Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor each and every person who wears a uniform or has served in our country's Armed Forces and celebrate National Military Appreciation Month.

My home state of Hawaii is home to over 142,000 military members, family and support personnel, making it the largest and most important multi-service military `ohana in the IndoPacific. We are deeply grateful to those who are regularly deployed to protect our Hawaii, along with the many more who are proud to volunteer their time, skills and abilities to the task of making our country and our world a better place for all.

Just as crucial to the fabric of Hawaii's military community is the more than 108,000 veterans who call Hawaii home. These men and women served with honor, and we must always ensure they are provided with the benefits they so rightfully earned and deserve.

I also want to extend my enduring gratitude to the families of our soldiers, sailors, marines, airmen and guardsmen who made the ultimate sacrifice for our nation.

Freedom, justice equality--these are the values that the men and women of our Armed Forces are charged to preserve and protect. Each of us owes our very best efforts to ensure that America's servicemembers can defend our values. We must make sure they are mission-ready, with the training and equipment necessary to carry out their duties here in our country and overseas.

As a member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies, I am dedicated to properly supporting our present military members and their families and fulfilling the promises made to our veterans. Their service deserves our nation's respect and recognition not just for this month--but every day.

Move forward with strength (Imua).

Madam Speaker, I rise today to give voice, not just to the 80 percent of my constituents whose heritage lies in Asia and the Pacific, but to all I represent; that we join with our brothers and sisters across our country in solidarity; that hate against any of us based on our race, our ethnicity, our heritage, is hate against us all; that this must end here now.

I rise today to recognize my Senator, Mazie Hirono, a pioneer in her own right, who brought this message to us in anger and in faith. I rise today for my granddaughter, 2-year-old, Cadence Masako Ansdell, and for millions like her for whom we must, today, make this choice, that when they come of age, they will know only the harsh lessons of their past and not the tragic reality of their present.

Madam Speaker, I rise for us all.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 297, the bill that I have co-introduced with my colleague from Hawaii, Representative Kaiali'i Kahele.

As Mr. Soto and the ranking member have noted, this legislation would require the Secretary of Agriculture, in consultation with the State of Hawaii, to conduct a study to identify lands in the State of Hawaii that merit inclusion in the National Forest System. This would be the first step in potentially establishing a national forest in one of the few parts of our country with no such system.

As my friend and colleague, Mr. Soto, has noted, Hawaii is the most isolated island chain and one of the most ecologically diverse places in our world. Within our borders, we have 10 of the 13 world climate zones, ecosystems that range from the deserts to the tropics, where plants and animals that found their way to Hawaii evolved like nowhere else.

A 2014 survey identified 9,975 endemic species in Hawaii, many of which are reliant on Hawaii's fragile ecosystem, including our forests, to survive. However, since the onset of human arrival just centuries ago, Hawaii has lost almost half of its unique native forest cover and countless fauna and flora species.

Despite these threats to our unique biodiversity, Hawaii remains one of eight States that does not have a national forest or grassland. The study authorized by the bill would take steps to correct this oversight. It would consider how a Hawaii national forest could contribute to the conservation of this biodiversity not found elsewhere in our National Forest System while supporting the research mission of the Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry.

It would help inventory where Hawaii's native koa, ohi'a, and sandalwood forests can be conserved and expanded for cultural and commercial practices. It would help identify where cultural sites could be better conserved and access expanded to the public and practitioners. And it would help provide the basis to bring together local stakeholders to advance the conservation of how to responsibly establish a national forest in Hawaii in a manner that will benefit both our island communities and the National Forest Service.

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleagues in the Hawaii congressional delegation for their support. I thank the Committee on Natural Resources and Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands chairs, ranking members, members, and staff for their support and assistance in bringing this bill to the floor.

I take my ranking member's comments to heart. I certainly hope that this study will not only evaluate and investigate how we can create a national forest in Hawaii but how we can make that a model for how national forests can and should be administered throughout our country. I endorse his concerns as to the administration of our national forests and, certainly, would look forward to working with him in our subcommittee and committee.

