Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, it is a unique responsibility to be the sole Congressman for Alaska in the House of Representatives.

It's easy for legislators to forget that life is different in Alaska, and it is my highest priority to ensure that Alaskans are not overlooked here in Washington, D.C.

One of the principal lessons I have learned in my years of service are the check and balances between the three branches of government inscribed by our Founding Fathers in our Constitution.

While the President of the United States governs the Executive Branch, Congress writes our laws and that's something we too often forget here.

Article I of the Constitution states: ``All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.''

That said the President can only enforce legislation that Congress has drafted and approved.

The real power of this country lies within this Capitol building and we need to act like it.

For over 48 years I have worked tirelessly to address the crucial infrastructure and energy needs throughout Alaska.

Before being elected to public office, I saw firsthand Alaska's lack of traditional infrastructure while I was a tug and barge operator along the Yukon River.

But I could also see the potential economic development that communities and rural villages could achieve if they were given the resources to put ideas into action.

It is that driving knowledge that guides me as I work to support federal investment in Alaska's energy infrastructure.

Unfortunately, the Biden Administration is continuing Obama-era attacks against Alaska.

By reviewing federal rules that support Alaska and by placing a moratorium on energy development in ANWR, President Biden seems intent to surrender to his party's environmental extremists.

I want the President to know this: Alaskans have shown for decades that energy development and environmental protection can go hand in hand.

The executive actions he has taken in his first days in office serve only to hinder our state's economy, stifle energy independence, and prevent the Alaska Native community of Kaktovik from responsibly using their lands.

Tomorrow I will be proudly introducing Alaska's own Mathew Rexford, at the House Natural Resources Republican Forum titled, ``Where are the Jobs?''

Mr. Rexford is the President of the Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation and a strong leader.

The Alaska community of Kaktovik has long advocated for access to their lands and the opening of ANWR.

Development in the 1002 Area of ANWR would create countless jobs, revenue streams, provide for infrastructure and improve the health and economic well-being of the indigenous people.

While the United States should continue working to reduce emissions, doing so in a way that denies the opportunity for incremental improvements and technological innovations over time is unreasonable.

Resource development in ANWR would be a major win for out nations energy independence and security for decades to come.

I'm proud to stand with my friend Mathew Rexford to ensure that Kaktovik is heard on this issue.

I hope that the administration will listen and engage with native leaders like Mathew Rexford and I look forward to our forum tomorrow.

Mr. Speaker, I watched this debate. I have to say, we have an old saying: ``How do you eat an elephant? A bite at a time.'' We have had two bites today.

Mr. Speaker, this is not about what everybody is talking about. It is about the Second Amendment and--I won't call you Democrats. A lot of you are. Some of you are socialists that believe in taking the right to protect away--the Second Amendment--from the law-abiding citizens.

This is just a little step forward, the 10-day waiting period instead of the 3-day waiting period.

The FBI is controlled by the President. He, in fact, can say take 6 months or 6 years for a legal purchase of a weapon. That is what you are really saying.

Taking away the right to protect your home and your liberty, not just from criminals but those who would take away your rights as a government, the Second Amendment is what it is all about, to protect from the tyranny that could occur by the wrong leaders taking rights and freedoms away from you.

That is why I, as a board member, support this idea of the Second Amendment and ask for a ``no'' vote on both of these bills.

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

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

(Mr. YOUNG asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Chair, in 2013, the EPA issued new standards on air pollutant emissions for commercial and industrial solid waste incineration, which include the small, remote incinerators used in remote Alaska.

My amendment would prohibit the EPA from enforcing these rules on small, remote incinerators in Alaska. My amendment would not affect anyone but Alaskans.

I know this Chamber has shown great interest in my State recently, but I sincerely hope you would agree that enforcing these rules in remote locations that are not even connected with the highway system is unjustified.

While I appreciate the focus on clean air, these standards are unattainable for rural Alaska. If the 2013 criteria are enforced in my State, residents and industry alike would be forced to be noncompliant or would not be able to use waste incinerators at all.

In many locations, there are very limited options for the handling and disposal of waste. The ground is frozen or the water table is too high. The locations that would be impacted by this rule are hundreds of miles away from waste facilities in Anchorage, Juneau, and Fairbanks.

While garbage trucks are critical to the infrastructure of the lower 48, transporting waste from these remote sites would generate more emissions than burning near the sites.

