Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, the National Defense Authorization Act ensures our military focuses on its core mission: defending our Nation, not advancing a Green New Deal agenda. This year's NDAA puts an end to efforts that prioritize radical environmental policies over military readiness and national security.

Key provisions include: No climate change programs. The NDAA does not authorize new climate change programs within the Department of Defense.

Our Nation's mission is to deter and defeat threats, not to serve as a testing ground for expensive climate experiments.

Zero-emission vehicle prohibition: The NDAA prevents the DOD from requiring servicemembers and civilian employees to use zero-emission vehicles for official travel. Although it might be usable in some phases, zero-emission vehicles can be impractical and unreliable, particularly in remote or high-stakes operational environments.

The weapon system climate preference prohibition: The bill prohibits the Department of Defense from issuing rules that prioritize weapons systems based on their climate impact instead of their effectiveness in combat. Our troops deserve to have the best tools to win wars, not the most environmentally friendly ones.

Defense industrial base greenhouse gas rules: The NDAA blocks the Department of Defense from implementing costly new greenhouse gas rules that would impose unnecessary burdens on the defense industrial base. These rules could stifle innovation, slow production, and drive up costs for critical defense equipment.

The military's role is clear: protect and defend the American people. Anything that distracts from that mission puts our Nation at risk.

Prioritizing climate regulations over combat readiness is a dangerous gamble, especially when global adversaries like China and Russia are laser focused on advancing their military capabilities.

Pushing a Green New Deal through the Pentagon threatens to undermine our readiness, increase our costs, and weaken the defense industrial base at a time when strength is indeed paramount.

Zero-emission vehicle mandates could leave servicemembers stranded or ill-equipped during missions. Climate-focused weapon system rules could mean our troops are outmatched on the battlefield because effectiveness took a back seat to some ideal of emissions.

New greenhouse gas rules on defense contractors could drive small businesses out of the market, increasing dependence on foreign suppliers or a handful of very large ones. We cannot afford that risk to prevent innovation either.

The NDAA reaffirms that national security comes first. It ensures the DOD uses its resources to strengthen our Armed Forces, not to chase political agendas.

By blocking these unnecessary climate rules, we are maintaining a strong, focused, and effective military and not an idealistic goal.

The NDAA draws a clear line: The Pentagon is not a climate agency. Every dollar and decision at the Department of Defense should prioritize mission success and national security.

Our allies rely on it, and our people of this country rely on it. With this bill, we are safeguarding our military's readiness and ensuring that America remains the strongest force for peace and security in the world.

Mr. Speaker, the National Defense Authorization Act takes an important step to protect children from harmful and irreversible medical procedures.

It includes a provision to permanently ban the Department of Defense from providing minors with medical treatments for gender dysphoria, such as hormone therapies and puberty blockers that can result in sterilization.

Children should have the chance to grow up without being subjected to experimental procedures that can cause permanent damage to their bodies and futures. These are minors we are talking about here. What business is it of the Department of Defense to be engaging in this?

These treatments are life-altering, and their long-term effects are still unknown. The Federal Government has no business funding or endorsing such practices, particularly when they involve children.

This provision ensures taxpayer dollars aren't used to promote controversial and harmful treatments for minors.

Including this ban in the NDAA reflects a commitment to common sense and the protection of our Nation's youth and focuses the Defense Department on defending the homeland. It is a step in the right direction for safeguarding the futures of these children.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my friend from Tennessee (Mr. Rose) in leading this effort tonight and for all his great work on our messaging that we are doing as a Republican Conference to illustrate to the people of the country what it is we are trying to do and that is our belief that it will be good for America and, in this case with the NDAA, good for our military and the people who populate it.

Regarding this NDAA, the point I want to make this round is that the NDAA puts real muscle behind countering China's aggression with $15.6 billion for the Pacific deterrence initiative, which is about $5.7 billion more than what the Biden administration thought was going to be adequate.

We are covering gaps the administration ignored, funding $490 million toward critical Indo-Pacific command priorities to shore up operations and capabilities in the region.

We are making it clear: Taiwan won't have to stand alone. This bill launches the Taiwan security cooperation initiative to send lethal aid where it is needed most.