As we continue to identify solutions to our climate and biodiversity crises, I hope we can all see the value in taking this step toward protecting our unique forest resources and their native species, along with providing important opportunities.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to express appreciation to my House colleagues who voted for my amendment to our recently passed Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act (VAWA) to ensure the full inclusion of American Indians, Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians in key parts of VAWA.

My amendment requires key data for full implementation of VAWA about our nation's indigenous peoples that has previously been unavailable, especially relating to Native Hawaiians. To develop this data, the federal government will conduct a review of law enforcement and other crime prevention programs dealing with child sexual exploitation, child abuse, intimate partner violence, human trafficking, missing or murdered individuals and substance abuse. The review will result in recommendations directly affecting the social, educational, economic and other factors contributing to Native Hawaiians becoming missing or murdered.

My amendment also calls for two additional reviews. The first one will examine programs that affect Native Hawaiians who are victims of criminal offenses. The second report will examine Native Hawaiians in the criminal justice system. This second report will also produce recommendations related to the social, educational, economic and other factors contributing to Native Hawaiians becoming involved in the criminal justice system.

The need for these reports and data is critical. While data is available for individuals of Native American and Alaska Native descent, it does not exist for Native Hawaiians who suffer from high incidences of violence. This new data will guide future legislation and identify key areas in which additional assistance and resources are needed. Organizations that are centered around helping the Native Hawaiian community will benefit as well through availability of accurate data to direct their resources better.

Mahalo nui loa (thank you very much) for your support for my amendment and for the inclusion of American Indian, Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian groups within VAWA.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the women of our nation and my home state of Hawaii past, present and future as we again celebrate Women's History Month.

Each year during the month of March, we remember and honor the extraordinary American women who have made such lasting contributions to our culture, history and society. Long before they finally gained the right to vote in elections and before they broke through glass ceilings throughout our society, generations of women worked to expand the rights and opportunities previously denied to them. Women from all across America revolutionized their respective fields, setting the stage for the next generation, and the next, to pursue and attain equality.

It is my honor to share with you today the stories of three remarkable women from Hawaii who made indelible contributions in education, science and politics.

When Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop was born in 1831, the Native Hawaiian population in the islands numbered about 124,000. By the time she wrote her will in 1883, only 44,000 Native Hawaiians remained. In response to these dramatic changes facing Hawaii, she committed her life to those who were suffering and struggling in her homeland. She saw that education would allow her people to adapt to a changing world while preserving their language, culture and identity, so she dedicated her royal inheritance to establish Kamehameha Schools, with the mission of educating the children of Hawaii. Today, Kamehameha Schools is the largest independent school system in the U.S., with a current enrollment of 6,900 students within its Pre-K-12th grade program, and countless alumni who have bettered Hawai`i and our nation in countless ways.

Born in remote Hana, Maui in 1919, Dr. Isabella Kauakea Tau Yung Aiona Abbott was the first Native Hawaiian woman to receive a PhD in science. Abbot spent much of her childhood at the seashore with her mother, collecting seaweed and algae. From her mother, as her mother from hers and on back, she learned to distinguish the different types of edible seaweed and how to use them in traditional Hawaiian cooking. These practices, passed from mother to daughter over generations, catalyzed Abbott's career in natural science. She went on to get her PhD in botany from the University of California at Berkeley. In 1960, she became a lecturer in the Biology Department at Stanford, and in 1971 she became the first woman on Stanford's biological sciences faculty. Abbot made unparalleled contributions to marine science, authoring eight books and over 150 research papers. She is credited with discovering over 200 different species of algae, many of which have been named after her, including a genus of the red algae family, which is called Abbottella, or ``little Abbott.''