When EPA wrote this rule, they used bad science and statistical methods to select the new standards. They didn't use enough samples to have statistical confidence in the values, and two of the incinerator units they used in the emission data do not even qualify as ``small'' or ``remote'' areas. They were both located within 20 miles of a regional landfill.

Incineration is the cleanest, most environmentally sustainable way to deal with waste in small villages. One thousand pounds of waste can be reduced to 50 pounds of ash that can be safely transported.

Keep this in mind: We have a lot of small villages that can only have incinerators; they cannot have landfills without shipping it. I am talking about 400 or 500 people.

This is not a good idea. It is the wrong thing to do.

I will say again, Alaska is a little unique. We are just about half as big as the United States, with 750,000 people. To put this standard in place, making these people, frankly, break the law is wrong. This amendment would keep them from applying that to the standards.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlewoman's comments, but, again, what do you do with a town that has 500 people and the only way to dispose of waste is by burning it or letting it go on the turf, letting it blow around, letting it pollute the other parts of the Earth? This is the only sensible way to do it.

I am not talking about great big cities. I am talking about small communities that cannot have landfills. And that does occur.

We don't have that many in Alaska, but where they do have these incinerators, there ought to be some compliance in the sense that: Okay, guys, you are not really polluting the air. It is a better way. There is more environmental damage by not being able to bury it, letting it run around on the top of the surface of the Earth, than there is burning it.

I know I just came out of Denmark. They have one of the largest incinerators in the world. It handles 2 million people. They burn 35 tons an hour.

Now, I am saying, okay, let's have those kind of incinerators, but you can't afford it for a small village.

Mr. Chair, I know where the gentlewoman is coming from, but you can't apply all rules to every place at one time when it doesn't work. You have to look at the total environmental damage.

I think, if you don't burn it, you have a lot harder problem than you do if you do burn it, so I urge my colleagues to support this small, innocuous amendment to try to make people live a better way than having them forced by a government agency to a standard that can't be met unless they just let it run around on the top of the ground.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

The misinformation you have just heard on the floor: You are not going to save any animals, you are going to help kill animals.

I have been to Africa eight times. I have tried to conserve, and I have done so. Areas that I have been hunting, like Namibia, the loss of the animals is because of poaching, not for the ivory, but because of the food, because there is no value to the animal, so they will kill it and eat it, the local people.

You are not going to help it out, because there is no value to that animal other than food if you don't have trophy hunting when it is worth more.

If I was to kill a buffalo over there, all I get is the head and the hide. They get the meat.

All you are going to do is prohibit it being imported into the United States and making you feel good, but it is not going to save the animal. In fact, the animal is going to diminish. That has been proven regardless of what you may read.

We are the real conservationists. It is going to let everybody else around the world go hunt in those areas, probably without any safeguard or investment.

This may sound good, it may help somebody out in their district, but it is not going to save the animals.

I suggest, respectfully, you ought to go and witness what is occurring over there by those that live there and are destroying the animals if we do not hunt them, because there is no value.

I believe I am a great conservationist. I have probably saved more animals than anyone in the room, because I do contribute.

You don't. You talk.

I think it is a shameful thing to say we are going to tell another country what they can and cannot do. That is what you are doing to make yourself feel good, but you are not saving the animals.

A conservationist is a true man that conserves, not tries to preserve in the natural state, because the natural state is very cruel. It takes the weak, it takes the strong, it takes them all. Man is the strongest of all, and they will take them all if it has no value other than food.

So I urge the defeat of this amendment. I wish more people would go and look and see, because you don't know what you are talking about.

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

Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), my good friend. I am always amazed how many people in this body know what is better for Alaska.

Four times in this last 2 weeks some of you have come out: I know what is best for Alaska.

This Roadless Rule was never to be. It was Obama's decision, and we appealed it, and we won in court. This is State land, a lot of it, we have access to, and we are going to continue that.

You say about climate change, old trees don't consume, new trees do. They clean the air out; old trees do not. We are not talking about, really, timber here, because you can't have a timber sale unless it is put up for sale. We are talking about access across Federal lands, because State land is one side--State land and Federal land in between.

We are asking, very frankly, just to have access. And that is the law. Under the ANILCA law, there was to be no more. Obama changed it by regulation. We are changing it again.

Now, I don't understand where he got this information, how he got it, what he has seen, where he has gone.

You talked about tourism. Tourism is great for you people in Oregon who want to come to Alaska, but it doesn't support our schools. It doesn't support a growing society. It, frankly, supports old growth, which has no value at all, other than to look at for a short period of time when it dies.