The joint training and trauma care programs will boost their readiness, while industrial base agreements make sure their defense capabilities and ours are solid.

The U.S. is doubling down on its commitments to allies in the region. This isn't just talk. We are reaffirming congressional support with action. With so much aggression by China in the region and around the world, this is the least we should be doing for an ally such as Taiwan who is there for us when we need them.

We are also demanding a deep dive into the troubling alliance between China, Iran, Russia, and North Korea, the actors who are teaming up to challenge us in that region in the Pacific as well as the mayhem they are causing with their alliances in the Middle East and our issues with trying to help protect Israel whether it is going to be with Iran's efforts immediately or with whatever is going to happen in Syria now with Assad taken out.

This bill gives counter-intelligence agents more tools to expose and crush Chinese Communist Party spies working to undermine us in any of these regions.

There will be no more contracts with Chinese Communist Party- affiliated contractors, labs, or universities. We are shutting down their access to our defense programs.

Why we have to do that now, when it should have been our policy years ago, I am not sure, but it is just common sense. You don't want to have Chinese access toward our technology and their ability to have some kind of weight in how our defensive programs work.

It bans the Department of Defense from buying Chinese tech like semi- conductors and communications gear. Relying on China for anything critical is asking for trouble.

Who knows how easy it might be for them to embed spy technology into some of these chips and into some of this other equipment that could send information that is critical to us out to a different source that they can then mine and use against us.

From ship repairs to logistics hubs, this bill ramps up our ability to operate in the Indo-Pacific.

We are even funding forward-deploying manufacturing because if China wants a fight, we will make sure we are ready for them on day one. Now nobody really wants to have a fight. Indeed, readiness and projecting strength is one of the best deterrents. The work we can do in the NDAA, whether it is in this Pacific deterrence initiative and the other related pieces or overall, it helps prevent war, and it helps prevent conflict in the United States. It brings confidence to its allies around the world and maybe just a little bit of fear to its enemies.

That is what we hope to accomplish and continue building on for the rest of this year and on through the Trump administration.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I stand before you today to address a crucial and escalating situation facing Israel, our close ally. They have been under attack not only from isolated factions but from a coordinated effort orchestrated by Iran.

Rockets have rained down on Israel from Lebanon, the Gaza Strip, and

Yemen, forcing Israel to defend its citizens and its sovereignty from these relentless threats. It is crucial to understand that these attacks are not random acts of violence but part of a larger, more sinister and coordinated plan.

In each of these regions, there exists a militia backed by Iran. In the Gaza Strip, it is Hamas; in Yemen, the Houthis; and in Lebanon, it is Hezbollah.

Recently, with the fall of Assad and the regime in Syria, this very much will disrupt some of those efforts that Iran and some of their backers in Russia have been able to do in there, but the United States and our diplomacy must pay very, very close attention to how this is handled because many times when there is a vacuum like this, there can be even worse results coming in, such as what happened in Libya and Iraq.

We will have to grade this by what we see as possible new leadership coming in, but, indeed, be on top of that so that Iran doesn't get a stronger foothold in Syria again.

It is exacerbated by the policies of previous U.S. administrations because of the overall outcome we are seeing. These people are funded, supplied, and directed by Iran as part of a calculated strategy to encircle and weaken Israel.

Indeed, they do not want Israel to exist, and it is pretty hard to sit down at a negotiation table to come up with peace when they don't even acknowledge your right to exist as a nation.

Unfortunately, the lenient stances taken by Presidents Obama and Biden have only encouraged Iran and others in the Middle East to keep Israel firmly in the target sights.

Secretary Blinken recently warned that Iran is potentially within weeks of nuclear capabilities. This is not hyperbole. It is a direct reality. We have been hearing that for some time, so we don't know what that really means, but Iran has been working ever since the JCPOA to become a nuclear nation.

We are witnessing a comprehensive and coordinated assault by Iranian militias aimed at Israel. The intent is to strain Israel's defenses from every direction. We must recognize and respond to the true nature of this threat.

The National Defense Authorization Act being brought to the floor this week in the House takes decisive steps to strengthen our partnership with Israel in the face of these ongoing threats. Our partnership with Israel is critical for their existence but also for us, as they have been a great partner in the Middle East and there are so many innovations and things that we do together as countries.