Patsy Mink was the first Asian-American woman to be elected to the U.S. House of Representatives. Although her list of accomplishments is extensive, Mink faced many obstacles early in her career from those who did not believe in gender equality. After earning her bachelor's degree at the University of Hawaii, Mink applied to 12 medical schools and was rejected by all of them. She pivoted to study law at the University of Chicago. After graduating, she was denied the opportunity to take the bar examination in Hawaii due to her gender and marital status. She challenged the statute, won her case, and later passed the bar only to find that she could not get a job because she was married and had a child. She opened her own practice and focused on ending discriminatory laws. During her political career over the subsequent years, she broke many glass ceilings, winning positions in the State House of Representatives, the State Senate and eventually the U.S. House of Representatives, where she served for 12 terms. During her 24 years in Congress, she introduced and won passage of many impactful initiatives, most notably the Title IX amendment that ended discrimination in education due to gender, religion or race. In recognition of the tremendous impact Title IX has had for millions of girls and women over the past four decades, Congress renamed Title IX the Patsy T. Mink Equal Opportunity in Education Act following her passing.

I could tell countless other stories of other women of Hawaii as we celebrate Women's History Month, stories that serve as an inspiration as we look to honor the tremendous contributions of the women who challenged the status quo and courageously fought for equality in every state of our nation. They truly paved the way for the equally inspiring women that we are privileged to witness advancing gender equity today.

There is still so much work to be done for women in the U.S. and around the world. With the rest of my colleagues in Congress, I am inspired this month to continue the work that brings us closer each day to our nation's highest ideals of freedom and equality for all.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1, the For the People Act I am proud to have co-introduced, which includes my amendment to further facilitate voting by all eligible Americans through the best-practices expansion of vote-by-mail elections.

Our For the People Act is a truly revolutionary bill that will implement many of the most critical government reform efforts we need to get government working for the people again, such as fighting voter suppression, simplifying voting, promoting election security, curbing special interest and dark money in politics, incentivizing smaller and broader donations, increasing transparency and fortifying ethics laws.

While I applaud the efforts and amendments of my colleagues that incorporate lessons learned in this past election, like ensuring Americans with disabilities have access to voting and verification infrastructure, I believe more can and must be done to analyze the greatest possible utilization of mail-in voting throughout our nation. My amendment, which has been accepted by the House and added to the bill, is needed because we should know what went well and what needs improvement as we look to responsibly expand voter access by mail.

Heading into the 2020 election, five states--Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Utah and my Hawaii--held universal vote-by-mail elections, with no-excuse absentee voting being an option in 34 states and the District of Columbia. The growing concerns over the safety of in-person voting during the COVID-19 pandemic prompted an additional 11 states to make it easier to vote by mail using absentee ballots.

The prevalence and easy access to vote-by-mail led, in part, to record voter turnout in the last election. Roughly two-thirds of eligible voters cast a record 158.4 million ballots, with nearly 65 million ballots cast using the mail. This is a dramatic increase from the 2016 elections, where roughly 34 million Americans cast a ballot by mail.

In my Hawaii, which performed its first universal vote-by-mail election in the 2020 primary elections, vote-by-mail increased election accessibility across-the-board, especially for our kupuna (elders) and those in underserved communities for whom in-person voting is problematic, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Hawaii's most recent primary election resulted in the highest voter turnout percentage for a primary election in our state's history, and more people voted in Hawaii's general election than ever before. We demonstrated to ourselves and the rest of the country that we can hold an all-mail election with virtually no fraud claims or disputed election results.

Despite Hawaii's success, I am sure we can do even better, and there are best practices that can be shared amongst the states across our nation to encourage the even more widespread adoption of vote-by-mail. Thus, my amendment simply directs the Election Assistance Commission to conduct a study on vote-by-mail efforts in 2020 elections and develop recommendations to help states better administer their elections in the future. My study and the recommendations that will come from it can help improve vote-by-mail procedures and systems to ensure the right to vote to all eligible Americans while protecting the integrity and security of our elections.

I thank this House for supporting my amendment, and urge this body to support final passage of the underlying bill. The For the People Act will truly deliver on our obligation to help renew Americans' faith in government by making sure it is of and for the people. Mahala (thank you).

Madam Speaker, I rise today to join my colleague, Representative Kahele, in introducing our bill to protect one of the most unique and fragile environments on Earth, our Hawaii, from devastating invasive species.