We had 32 forest fires last year, because you don't allow roads into an area so we can manage them, and that is wrong.

All we are asking is to have what the State was guaranteed by this body. And you are taking it away from them and saying: You don't have access to your lands. You don't have a right to build anything because you don't have the ability to have a road.

And I stand here as one Member who represents the greatest State in the Union, the largest district. I constantly see people--incinerators, game, timber, mining. Why don't you mind your own damn business? This is not yours.

I am disappointed the gentleman would do this.

You are a friend of mine. Did you ever consult me about this? No. And that is disrespectful.

Maybe I ought to think about something that makes you more respectful to me.

Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I suggest, when they talk about the taxpayer, these roads that are in place now, maintenance costs were already there. The reason they are not being used is because there is no timber in that area, which have been cut already, a very small amount of the Tongass. I am talking about State land.

By the way, can I ask the gentleman who just briefly spoke, or anybody: Have you been to the Tongass?

Do any one of you want to answer that? No. They are mimicking or parroting what has been fed to them.

This is not the United States of the Federal Government; it is the United States of America. You are taking away the right of a State of access to their land because of this action, and that is wrong.

I said we won it in court. You may not know that. We will win it again, because the law is very clear: There was to be no more in Alaska, but Obama did apply it.

So I am saying: Have at it. It is not going anywhere.

I shouldn't get excited. It is just the idea that you are supposed to be representing a form of government, and you should have a right to represent your district. That is your responsibility.

Stay out of my district, because you are not doing what is right for the State of Alaska, and that is my job. I say shame on you.

Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).

Madam Chairwoman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

We passed the same opening of ANWR 14 times in this House, including when the Democrats controlled it, because this was set up by Moe Udall, Senator Jackson, Ted Stevens, and myself for an area that has potential great value to this Nation and, of course, the State of Alaska. That has been decided. Because they said at that time and I said at that time that if Congress was to say we should open ANWR, drilling can take place.

Now, as far as the figures go, one of the things that bothers me, because the statement says 50 percent of the CBO score, one score, the first sale may not make that.

But who is to say what the second sale is going to make or the third sale?

So the total amount is for the Treasury of the United States of America.

This area is not pristine. I have to say that. I wish some people would go up and see it. It has been developed before by defense systems. The people there who live there, the Native people, the Inuits, they support it. The State of Alaska supports it. It is the right thing to do for America.

This is a backdoor approach by certain people of the other party who want to not open ANWR. You lost that battle. We won. For the good of the country, the good of the State, and for the good of the people, we won. This is a back way to stop it.

I believe we are going to raise that money. That is how confident I am. I think the sales will produce what we say. So I am not going to really get excited about this, because it is not going to go anywhere. Thank God we have got two Senators for every State. It is the right thing to do. That is why the Constitution and the forefathers made it that way. So I have got two Senators who will make sure this doesn't go anywhere.

I appreciate those who oppose it. I thank the chairwoman for actually saying she does oppose opening ANWR. I respect that. I happen to support it, and I think I will be proven right.

I believe this amendment is the right way to go. I think we ought to eliminate the question, so I am going to urge a ``yes'' vote on this legislation. It is the right thing to do. Then let's go forward and really govern for the future. That is important. We are missing that.

Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Simpson), ranking member of the committee, and I was interested in listening to this conversation.

I would really respectfully ask the Member to respect the district which I represent. I am not talking about the mine. I am talking about the process.

This is State land. They gave it to us, the Congress--State land. They put it up for discovery. It was discovered. And under the clause of the discovery, you have the right for exploration. Under the right for exploration, you have a right for production, if it is possible to process.

And the chairman, the ranking member put it very clearly: Let's go through the process. What this gentleman from California is saying: We are going to make a decision what is right for everything here, and they don't know a damn thing about it, nothing, because they are promoting people saying: This shouldn't be done. There is no science behind it yet.

Science is what they talk about all the time. It is the bedrock. EIS is the bedrock. And yet they are ignoring it, expecting this Congress that doesn't know squat about the mining in Alaska.

It is our land, not their land. It is not Federal land. It is our land.

I am saying, let the process work. Let the process go through. That is what we are here for. Not for us to make decisions.

The ranking member put it very clearly. What are we going to do next time? They will not be in the majority forever, and we will have some things they do not want, and we will say we are going to do it.

They are ignoring the science, and they brag about the science all the time. Let the science prove us right or wrong. That should be their responsibility, not saying they are for or

against a mine and give all these doomsday things there. They may happen. If that happens, it will not happen because it will not issue the permits.