The NDAA authorizes full funding for joint U.S.-Israel missile defense programs, like the Iron Dome, a defensive mechanism. It allocates $47 million for cutting-edge technologies, such as anti- missile laser defenses, and commits $30 million to dismantling Hamas tunnel networks.

As Iran continues its aggression against Israel, these measures reaffirm our unwavering support for Israel's right to defend itself and its future and to exist. Together, we must ensure that Israel has the tools it needs to stand strong.

Our partnership is ironclad. It is important to both of us. It is important to Israeli existence, and even other Arab countries nearby have acknowledged that Israel is an important partner due to the success of the Abraham Accords.

If my colleagues ask Arab Israelis who live in the country if they like it better in Israel or would rather go back to something else, they like it better in Israel.

There is a lot of good that comes from that nation being able to stand on its own, as it has always been a beacon of light and opportunity for people who just want to play by a good set of rules.

Mr. Speaker, the National Defense Authorization Act is more than just a defense bill. It is a safeguard for free speech.

How can that be?

It is because within its pages, Congress took an important step to protect the First Amendment by prohibiting the Department of Defense from partnering with advertising firms such as NewsGuard which unfairly targets conservative news sources as untrustworthy.

Stopping censorship and ensuring the government isn't using taxpayer dollars to silence viewpoints it doesn't like under the pretense of misinformation is essential for free press.

By including this provision, the NDAA ensures that Federal agencies can't act as gatekeepers for acceptable speech or manipulate the flow of information.

At a time when cancel culture seems to have no boundaries, this is a much-needed step to keep the government out of the business of picking winners and losers in the marketplace of ideas, especially in information that needs to get out to the public.

The NDAA sends a clear message: Free speech isn't a privilege; it is a right for us to know.

Mr. Speaker, securing our southern border still remains one of our most urgent and pressing challenges facing our country.

House Republicans are taking decisive action with the National Defense Authorization Act, which we will be taking up soon. It is a bill that not

only strengthens our military but directly addresses the border crisis.

A cornerstone of this plan is the authorization of National Guard deployments to the southern border. This ensures we have the manpower to respond effectively to illegal crossings, combat the influx of dangerous drugs, and disrupt cartel operations that endanger American lives and jeopardize our national security.

We are directing resources to where they are needed the most: protecting the borders and safeguarding the homeland. Indeed, the cartels have been so powerful and so aggressive in what they do that it endangers many, many lives. We have heard horrific stories about the lives that have been taken and the trafficking.

This focused approach prioritizes the well-being of all Americans over the inefficiency we typically find in Washington.

To prepare the folks who serve in our military, this bill would help them with that. This bill makes significant improvements in housing, boosts pay, and shortens healthcare wait times. If you have dealt with VA on that, which we do often, our retired soldiers should not have to do such horrific things to get the care they need through the VA or the Veterans Choice Program through any local entity.

The bill even enhances childcare options for military families. The legislation also eliminates divisive policies that have no place and no business being in the Department of Defense, allowing our military to concentrate solely on readiness and morale within the military.

This renewed focus ensures that our forces are prepared to succeed in tackling challenges such as the border crisis. House Republicans are delivering a comprehensive defense bill that prioritizes border security, improves the conditions for servicemembers, and eliminates wasteful spending.

Mr. Speaker, more locally, in my district in northern California, part of the effort will be to set up the new mission of collaborative combat aircraft at Beale Air Force Base. These drone wingmen will make our existing aircraft more lethal, as well as protect the manned aircraft by having these drone vehicles available to be part of a flight, which will place less emphasis on and create less risk for manned aircraft.

Drone technology can extend the fight longer and farther and allow the engagement of many more targets.

This year's NDAA invests more money into this new drone technology. This forward-looking technology enhances the existing airframes that we have to be able to keep vital air dominance and control in near-term Indo-Pacific conflicts.

Mr. Speaker, this is really great technology that is important to incorporate so we have less risk to our pilots. We can use existing aircraft instead of having to buy nearly as many hyper-expensive new aircraft. It is not that I am against it. I am in favor of the newest, best aircraft we can get, but maybe we don't have to buy nearly as many when the stuff that we have is still good for the mission, with the wingman approach of these drones being able to do a lot of the dirty work and take the immediate risk off of the manned aircraft.