Invasive species pose an especially grave threat to Hawaii's unique ecosystems, natural resources and agricultural communities, in part due to Hawaii's unique geography. Hawaii is the most isolated island chain and one of the most ecologically diverse places in the world. We are 2,282 miles from the Continental United States, 2,952 miles from Japan and 4,772 miles from Washington, DC, with no other islands in close proximity. We have within our constrained borders ten of the thirteen world climate zones, with ecosystems ranging from desert to tropical, where plants and animals that found their way to Hawaii evolved like nowhere else. A 2014 survey identified fully 9,975 endemic species in Hawaii. These species include the Hawaiian scarlet honeycreeper, the `i`iwi; the flowering evergreen; and the state mammal of Hawaii, the `Ilioholoikauaua (Hawaiian monk seal).

However, tragically, in large part due to invasive species, Hawaii has become the endangered species and extinction capital of the

world. Hawaii currently has 502 species listed as endangered, more than any other state and almost half of the total endangered species nationwide. Many of these species are critically endangered and face an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild. Although we will never know the true number of species that have gone extinct in Hawaii, best estimates are that in the last 200 years alone, 28 bird, 72 snail, 74 insect and 97 plant species have gone extinct.

As one particularly poignant example, two years ago the Atlantic published an article, The Last of Its Kind, which chronicled the death of George the snail. He was the last achatinella apexfulva, a species of tree snail that is endemic to the island of O`ahu. This article calls attention to the alarming fact that snails in Hawaii are disappearing at an alarming rate, perhaps faster any animal on Earth right now, victims of various factors in part linked to invasive species.

The threat to our state tree, the `ohi`a lehua, is also illustrative of our growing crisis. Used for poi boards and outrigger canoes, the `ohi`a lehua is important to Hawaiian culture and the islands' watersheds. As the first tree to grow in new Hawaii lava flows, `ohi`a grows throughout the watershed creating new soil, stabilizing steep mountain ridges and comprises approximately 80 percent of Hawaii's native forests. However, rapid `ohi`a death, or ROD, caused by an invasive fungal pathogen, kills `ohi`a trees quickly, and threatens the stability of Hawaii's native forests. Since its discovery on the Big Island in 2014, ROD has spread to Kaua`i, Maui and O`ahu, and has killed hundreds of thousands of trees.

Hawaii's unique circumstances also have given rise to one of our nation's most diverse and productive agricultural communities. With a year-round growing cycle, our crops have ranged throughout our history from the highest quality sugar and pineapple and cattle to tropical specialty crops like fruit and cut flowers in the highest demand worldwide.

Yet it is exactly because these crops like our natural resources have adapted to Hawaii's uniqueness that they are the most susceptible to devastation from external species against which they have no natural defenses. Invasive species have drastically impacted agriculture in Hawaii, threatening some of the island's most valuable crops in the state's third-largest industry.

Hawaii's third most valuable crop, the macadamia nut, is under threat from the macadamia felted coccid. Macadamia felted coccid has been found in all of Hawaii Island's macadamia growing regions. The felted coccid reduces macadamia tree output by draining nutrients from the tree. Invasive species coupled with increased rain led to a 22 percent decline in the macadamia nut harvest this year compared to last year.

The cattle industry, which is one of Hawaii's most important agricultural commodities, has been dramatically affected by the introduction of the invasive two-lined spittlebug. Since being detected in 2016, the pest now infects more than 125,900 acres of grassland and is clearing lands for invasives grasses that further affect Hawaii's ecosystems.

Yet despite these incontrovertible and growing impacts of external species on Hawaii's natural resources and economy, existing federal law leaves Hawaii largely defenseless against increasingly destructive invasives. Imports by air and sea, the only means of in-bound transportation to our island state, lack any effective regulation to screen out invasives. This is despite a fairly robust screening of exports from Hawaii to the Continental United States to screen out invasives from Hawaii viewed as harmful to mainland agriculture (invasives that, ironically, were invasives into Hawaii to start with).

I sought to crack down on this lax regime to prevent and curb invasives with my introduction in 2005 of H.R. 3468, modeled after New Zealand and other isolated jurisdictions with then like now the most stringent invasive species prevention regimes in the world. Since the introduction of that bill, the threats from invasives have only grown. Since 2005, 195 invasive species have been introduced to Hawaii. That is in addition to the roughly 5,000 invasive species that have been introduced to Hawaii throughout its history.