I want everybody to think about this a moment. What is happening here tonight is for the interest of some environmental groups--which you used to be head of, by the way--environmental groups to stop a project that is not any of their business until science has not been proven. I am saying let's look for it. Let's look for proven. I am saying let's look for it. Let's look for the science. If that happens, then we will do it.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate our Anchorage North Stars U16 Tier II hockey team for their 2019 USA Hockey National Championship win at the end to their hard-fought season.

A 3-2 loss to the McKinney North Stars earlier in the Tournament could not discourage these young men from Anchorage. They qualified for the championship bracket, and advanced to the Championship game, where they once again faced the McKinney North Stars. With just 50 seconds left, Anchorage's

Hayden Fox notched the winning goal off a Tucker Lien assist to come from behind to win the game. I have not seen a team from the State of Alaska win the boys' National Championship at the U16 age group in more than 20 years, and I can't begin to say how immensely proud I am of this team.

Victory in hockey is a team effort, and so I would like to recognize the players and staff of this team individually for their hard work and dedication this season. Our 2019 Anchorage North Stars U16 Championship players are Jarett Beckett, Peter Flannery Schutt, Colten Gerken Roberto, Jakub Hall, Tyler Huffer, Olin Kelliher, Tucker Lien, Spencer Lund, Revelin Mack, Cullen McCormick, Garret Miknich, Trevor Monahan, Logan Orr, Alexander Pavia, Teague Porter, Landen Reed, Drake Reid, Joshua Tyra, and the winning goal scorer, Hayden Fox. The 2019 Anchorage North Stars National Championship team is led by Head Coach Matt Thompson, Assistant Coaches Austin King, Graham McManamin, and Kory Roy, Team Manager Katie Hulse, and President Barrett Heisten.

Madam Speaker, it gives me great pride to celebrate the achievements of our young people in Alaska. Hockey teaches young Alaskans the value of practice and hard work, and there is no better reward for a season's worth of training than overcoming all obstacles in your way to secure a championship. The other teams in the 2019 USA Hockey U-16 National Championship deserve their recognition as well, especially the McKinney North Stars, who gave Anchorage as tough of a championship game as they could've asked for. I see it only fitting that these young men be recognized not only by their home state, but by this Congress, on their achievement. I think I speak for all of Alaska when I say congratulations on their victory.

Madam Speaker, on May 2, Senior Counsel Harry ``Hank'' Atack Savage is retiring from the Office of Legislative Counsel after 33 years. I want to commend Hank for his long and excellent service, and his improvements to the many bills on which he has worked over the years. In addition to working for other Committees, Hank handled maritime, Coast Guard, coastal and ocean and other issues for the now defunct Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, and for the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, the Committee on Natural Resources, and the Committee on Armed Services. When I chaired the Committee on Natural Resources and, later, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, I was glad to have his support and expertise when drafting complex legislation.

As the maritime transportation counsel, Hank helped shepherd through Coast Guard authorization bills, including eight in the last nine Congresses, and a Maritime Administration authorization measure in every National Defense Authorization Act since 1995. His work has left a lasting impression on title 14, Coast Guard, and title 46, Shipping, of the

United States Code. He also has drafted untold numbers of Jones Act waivers covering every imaginable type vessel, ownership scenario, and vessel history.

On the Natural Resources Committee, I was particularly appreciative of his work on the 1996 update of the National Wildlife Refuge System organic statute during my first term as Chairman. He also worked on the first update of the hydrographic surveying laws in half a century, the Hydrographic reauthorization of the National Marine Sanctuaries Act, and multiple Coastal Barrier Resources System Act amendments, including the provision that led to the digitization of the Coastal Barrier Resource system maps.

Of course, as the Congressman for All Alaska, I appreciate Hank's work on legislation related to numerous Alaska maritime and terrestrial issues, including the environmental restoration and land transfers on the Pribilof Islands.

Hank is a proud University of Michigan grad, and graduated from Tulane Law School in New Orleans.

Again, I want to thank Hank for his long and excellent service to Congress, and I am sure I am speaking for a long line of current and former Committee chairmen who share those thanks. I wish Hank and his wife, who is also retiring for Federal Service this spring, a long and happy retirement. I hope that will include a trip to Alaska.

Madam Speaker, today I'd like to congratulate Zygmund Kowalewski on the

occasion of his 99th birthday on April 7th, and thank him for his service to the United States Navy and to the United States of America.