The NDAA is something we have to pass every year. We need to get this done this month and keep that continuity that our fighting people need to get the job done, as certainly it is a more dangerous world than it ever has been right at this moment with what is happening in the Middle East and with what is happening in the South Pacific with China and its aggression.

Mr. Speaker, we need to be ready, and this legislation will help move us in that direction. These new technologies will lower the risks for our fighting people.

Mr. Speaker, servicemember quality of life directly impacts morale, family stability, and military readiness, affecting recruitment and retention, as well.

The NDAA addresses these issues with key provisions to improve the lives of servicemembers and their families. A 14.5 percent pay raise is authorized for junior enlisted servicemembers, and a 4.5 percent raise is supported for all others.

This pay increase was previously opposed by the Biden administration but is now a critical part of the bill we will be taking up soon to support those who serve our country.

The cost-of-living allowance calculation is improved to better reflect inflation, particularly for those stationed abroad. Inflation has been devastating toward the military family incomes.

The NDAA expands the basic needs allowance to support servicemembers facing financial challenges. It requires the Department of Defense to reassess the subsistence allowance to ensure it covers the rising cost of necessary goods and services.

These improvements will strengthen both the well-being of our servicemembers and military readiness, ensuring our forces are better equipped and have a higher morale to defend our Nation.

Mr. Speaker, California's unemployment system is failing. The State owes $20 billion to the Federal Government because of mismanagement and rampant fraud. Small businesses are going to be left to pick up the mess.

In order to address the root problem, California should instead help small businesses, not shove the problem onto them. Instead, they are going to see higher unemployment insurance taxes that cover up this debt, higher taxes on already struggling businesses in my home State, on top of the taxes, regulations, and red tape they already face.

These small businesses are key to getting people back to work, but they are being crushed by these policies that prioritize bureaucracy over actual solutions. When a State cannot account for many billions of dollars of unemployment, as well as through the EDD, let alone the billions that are missing now for homeless issues, it needs to get back in focus on what is important for the people of California.

We have crime to solve. We have water we need to store and help with our agricultural community. We have homeless problems that are still not being met. We have housing issues we need to address. Instead, we get more and more of this kind of corruption.

The path to recovery starts with our small businesses in California, not harming them with more taxes.

Mr. Speaker, we know that small businesses are really the cornerstone of the American economy. Entry-level jobs and the corner mom-and-pop stores are what really make a town, a small town, or a neighborhood work well. Yet, the regulations that are being heaped upon them make it just about impossible for them to go much further to remain in business. Year after year there are more costs, more paperwork, more things that just make it more enticing to retire or go out of business.

Federal regulations play a big part in that. In my home State of California, State regulations heaped upon them play a big role, as well. So what do we get? Some of the bad ideas that come out of California are emulated here.

We had a bill called AB5, also known as the ABC worker classification rules. What happens? That starts affecting what they call gig workers or people who are contractors but they are trying to corral them into being employees mainly so they can be unionized. That isn't it at all.

Then what happens? AB5 passes in California and messes things up for a while. They have to pass another law to straighten out some part of it including things like Uber rides and Lyft and things like that. They got an exemption for them. There are a lot of other people who have not gotten that exemption.

In D.C., in Congress, after watching that mess, after having something at least partially corrected that didn't work well, they wanted to emulate that with something called the PRO Act here last Congress. They want to keep on adding more and more to that burden.

What we see, again, in my home State of California is our resources board came up with more and more emissions rules on vehicles. We are not talking about being against clean air and having more efficient vehicles. That comes from the marketplace. It comes from technology advancing, as it can, instead of State mandates saying that we will just force you to electrify all vehicles by 2035 or 2040 or 2045 or whatever round number fits the narrative that day for a date and time.

We see that CARB is just choking off so much for small businesses and for trucking. Trucking is essential to get finished products to the store shelves and so much of the inputs to a farm or to a factory, for example.

A lot of times a ship will bring things into port. A train might move it a long way or the truck might move it directly to where it is needed in manufacturing or processing and then it is brought to your store shelves.