Our bill, the Hawaii Invasive Species Protection Act, will require the U.S Department of Agriculture (USDA) Animal and Plant Inspection Service (APHIS), in cooperation with other federal departments and the State of Hawaii, to conduct visual, x-ray and canine inspections, as appropriate, on person, baggage, cargo and any other article destined for direct movement to the State of Hawaii. The inspections will search for high-risk invasive species and agricultural materials. The inspections will be conducted at airports, ports and postal sorting facilities prior to direct travel to the State of Hawaii.

Our bill further requires APHIS to work with the State of Hawaii to develop and publish a list of the high-risk invasive species and agricultural materials for the State of Hawaii. It pays for these inspections by increasing Agriculture Quarantine Inspection fees to cover the full cost of inspection.

Inaction is not an option. Since my re-introduction of this bill last Congress, the coffee berry borer, which was discovered in Kona on Hawaii Island in 2010, now infects all of the coffee growing islands in Hawaii. The coffee berry borer can cause yield losses of between 30 and 35 percent and affects the quality of the coffee beans, directly impacting the income of growers. Had this bill been implemented, it may have helped prevent coffee leaf rust from entering Hawaii late last year. The confirmed presence of this fungal disease, which can lead to yield losses of between 50 and 80 percent, on multiple Hawaiian islands could leave one of Hawaii's most iconic industries devastated.

If we truly care about the threat that continued and escalating invasive species pose to one of the most invaluable and unique ecosystems on earth, in addition to our unique economy and way of life, then the stark reality is that this bill is what it will take. Again, it is not revolutionary when compared to other countries that have not only recognized this threat but actually done something about it. And it is certainly not revolutionary when compared to longstanding domestic restrictions on exports from Hawaii, leading to the basic point that if these invasive species prevention requirements are good enough for the rest of the country and much of the world then they're good enough for Hawaii.

Madam Speaker, I am grateful to this House for your understanding and careful consideration of Hawaii's challenge and opportunity, and ask for our bill's expeditious passage. Mahalo (thank you).

Madam Speaker, today I am re-introducing my Safe and Quiet Skies Act from the 116th Congress to ensure that commercial air tour flights are adequately regulated to ensure in-air and on-ground safety and address widespread and accelerating community disruption. I extend a special thanks to my colleagues, Congressmembers Nadler, Neguse, Norton, Sherman, and Sires, for co-introducing this necessary measure.

In 2019 alone, there were 17 sightseeing tour flight and skydiving accidents nationwide with 37 tragic deaths from six of those crashes. In my Hawaii alone, we saw three dead in the crash of a commercial air tour helicopter into a residential neighborhood, eleven more dead in the crash of a commercial skydiving plane, and then seven more dead in a commercial air tour helicopter crash in a remote mountain region. Many other areas of the country have been equally impacted, especially those with high commercial usage, more dense populations, valuable natural resources, significant defense installations and other factors.

These tragedies occurred amidst a rapid increase in commercial helicopter and small plane overflights including residential, commercial, and industrial neighborhoods, cemeteries and memorials, land and marine parks and other recreation areas, and sensitive military installations. These have disrupted whole communities with excessive noise and other impacts, destroyed the peace and sanctity of special places, increased risk to not only passengers but those on the ground, and weakened security and management of defense operations.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) currently has virtually exclusive jurisdiction over these aircraft operations. Following these and other recent tragedies across the country, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), which is responsible for investigating accidents but not for direct safety regulation, strongly recommended to the FAA that safety-related regulation of commercial tour helicopters and small aircraft skydiving operations is generally insufficient.

Regarding ground disruption and risk, the FAA takes the position that its responsibility is strictly operational safety and national airspace efficiency and does not extend to ground disruption and other negative impacts. As a result, the operators, aside from strict takeoff and approach, avoidance of established flight paths and other limited circumstances, are virtually free to fly wherever, whenever, and as often as they want. And they do, with little to no self-regulation.