Mr. Kowalewski enlisted as a gunner on a twin-engine PBM flying boat in October of 1941, just two months before the ambush at Pearl Harbor would launch the U.S. into World War II. As a part of Torpedo Squadron Eight present at the Battle of Midway, he and his fellow crew members earned commendations for bravery in engagements at Guadalcanal, Midway, and the British Solomon Islands.

Attempting to fly a mail route off the coast of the Fiji Islands, Mr. Kowalewski's plane stalled on takeoff and crashed into the Pacific Ocean. He was forced to free himself from the downed plane and paddle from the wreckage, fearful the ship's 500-pound depth charges would detonate. Madam Speaker, even after receiving combat honors twice for his heroics, Mr. Kowalewski once again piloted a U.S. Navy plane, instead hunting German submarines in the North Atlantic Ocean.

Mr. Kowalewski moved out to Alaska in 1967 after fulfilling his Naval service, continuing to fly as an FAA Airway Systems Inspection Pilot. But whether he was piloting a torpedo bomber or a twin-engine Cessna, he always conducted himself with valor and should be considered among Alaska's finest Naval Aviators for his service.

An aviator needs quick decision-making and a cool head to fly a plane in combat. Many of us will not know the kind of mental toughness required to see a mission to its conclusion, even under the most dire flight conditions.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Zygmund Kowalewski, who now at the age of 99, will have spent nearly one quarter of his life's work in service to his country having flown missions from Dutch Harbor to the Panama Canal. There are few people that can claim to have sacrificed as much under our flag, and he is owed the thanks and gratitude of all of us here in Washington and in Alaska.

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Chair, my amendment would improve this bill's application to remote Alaska Native villages.

Women in Alaska Native villages suffer the very highest sexual abuse rates in the Nation.

Alaska Native women are overrepresented in the domestic violence survivor population by 250 percent.

Alaska Natives comprise about 19 percent of the State's population, yet are 47 percent of the reported rape survivors.

Yet, Native villages currently lack any efficient tools to criminally prosecute the offenders. The remoteness and isolation of the Native villages, most of which are not connected to the road system and only accessible by air, makes it difficult to prevent violence and care for the survivors.

Almost all of these villages lack any form of law enforcement, and it can take days for authorities to fly to the village and respond to an incident, particularly when weather conditions are bad.

My amendment will open the door to a meaningful pilot project to help overcome these limitations by crafting an Alaska solution for a unique Alaska problem.

Currently, the bill would create an Alaska Native jurisdiction pilot program for five villages, but only covers Native lands that are largely outside the villages. These lands are not where people live and, therefore, not where crimes are committed.

My amendment would add jurisdiction for all lands inside Alaska Native villages to cover where the majority of violence actually occurs.

Villages need to be empowered to develop local solutions to these problems.

My amendment is supported by the National Congress of American Indians, Alaska Federation of Natives, the Tanana Chiefs Conference, and Bristol Bay Native Corporation.

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

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

Madam Speaker, today I'd like to congratulate Zygmund Kowaleski on the occasion of his 99th birthday on April 7th, and thank him for his service to the United States Navy and to the United States of America.

Mr. Kowaleski enlisted as a gunner on a twin-engine PBM flying boat in October of 1941, just two months before the ambush at Pearl Harbor would launch the U.S. into World War II. As a part of Torpedo Squadron Eight present at the Battle of Midway, he and his fellow crew members earned commendations for bravery in engagements at Guadalcanal, Midway, and the British Solomon Islands.

Attempting to fly a mail route off the coast of the Fiji Islands, Mr. Kowaleski's plane stalled on takeoff and crashed into the Pacific Ocean. He was forced to free himself from the downed plane and paddle from the wreckage, fearful the ship's 500-pound depth charges would detonate.

Madam Speaker, even after receiving combat honors twice for his heroics, Mr. Kowaleski once again piloted a U.S. Navy plane, instead hunting German submarines in the North Atlantic Ocean.

Mr. Kowaleski moved out to Alaska in 1967 after fulfilling his Naval service, continuing to fly as an FAA Airway Systems Inspection Pilot. But whether he was piloting a torpedo bomber or a twin-engine Cessna, he always conducted himself with valor and should be considered among Alaska's finest Naval Aviators for his service.

An aviator needs quick decision-making and a cool head to fly a plane in combat. Many of us will not know the kind of mental toughness required to see a mission to its conclusion, even under the most dire flight conditions.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Zygmund Kowaleski, who now at the age of 99, will have spent nearly one quarter of his life's work in service to his country having flown missions from Dutch Harbor to the Panama Canal. There are few people that can claim to have sacrificed as much under our flag, and he is owed the thanks and gratitude of all of us here in Washington and in Alaska.