Well, those prices just keep going up because they force more and more mandates on trucks and on locomotives. The technology doesn't even exist or certainly hasn't been perfected yet on those diesel engines. Diesel does power the country, like it or not. It will do so for a long, long time.

The mandates that they place at CARB are making it so much more expensive. At some point we might have to go a few weeks without food and other issues, other supplies being on the shelves to finally get the point across that truckers can't do it anymore in my home State.

You see what farmers go through with trying to comply with water supply issues where more and more water is being pushed toward environmental water and less toward farming and growing food in my home State.

The San Joaquin Valley has been devastated over 2 years with the water being taken away and flushed out to the delta. It supposedly helped something called the delta smelt or so-called saltwater intrusion coming up to the bay and salting the water that gets farther inland.

They don't need nearly the amount of water that is wasted and is going through the delta and out to the ocean to take care of some of those problems.

Indeed, the municipalities around the delta need to look at how much effluent they are putting into the delta, into that estuary, or into the ocean directly by not having cleaned up their act with the effluent coming out of the sewer treatment plant, sometimes just straight sewer. The regulations are needed on the city folks and not on the farmers and not taking away the water.

What I am talking about is that these small businesses like farms, like downtown, like trucking companies, like all that are being devastated by regulations. A lot of them start in my home State of California but then are emulated here in Washington, D.C.

Mr. Speaker, so often it seems that one hasn't even talked to the other about how the rules would be effective, how they would actually be devastating, or how they would be implemented in a way that isn't hurtful.

Government is supposed to help the people. Government is supposed to help people whether they are the ones being protected by these so- called polluters or the ones who need to receive the products that they are making. Business is a big part of that.

If we don't allow these people to be in business, then those jobs will be exported. We will import everything from China at lower quality. We need relief from that at the Federal level, as well as the State level, from this regulatory overreach.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Senate finally passed the Federal Disaster Tax Relief Act which includes in that my own bill to stop taxing wildfire survivors after they received damages and after everything has been burned out in Paradise, California, and several other northern California fires in recent years.

The IRS has treated disaster relief like a payday for themselves, taking from the survivors who have already lost so much. Now that ends.

This bill ensures wildfire victims will keep their settlement funds, money they need to rebuild their own lives. It also stops the unfair taxes on legal fees. Get this, Mr. Speaker, they have to pay the taxes on the fees that the attorneys would get when they cut their 30, 33 percent out of those award damages. It also restores their lost wages, taxes, and other recovery costs.

Taxpayers can claim refunds for taxes wrongly paid since 2020, putting over $500 million back where it belongs: with the people.

This isn't just dollars and cents. It is about doing what is right for those facing disaster.

After years of work, I am really glad to see this legislation can finally clear both Houses of Congress and get these folks the relief they have needed for so long after nearly being disaster victims of wildfire.

Mr. Speaker, California voters have made it very clear. They are tired of the unchecked crime and soft-on-crime policies that have plagued our State for years.

With over 68 percent voting to strengthen penalties through Proposition 36 that just recently passed, the message couldn't be louder: Enough is enough.

What are California Democrats doing? Instead of focusing on this overwhelming mandate to restore public safety, they are pouring their energy into Trump-proofing California, an obsession with political theater while crime continues to rise and neighborhoods feel less safe.

Their so-called legislative solutions are more about optics than outcomes.

The voters wanted more action, but Democrats are too busy spinning excuses about pendulums and alternatives to incarceration to deliver real actual results.

Californians aren't asking for extreme swings. They are asking for accountability.

The people voted to reverse the disastrous criminal justice policies of the past. They want true action.

Sacramento Democrats need to stop ignoring that and wasting money on other things, like trying to stop an agenda here that will make the prices of food and energy go down and help their own citizens.

Enough with the distractions. Enough with the games. Let's get serious.

Mr. Speaker, we cover a wide range of topics here, and it is important that we discuss many of them with the public. Something that is an interesting trend these days and is lost in the memory or never even learned about by newer generations is the topic of communism.

What? Yeah. It is something that needs to be understood better because when you see polls out there that 28 percent of Gen Z view communism favorably--which shows a very fundamental misunderstanding of its consequences and what it is about--it is very alarming.