This situation is unacceptable for both safety and community impact concerns. It is also not limited to Hawaii, with growing concerns in other areas with high commercial tour usage, more dense populations, valuable natural resources, significant defense installations and other factors.

This bill would first require the FAA to implement the NTSB's recommended enhanced safety regulations. It would also prohibit flights over federal property that requires privacy, dignity, and respect, to include military installations, national cemeteries and national parks, wildlife refuges and wilderness. It would further require the use of standard equipment to monitor the location of flights, apply the ``sterile cockpit rule'' to tour flights (meaning in part that the pilot could not also be the tour guide), prohibit flights lower than 1,500 feet over actual ground, and limit decibel levels to those commonly applied to operations in residential areas. Additionally, the bill would allow states, localities, and tribes to impose stricter regulations on tour flights in their jurisdictions with required public engagement.

I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this bill into law.

Madam Speaker, today I introduce three bills to end a century of monopolistic closed market domestic cargo shipping to and from my isolated home state of Hawaii as well as the other island and separated jurisdictions of our country not part of the continental United States. In doing so, we will break the stranglehold on the peoples and economies of these exposed communities and their resulting sky-high costs of living which results from just a few domestic shipping companies controlling the lifeline of commerce upon which we absolutely depend.

These bills all amend the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, also known as the Jones Act. That federal law mandates that all cargo shipping between U.S. ports occur exclusively on U.S., not foreign, flagged vessels. Additionally, the law requires that these vessels are built in the U.S. and owned and crewed by U.S. citizens.

The Jones Act was enacted in a protectionist era under the guise of preserving a strong national merchant marine. But today it is just an anachronism: most of the world's shipping is by way of an international merchant marine functioning in an open, competitive market. And those few U.S. flag cargo lines that remain have maneuvered the Jones Act to develop virtual monopolies over domestic cargo shipping to, from and within our most isolated and exposed locales--our island and offshore states and territories--that have no alternative modes of transportation such as trucking or rail.

My Hawaii is a classic example. Located almost 2,500 miles off the West Coast, we import well over 90 percent of our life necessities by ocean cargo. There are plenty of international cargo lines who could and would compete for a share of that market. Yet only two U.S. flag domestic cargo lines--Matson Navigation and Pasha Hawaii--operate a virtual duopoly over our lifeline.

While they are nominally subject to federal regulation, the fact of the matter is that cargo prices have gone in only one direction--up, fast and repeatedly, despite a surplus of international shipping--and it is indisputable that there is no downward market pressure which would otherwise result from meaningful competition. These accelerating cargo prices are not absorbed by the shipping lines, but passed through all the way down the chain, to the transporters, wholesalers, retailers, small businesses, mom-n-pops and ultimately consumers, of all of the elementals of life, from food to medical supplies, clothes, housing and virtually all other goods. The result is a crippling drag on an already-challenged economy and the very quality of life in Hawaii.

The broadest, deepest effects of the Jones Act on Hawaii result from its impact on westbound imports from the continental United States to Hawaii. But Hawaii is an export location as well, in key products such as agriculture and livestock. Here the Jones Act also effectively stifles meaningful competition in getting those products to their primary markets on the U.S. Mainland. Because the producers of these products and all that rely for their own livelihood on their successful export have to eat inflated shipping costs, these export industries, which any economist knows are the ultimate key to any economy's prosperity, are also crippled.

Let's take a concrete example: Hawaii's once-prosperous ranching/ cattle industry, which is so key to the economic health and the very lifestyle of so much of areas like the rural Big Island, where I was born and raised. That industry depends on getting its product, young cattle, to West Coast pens and transportation hubs in a cost-efficient manner.

There are foreign cargo carriers that specialize, through custom cattle ships and overall sensitivity and adjustment to rancher timetables and needs, in such transport, but the Jones Act outright excludes them from the Hawaii-Mainland market. As a result, Hawaii's ranchers are reduced to two crippling, cost magnifying options.

The first is to ship their cargo by foreign carriers to Canada, where they have to go through a myriad of bureaucratic, cost-magnifying gyrations to get their product eventually to their U.S. markets. The second is to beg for the goodwill of the domestic carriers, to whom this is simply a hindrance rather than a major commitment, to ship directly to the West Coast.