Madam Speaker, I want to pay tribute today and thank Chad Padgett for his years of service on my staff, the great state of Alaska, and to the United States of America.

Chad Padgett first came to work in my office in 1994 and has served as my State Director for more than a decade. Madam Speaker, to put the magnitude and demands of his job into perspective requires some explanation. There are only seven other states in the U.S. House of Representatives that have State Directors. In the other 43 states, the position is commonly referred to as District Director. For example, the State of California has 53 House District Directors.

During Mr. Padgett's tenure in my office he has traveled to almost every city, town, village and road stop in the state. That's quite an accomplishment in and of itself, when you think about how large the 49th state actually is. Alaska has 6640 miles of coastline representing 50 percent of our nation's total coastline and is one-fifth the size of the entire country. Many of the places Mr. Padgett has traveled to have only been accessible by air or water. Remember, even our state capitol, the third largest city in the state, can only be accessed by plane or ferry. He has traveled by car, truck, jet, single-engine plane, helicopter, state ferry, and boats of all sizes and makes.

Madam Speaker, Mr. Padgett has had a lot of geography to cover in Alaska--more than California, Texas and Montana combined. These three states have 90 people doing what Mr. Padgett does.

As mentioned earlier, Mr. Padgett joined my team in 1994 as a Campaign Assistant. In 1995, he became a Special Assistant in my congressional office and quickly became my Deputy State Director. He remained in that position until, under President George W. Bush's administration, he received a Presidential nomination to serve as State Director for the Farm Services Agency. From there, he became the State Director for USDA Rural Development. He remained with the USDA until 2009, when he chose to come back to work as my State Director.

As much as I hate to see Mr. Padgett leave my office, I am equally pleased that he has been selected to serve as the State Director for the Bureau of Land Management in Alaska.

Mr. Padgett will excel in his new position. He brings to the job the right temperament, integrity, experience and knowledge necessary to provide leadership and stewardship overseeing our federal lands.

Mr. Padgett has proven himself as a loyal, competent and respected public servant. He has shown care and compassion for literally thousands of Alaskans by helping them resolve their problems and navigate the bureaucratic mazes.

He is well-liked by his co-workers and has helped mentor many young staffers by instilling his core values of hard work, loyalty, responsibility and maintaining a positive attitude.

To me, Chad Padgett is more than my State Director. Most of all, he is a trusted friend. He is an advisor with my best interests always at heart. He is like family--and always will be.

While it is difficult thinking of his departure from my staff, it gives me a great sense of pride and comfort knowing he will oversee and be the steward for about a quarter-of-a-billion acres of federal land in Alaska.

On behalf of the countless number of Alaskans that he has helped, his co-workers, and most of all, my family and me--I thank him and God bless.

We are excited and extend our best wishes to him for the challenges ahead.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Speaker Pelosi for those kind words, the kind words of the Republican leaders, and the kind words of all my colleagues.

It was mentioned that I love this institution, and I do because this is the great United States of America, and we are representatives of our districts.

The one thing I learned, during my 46 years, is that each one of you represent your people, and I respect it. I may not agree with some of the things you stand for, but I respect that you were elected by your people.

I had the privilege of traveling a lot, and I still do, in Members' districts, not to campaign against them, but to find out why and how they are elected and what they stand for in that community. This House is the people's House.

I have to sort of confess to one thing that was alluded to by Kevin. It is a fact that I was a schoolteacher to fifth grade students, and it prepared me for this job. There is some truth in that because, I have to tell you, I have timed it as a teacher. The average attention span of a fifth grader is 7 minutes, and the average attention span of most Congressmen is about 4\1/4\, because they are so busy trying to do everything they can, and they are so busy representing their people.

John Dingell was mentioned. And, Debbie, God bless you for him. He was one of my dear friends. Everybody says that, but he was a dear friend.

I met him in 1964 in my hometown of Fort Yukon. He was on the Fish and Wildlife Committee. He was 9 years a Congressman. I met with him and talked to him about an issue I was interested in.

Of course, when I got elected, he came to me, and I went to see him. We had one thing in common: We loved to hunt. We hunted on weekends, because we stayed here. We fished on weekends. And we became dear friends. He is the strongest, frankly, Congressman I have ever served with.

We had one thing in common: He respected my beliefs, and I respected his. I would say, John, this is the right thing to do. And he would do it.