You have 19 percent of Gen Z that believes a dictatorship would be the best political system. With the rhetoric flying these days, the word ``fascism'' is thrown around so loosely or calling politicians in this country ``Nazis,'' this is all cut from a very similar cloth.

For people to believe that a dictatorship or these types of--it is not even government, it is just flat power over the people. What it really boils down to, these trends are the result of a failure to adequately educate our youth about that history, about how brutal that history is. How did it come on board?

When you think about in Russia, the Bolsheviks, murdering the powers that be back in the teens of the last century in order to gain power, that is being lost on people these days.

Oh, communism sounds good. Even the word ``socialism,'' well that means you are social, right? No. Think of Communism as being rooted in a very dangerous, very centralized government and controlling the people.

For example, here in this country, there are approximately 500 U.S. schools from K-12 that will host what is called the Confucius classrooms funded by the Chinese Communist Party. These programs promote the Communist Party propaganda. They whitewash the atrocities of communism and distort history to undermine American values.

Again, look at the amount of murdering that has gone on in the Russian era of communism, in the Asian areas, South America, and just off the coast of Florida in Cuba.

These programs are a deliberate attempt to influence the minds of young Americans creating a dangerous foothold in our education system and softening the whole idea of what communism really did mean. Teaching the truth about communism is not just about history, it is about safeguarding the future of our own form of government.

Civic education must include an honest account of communism's failures--the failures. Where has it been tried that it has really worked and provided the people with more freedom, more prosperity, more choices, more options? It hasn't worked anywhere.

They become more and more oppressed, poorer, much worse off quality of life, and end up attacking other countries that still do love freedom. By failing to address these truths, we are raising a generation unprepared to defend our freedoms and even our homeland.

This week, House Republicans are considering legislation by our Florida colleague, Congresswoman Salazar. It is called the Crucial Communism Teaching Act. The bill directs the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation to develop and provide civic education materials for middle and high school students to understand.

These materials will highlight the devastating consequences of communism, the importance of standing against these totalitarian regimes. It is not just an education as mentioned a minute ago. It is a national security issue and a moral obligation to teach our kids properly. I appreciate Congresswoman Salazar making this effort as a Florida Member.

Right next door, prime example, Cuba is just 70, 80, 90 miles or so from Florida. Why do people take boats and they fashion rafts and whatever means they can to escape Cuba and try to come to the shores of the U.S.? It is not because communism is popular and is giving them more choices and more freedom, is it? In so many cases, people are desperately trying to break out.

When Ronald Reagan demanded Mr. Gorbachev to tear down that wall between East Germany and West Germany, there didn't used to be an East and West Germany before that timeline, but on the heels of World War II and the occupation of that.

It required the Berlin Airlift just a couple years after World War II to keep those people sustained because of the Russian bear having taken over that portion of Germany when they completely misread what the treaty at the time was to keep Germany in line after World War II.

Instead, Russia took it as an opportunity to take it over and so many other, what had been free states, free countries in the area, Poland. They imposed all that. It wasn't willful.

Indeed, communism might sneak in, but you have to shoot your way out of it is what people have learned. In the case of this issue with Cuba right next door, 50-plus years of Castro. I am glad my Florida colleague can point this out because her own State has been the recipient of many people escaping communism and trying to have the life that we all deserve as human beings.

If we fail to teach these horrors to these next generations, we will dishonor the millions of victims who suffered under the regimes and the many soldiers that died on the field to try and push back communism.

We had so many suffer, over 50,000 losses in this country to try at some level to beat communism in Vietnam. Why should we waste those lives? Why should we not learn? Why should the next generation not learn? It was a poorly run attempt by the government at the time, but that should not be lost as we honor those Vietnam veterans and welcome them home during a time of strife that they were not always properly welcomed or thanked for something they didn't create.

We owe it to future generations to have them recognize and reject these oppressive ideologies. We, as Members of Congress, have a duty to ensure the truth prevails in American classrooms and in the media, and even with it said here on this House floor so that next generation will understand, and current generations, that sometimes think they want to vote in this sort of thinking into our government, into those who rule us or would rule us.

