a day for passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks, and employs 2,300 of my constituents.

Fayetteville plays a major role in the State's industrial economy, and its manufacturing sector provides significant economic opportunities for my constituents, including our area's veterans from Fort Bragg. These 11 facilities have supported the American worker for decades while complying with all environmental regulations.

In 2020, the EPA ruled that these facilities were already operating under the accepted threshold and had established a margin of safety to protect public health. This rule, issued by the previous administration, would do just the opposite, actually. It would increase CO2 emissions by requiring facilities to install additional costly technologies that will increase energy consumption.

Beyond that economic harm, the rule would prove costly to manufacturers, affecting workers' wages and the expansion of the domestic tire manufacturing industry.

The per-company cost to comply with this rule would be four times what EPA has suggested: 100 million in capital costs and $20 million in other annual costs.

Madam Speaker, this regulation must be rescinded. We must reinstate common sense. Rubber tire manufacturing facilities have complied with the existing standards, and keeping this rule in place would bring economic harm and no benefit for anyone, including my constituents.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill, the Amtrak Executive Bonus Disclosure Act, which increases accountability and transparency at Amtrak by requiring public disclosure of taxpayer- funded bonuses given to its top executives.

Amtrak was created 55 years ago by Congress as a for-profit entity to relieve our Nation's vital freight railroads of their obligation under law to provide what had proved to be an unprofitable intercity passenger rail service.

Since then, Amtrak has done no better. They have failed to ever make a profit and struggle to provide adequate service.

Even with the post-pandemic improvements in ridership, staggering financial losses remain. In 2023, Amtrak lost more than $1.7 billion despite collecting $11 billion in taxpayer subsidies and almost $22 billion in advanced funding from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

Amtrak's delays and customer service failures were front and center the day after Christmas just a month ago when the Northeast Corridor train didn't board any passengers at Washington's Union Station. Mr. Speaker, 100 customers were stranded during the busiest travel time of the year when operations should be the most efficient.

Amtrak is also hampered with project delays. Delayed projects lead to cost overruns and significant revenue losses. For example, its new Acela II train service for the Northeast Corridor is more than 3 years behind schedule with no firm date on when it will enter service. This delay has led to a $140 million loss in revenue according to a 2023 OIG report. Relying on government bailouts to make up for losses must end.

Despite this track record, no pun intended, the Amtrak board of directors awarded the company's 15 executives more than $9 million in bonuses during the last 2 years. Congress, Amtrak employees, and the public were shocked and outraged, and rightly so, to discover such generous and questionable awards paid largely by taxpayers.

The Transportation Workers Union, which represents 1,500 Amtrak service workers, said that these bonuses are an affront to every Amtrak worker and American taxpayers, which is why the TWU endorsed this bill during the previous Congress when it last passed the House.

While Amtrak has taken steps to be more transparent about their executives' bonuses, they only did so after a hearing before the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

Congressional oversight and influence should not be necessary for this information to be made public, but unfortunately, it is. It is why this bill has been brought to the floor today, to require Amtrak to publish its annual executive bonus awards on its website, providing passengers, employees, and taxpayers with transparency regarding how their tax dollars are being spent.

Mr. Speaker, I urge support of this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of my bill, H.R. 1101, the Lumbee Fairness Act, to give the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina the full Federal recognition they have been unfairly denied for decades.

The Lumbee Tribe, comprised of 55,000 members, is the largest American Indian Tribe east of the Mississippi River and the ninth largest in the Nation. Throughout recorded history, the Lumbee have called southeastern North Carolina home, spanning Robeson, Scotland, Hoke, and Cumberland Counties.

Despite their long history and cohesive culture, the Lumbee Tribe has never had access to the same resources exercised by every other federally recognized Tribe. During the termination era, when Congress ended the Federal relationship with 60 Tribes, the Lumbee Act of 1956 recognized the Tribe's existence yet denied them the Federal rights and protections afforded to other federally recognized Tribes. This includes access to benefits from the Indian Health Service and support from the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Sometimes, it is quite helpful to go back to see what the statute actually says. Public Law 571 specifically reads: ``Nothing in this act shall make such Indians eligible for any services performed by the United States for Indians because of their status as Indians, and none of the statutes of the United States which affect Indians because of their status as Indians shall be applicable to the Lumbee Indians.'' It is a bit wordy but very clear and very to the point.

Beginning in 1978, the Federal Government began rectifying the damage done during the termination era, establishing processes in which Tribes could regain Federal recognition and privileges.

The Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act established three ways in which an Indian group may become federally recognized: By act of Congress, by the administrative procedures established by the Department of the Interior, and by decision of a United States court.

Since then, Congress has stepped in and recognized 23 Tribes through legislation, reestablishing their relationship with the Federal Government.

Unfortunately, given the language of the Lumbee Act of 1956, only an act of Congress can establish the Federal rights and privileges of the Lumbee Tribe.

Some point to the administrative process as the path forward for the Lumbee Tribe, but the language of the 1956 act, which I just read, has acted as the law of the land, barring the Tribe from gaining their due privileges.

The fundamental point is this: Congress wrote a law that terminated the Federal relationship with the Tribe, and Congress is the only entity that can restore that recognition. The administrative process has quite honestly proved to be a dead-end street simply because of that statute.

The Lumbee's leadership and members work tirelessly every year to mobilize support to move the legislation that is before us today. The bill has been introduced in Congress more than 30 times with broad bipartisan support in the House and Senate.

Through more than a dozen congressional hearings, documentation has consistently affirmed the Lumbee Tribe as a distinct, self-governing Indian community. In each of the last 11 Congresses, legislation has been introduced to grant the Lumbee Tribe the full recognition they deserve.

In the last two Congresses, the House passed this legislation under suspension, and beyond Congress, the Lumbee Fairness Act has the support of 236 Tribes across the country who have repeatedly cited the unfair treatment of the Tribe under the 1956 Lumbee Act.

All of this is to say, Mr. Speaker, this needs to be done. I thank the House leadership, particularly Speaker Johnson and Majority Leader Steve Scalise, for bringing this bill forward for consideration today.

I thank Chairman Westerman and his committee for their diligent work on all issues, particularly this one. Their efforts have not gone unnoticed. Today, the House can take a great step forward to right the wrong of the unfair and unjust treatment of the Lumbee Tribe once and for all. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, on Roll Call No. 419, I mistakenly voted yea when I intended to vote nay.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and therefore missed two votes. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 424 and YEA on Roll Call No. 422.