I think a lot of us here today have to learn that and quit watching the media. That person who represents that district, listen to what they have to say and support them. That makes this House work a lot better, frankly, than it is right now.

This is nothing new. We have to do this for this country, to retain the control of the Congress to run this Nation. If not, we will lose our democracy.

Mr. Speaker, I thank everyone in this room for recognizing my tenure. I want to especially thank my wife, Anne, who is up in the stand. I have been trying to get the State of Alaska to pay her because when I lost my dear Lu, I thought I was going to die. She came along, picked me up off the ground, supported me, loved me, cherishes me, and makes me want to come to work every day to serve the great State of Alaska.

Mr. Speaker, I thank everyone. God bless them, and God bless America.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank former Chairman Bishop and Chairman Grijalva for their work on this legislation.

This is a proud moment. We listened to a lot of angst a while ago, and now we look at two people working together to solve a problem. This is how Congress should work.

I am especially proud of this legislation because, as the chairman mentioned, there are 62 pieces of legislation that passed this House that are in this bill somewhere, including five which are mine.

I think it is important to the State of Alaska. What this bill does, as mentioned by the chairman and the past chairman, is gives opportunity to everybody to be involved. As the chairman said, it may not be everything we want. I had a couple of things we didn't get in it, but this is the beginning of working together on public lands as they should be, with those that are directly involved in it.

The legislation that was in this bill that was mine: There was the Alaska Native veterans and selection of lands--first time. Been trying 15 years, and we finally got it done.

It also has and expands the long overdue sand and gravel mineral rights to Alaskan Natives in Barrow. A lot of this land surrounds Native villages, so this legislation solves a lot of those conflicts. And everybody supports it.

I am very excited about this legislation. I want to thank my senators for working on it and finally getting it done but, most of all, the committee, the Natural Resources Committee, where I was chairman for 6 years. This is a good piece of legislation, and I urge passage of this piece of legislation.

Madam Speaker, it was my pleasure as Dean of the House of Representatives to swear you in at the beginning of this Congressional Session. I pledge to work with you on all matters affecting our Nation and my home State of Alaska.

I want to bring to the attention of my colleagues, and the United States Postal Service (USPS), which receives a certain level of federal funding for forgone revenue due to free and reduced rate mail under the Financial Services and General Government (FSGG) Title of the appropriations package, an issue that is critical to safe and stable passenger air service in Alaska.

Alaska is unique in comparison to other States within our Union in that we have special mail service to provide roughly the equivalent of universal postal service, on par with the rest of the country, to remote Alaskan communities throughout my State which are not connected to the U.S. road system. By way of aviation, vital ``bypass'' mail service is provided via air carriers to towns and villages all over Alaska. This service is critical to the State of Alaska and to my constituents. USPS has jurisdiction over this program and, from time to time, has implemented its interpretations that diverge from Congressional intent of the Rural Services Improvement Act (RSIA)--a law that I helped develop with my former Senate colleague Ted Stevens, and which governs the USPS mail-delivery system for Alaska.

The intent of RSIA is very similar to the intent of the USPS funding included in the Financial Services appropriations bill--to ensure that rural postal delivery is maintained at prior year levels and to prevent the closure of important rural post offices.

There is only one airline in Alaska that now delivers mail and passengers ``from the first to the last mile'' to the far reaches of the State--to Native communities, to communities on the Aleutian chain, and the northern-most towns and villages in the State. This airline, Ravn Air, has been disadvantaged by the USPS's interpretation of RSIA that does not grant the air carrier the status as an ``existing mainline carrier'' under the statute. This status will help further ensure that viable passenger service and mail delivery is maintained throughout the State.

From time to time, it is fair and appropriate for USPS to objectively reevaluate its interpretation of RSIA to provide an updated application of the law and to consider Ravn for this status.

I intend to follow up with USPS and its new Commissioners regarding this request. The entire Alaska Congressional Delegation has previously written USPS on this matter and I will continue to reach out to my Senate Colleagues for review of this with USPS in light of changes within USPS itself, and changes in the airline industry and marketplace in Alaska.

I thank my colleagues and with that I will vote for passage of the Financial Services bill as part of the final FY '19 Appropriations package.

Madam Speaker, I am honored to express my deepest gratitude to all of the Coast Guard members stationed in Kodiak that do so much for Alaska and this country.

Our Coast Guard base in Kodiak is the largest in the nation and truly vital to protecting our shores and coastal waters. Home to Air Station Kodiak, the Kodiak Naval Operating Base, and three cutters, Kodiak is a lynchpin of coastal security in the North Pacific.