And it shows: most of the cattle are first shipped from Hawaii's Neighbor Islands, where the bulk of the cattle industry is located, to O`ahu, in small ``cow-tainers,'' where they sit for days in Honolulu Harbor awaiting the return to the Mainland of one of the massive cargo ships designed and utilized for quite another purpose. The result (besides associated higher costs) is in-harbor cattle waste disposal challenges, higher in-transit cattle mortality and lower-weight cattle delivery to market. That's what happens when you try to squeeze a square peg into a round hole.

More broadly, there is much evidence about the direct impact of the Jones Act on shipping prices to noncontiguous areas. At a basic level, the everyday goods that we rely on in Hawaii cost much more than on the Mainland, a difference which largely cannot be attributed to anything other than shipping costs.

Last year, the Grassroot Institute of Hawaii published a thorough and first-of-it-kind report, ``Quantifying the Cost of the Jones Act to Hawaii.'' The report found that:

The median annual cost of the Jones Act to the Hawaii economy is $1.2 billion.

The annual cost of shipping to Hawaii is estimated to be $654 million higher and prices $916 million higher.

The Jones Act annually costs each Hawaii resident more than $645.

Thanks to the Jones Act, Hawaii has approximately 9,100 fewer jobs, representing $404 million in wages.

Hawaii families across all income groups would benefit from Jones Act reform. In the absence of Jones Act restrictions, those making between $15,000 and $70,000 annually would see an annual across-the-board economic benefit ranging from $78 million to $154 million.

Annual tax revenues would be $148.2 million higher.

Focusing solely on the Jones Act requirement that vessels be built in the United States, they found that the build provision results in a 1.2 percent shipping cost increase for Hawaii. This translates annually to an added cost of $531.7 million to the state's economy, or about $296 per resident. It also means a loss of 3,860 jobs, and $30.8 million less in state and local tax revenues.

In 2012, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York studied Puerto Rico's economy and found that ``the high cost of shipping is a substantial burden on the Island's productivity.'' The New York Fed found that, ``[i]t costs an estimated $3,063 to ship a twenty-foot container of household and commercial goods from the East Coast of the United States to Puerto Rico; the same shipment costs $1,504 to nearby Santo Domingo (Dominican Republic) and $1,687 to Kingston (Jamaica)--destinations that are not subject to Jones Act restrictions.'' There is only one reason why costs

are double to ship from the continental United States to a domestic port in Puerto Rico as compared to foreign ports in the Dominican Republic and Jamaica: there is international competition on the latter routes, none on the domestic route and the shipping companies take full advantage of that lack of competition.

The three bills I introduce today say: enough is enough. If the continental U.S., wants to continue the Jones Act as to shipping between their locations, that's their business. But don't penalize us island and other noncontiguous locations by throwing us to the monopoly wolves you've created.

The first bill, the Noncontiguous Shipping Relief Act, exempts all noncontiguous U.S. locations, including Hawaii, from the Jones Act. The second, the Noncontiguous Shipping Reasonable Rate Act, benchmarks the definition of a ``reasonable rate'' that Jones Act shipping can charge to within ten percent of analogous international shipping rates. And the third, the Noncontiguous Shipping Competition Act, prevents monopolies or duopolies in noncontiguous Jones Act shipping. Essentially, the bills are intended to lay out options for providing relief for our U.S. noncontiguous areas. We can resolve the issue in many ways, but we must change the status quo which has had such a deep, broad and negative impact on my state and the other jurisdictions beholden to the Jones Act.

The Noncontiguous Shipping Relief Act would allow the noncontiguous jurisdictions to be serviced by non-Jones Act vessels and increase, or in some cases create any, competition in these critical shipping lanes. Again, this is a small portion of the total national Jones Act shipping where it is particularly destructive in application.

Let me address directly the argument offered up by the domestic shippers in defense of the Jones Act: that it contains important labor and environmental protections that would be lost upon repeal. My bill would retain these important protections. Specifically, it provides that all foreign shippers operating under the bill's Jones Act exemptions must comply with the same labor, environmental, tax, documentation, U.S. locus and other laws as are applicable to non-U.S. flag ships and shippers transiting U.S. waters today.