Mr. Speaker, indeed, our freedom is at stake. We should not take it for granted.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a good friend, Sean Morgan, who has served on the Chico City Council for the last 12 years. Like our American founders, he stepped up to serve and is returning back to private life. He has done an outstanding job for the City of Chico and must be recognized for his efforts.

Sean moved to Chico in 1974 at age 4. He attended Citrus and Shasta Elementary Schools, Bidwell Jr. High, and Chico High. In 1993 Sean graduated from the Chico State College of Business.

While raising his two boys, Ashton and Zachary, Sean was involved in local youth sports for over a decade as a coach, referee, and team parent. Sean's favorite time of year is any day he can watch his own children participating in any activities.

Sean Morgan started his first company while still attending college and was traveling around the country speaking on the small business lecture circuit at age 25. It was here that he learned the value of budgets, living within one's means, and managing diverse groups of people. In addition to being a business owner, Sean teaches business at Chico State University.

In 2012, he was elected as a Chico City Council member and has served multiple roles during his twelve years on the council. Sean's intent as a council member was clear, to return Chico to a safe place to raise a family, an ideal location for business, and a premier place to live. Sean served as Vice Mayor for two years and then Mayor for two years. He served on the Finance Committee for ten years, serving as the Chair for eight of those ten years.

During his twelve years of service on the council, Sean was a strong defender of public safety, the rights of business owners, and the citizens. Sean has been a strong leader through numerous disasters, including the Oroville Dam Crisis, the Paradise Camp Fire, and the COVID pandemic, and fighting to clean up the City of Chico after a lopsided council created a homeless crisis and needle giveaway programs.

On a personal note, for more than 12 years now Sean has been Mr. Chico. He has been the Master of Ceremonies for more events than I can count, including many of mine. He has raised money, he has volunteered, he has been the loudest, most consistent voice for common sense in difficult times. Sean Morgan has sacrificed for the City of Chico. If there was something that needed to be done, Sean is who we all counted on to get it done.

The City, the County and I are grateful for his years of service and commitment to the City of Chico. With sincere appreciation I am happy to honor Sean Morgan for his extraordinary service and commitment. I thank Sean Morgan.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about the urgent need to rein in government inefficiencies and wasteful spending.

In 1982, the Grace Commission, launched by President Reagan, revealed shocking examples of bloated budgets like $400 hammers and offered cost-cutting measures that saved taxpayers at the time over $100 billion.

It also exposed how politics often stands in the way of real reform. That is why I am eager to meet with Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy this Thursday. These are leaders who have proved that innovation and efficiency can transform entire industries.

Mr. Speaker, imagine applying that same mindset they bring to clean up our government and save Americans many billions of dollars via the Department of Government Efficiency that they are working on.

The Grace Commission at the time showed us what is possible, but it is time to take that mission further.

Now, with Elon and Vivek at the helm, I am confident we can turn bold ideas into action and make the government work smarter, not harder, for the people.

Together let's finish what Ronald Reagan started and deliver accountability through the Department of Government Efficiency, which shouldn't be an oxymoron or even a joke.

Taxpayers should be able to expect efficiency from their government from their hard-earned tax dollars.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the public service career of Sutter County Supervisor Nick Micheli.

Nick is a third generation Sutter County resident and farmer. The Micheli family roots in Sutter County go back to when the family first started farming in Live Oak in the 1920's.

Nick's early education was in Sutter and Yuba County where he attended Sutter Union High School. and then Yuba College. Nick would further his education at the University of Phoenix, where he majored in Business Management and received an Associate's Degree in Business Fundamentals.

Nick would take over the family farm, Micheli Enterprises Inc., at the age of 20, after his father passed away. Nick continues to serve as the Manager and Owner of the farming operation and as the Secretary and Treasurer of the Lomo Receiving Co. in Live Oak.

Nick would also serve as a Board Member of the Yuba-Sutter Farm Bureau and California Dried Plum Board. In these organizations, Nick served on the Government Affairs and Management Committee.

Nick proudly serves as a local ambassador to Shriner Children's Hospital and is a 32nd Degree Free Mason who chairs the bicycle program for local elementary schools.

Nick and his wife, Sasha, have a daughter named Violet.

We thank Supervisor Nick Micheli for his years of service advocating for the agricultural industry while on the Sutter County Board of Supervisors. We wish him all the best in his career.