I am sure I do not need to teach anyone about the vital role the Coast Guard serves in Alaska. The area of responsibility assigned to Coast Guard units within Alaskan waters is the largest in the nation, spanning a massive 3,853,500 square miles and more than 33,000 miles of coastline. This enormous geographic responsibility includes the patrol of the North Pacific Ocean to protect those traversing the often-rough waters and to stop large-scale high seas drift netting as well as other illegal fishing practices that rob Alaskans of our livelihood and one of our most valuable natural resources.

From a national perspective, the Coast Guard is responsible for protecting our coastal borders and keeping those in our waterways safe through port, waterway and coastal security, drug and migrant interdiction, maintaining maritime aids to navigation, search and rescue missions, living marine resources and marine safety, ensuring defense readiness, marine environmental protection, ice operations, and other law enforcement operations. Through these important missions, the Service saves thousands of American lives every year.

I was glad to speak with Coast Guard leadership recently about the great work performed already this year, even during the political divide in Washington, D.C. Every man and woman in the service is a testament to the spirit and drive that makes America so great and I want to assure all of our Coast Guard men and women that I am working to support and represent their interests in Congress just as I have done my whole career. I would like to thank everyone in the Coast Guard for the outstanding work they do, day in and day out to protect Alaska and our country. America is truly better off thanks to the Coast Guard.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to address the unfortunate position the brave members of our Coast Guard were put in due to the recent shutdown. Even while they operated without pay, these courageous men and women continued to serve our country and I would like to highlight some of their stories.

On January 12th, a Coast Guard aircrew responded to two surfers in distress off the Oregon Coast who had been pushed by the surf into a cliffside cove. Once on scene, the crew was able to hoist the surfers out of the water and get them to safety. On Christmas Eve of last year, the Coast Guard interdicted a migrant boat off the coast of the Dominican Republic. Onboard, the crews found 100 kilograms of cocaine heading for the United States. On January 6th, the Coast Guard Cutter Vigilant assisted the Haitian government in stopping a small boat dangerously overloaded with 70 Haitian migrants. The Coast Guard worked jointly with Haiti to stop the illegal immigration and maintain the safety of life at sea, something they regularly work with international partners to accomplish.

These are just a few examples of the great work our Coast Guard does every day to protect the people in and around our waterways as well as in our country. Yet unlike the other branches in our armed forces who selflessly serve this country, our Coast Guard men and women were not getting compensated for their work during the shutdown. In 2013, Congress passed the Pay Our Military Act before a shutdown began to make sure members in the armed forces were able to collect their paychecks. I emphasize that this was done before the 2013 shutdown because we just went a little over a month in one and even with introduced legislation to make sure our Coast Guard got paid, we didn't act on it.

There were 41,000 Active Duty Coast Guard members, 6,200 reservists, and 8,500 civilian personnel affected by the shutdown. It is estimated that 31 percent of Active Duty members do not have the savings needed to cover one month's worth of expenses. Moreover, some 13 percent do not have any emergency savings at all. This is not to mention the other benefits the Service members were missing out on like child care programs, death benefits, housing allowances, and required travel costs. Meanwhile, the negative impact on recruiting and retention of members due to the instability will likely have lasting effects long after the shutdown.

My state is home to U.S. Coast Guard Base Kodiak, the largest Coast Guard base in the nation. From there, they coordinate a multitude of operations in the waters around Alaska, including north in the Arctic. They patrol our waters to ensure the proper adherence of fishing laws and regulations, coordinate search and rescue efforts, help establish and maintain aids to navigation, and conduct other missions to help save lives and strengthen national security. As the United States' only surface presence in the Arctic, their mission to ensure safe maritime activity and safeguard national security has gained importance due to the growing presence of Russia and China in the region. This mission is sure to only become even more significant as these foreign powers continue to expand their influence.

Madam Speaker, I could go on about the many great things our Coast Guard does for both the state of Alaska and the United States as a whole, but I believe it is well understood in this chamber and across the country. With the threat of another shutdown in the near future, I fear that the members of our Coast Guard will be put in the same position again. That is why I urge we move to immediately bring up and pass H.R. 367, the Pay Our Coast Guard Parity Act of 2019, to make sure they are compensated moving forward. Meanwhile, I call on all members in Congress to come to the table and work with the Administration so that we can make a long-term agreement that is beneficial for all federal employees and prevent another shutdown.