The Noncontiguous Shipping Reasonable Rate Act would define a ``reasonable rate'' for the noncontiguous domestic ocean trade as no more than ten percent above the rate set by a comparable international rate recognized by the Federal Maritime Commission. Currently, the Surface Transportation Board technically has the authority to adjudicate and set precedent on what a ``reasonable rate'' is for Jones Act shipping, but it has almost never been used and never to a clear conclusion on what is a reasonable rate. My bill would define reasonable to remove uncertainty. Current Jones Act shipping rates vary widely and there is no central compilation of these rates. The ten percent benchmark would allow for variance but also ensure that Americans in our noncontiguous areas are not forced to pay exorbitant rates way above shipping rates which would otherwise be provided through international competition were the Jones Act not applicable.

The Noncontiguous Shipping Competition Act would exempt shipping routes to noncontiguous jurisdictions from the Jones Act requirements if a monopoly or duopoly exists on those routes. The Jones Act has resulted in the blossoming of monopolies and duopolies in our noncontiguous jurisdictions. To ensure that these communities, which are the most reliant in the country on shipping to receive necessities, are not held hostage to these dominant companies, my bill would give Jones Act exemptions to routes that are not serviced by at least three companies with separate ownership. In short, if a domestic route is in fact in a competitive environment, the Jones Act is less of a problem, but if there is no competition, then the route should be opened up to international competition by rescinding the Jones Act.

Madam Speaker, these long-overdue bills are of the utmost importance to the localities which have long borne the unfair brunt of the Jones Act. It is often difficult to pierce the veil of longstanding custom and understanding to see the real negative impacts of a law and what should instead be. It is even more difficult to change a law which provides a federally-created and endorsed monopoly under which no competition exists to hold down prices. Yet clearly the time for these measures is overdue. I urge their passage.

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

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

Madam Chair, not far from here, on the slopes of Capitol Hill, is a small, serene, and unassuming memorial. On its walls are names not now known to too many Americans but indelibly etched in a dark chapter of our national story.

Tule Lake, Poston, Manzanar--these are the internment camps where 120,000 ethnic Japanese, most of them American citizens, were locked up in the hysteria of the Second World War just because they were Japanese.

This amendment, proudly sponsored by many of my colleagues in our Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, including our chair, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Judy Chu), asked us a question that must be asked: Are we repeating history or in danger of doing so?

In these recent years of justifiably heightened scrutiny on the intelligence activities of the People's Republic of China, a disproportionate number of Americans of Chinese descent have been investigated and prosecuted for espionage.

Those convicted have received disproportionately high sentences, and the too many exonerated have had their careers ruined nonetheless.

No doubt, China seeks to recruit Chinese Americans to its goals, and no doubt, our government should and must review specific cases of potential espionage by China on specific facts. But have we fallen into the same trap all over again of justifying investigations and other actions toward the ends of national security by means of general profiling and targeting based solely on ethnic identity?

The Committee of 100, a group of prominent Chinese Americans in diverse fields, reviewed the empirical evidence and concluded that ``Asian Americans, whether immigrant or native-born, may be facing unfair and increasing racial prejudice in this era of geopolitical competition.''

It stated, and I believe correctly: ``A definite line can be drawn between appropriate prosecution that is based on actual evidence and free of bias and overreaching persecution that is triggered by unfounded suspicions and tainted by racial prejudice. All Americans, regardless of ethnicity, depend on that line.''

This resolution is a flashing red light to our intelligence community: Stop, look, and listen. Take some time to think it through to be sure you are staying on the right side of that line, and then report back to us here in Congress that you have done so and have the procedures and mindset in place to ensure that we won't repeat history with Chinese Americans or any other broad ethnic or interest group.

Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff), the committee chair.

Madam Chair, I strongly urge adoption of this amendment. It is the right amendment. We certainly want our intelligence community to do its job, but we also want them to be very conscious of the decisions that they are making and are in line with our basic civil liberties.

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

Madam Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment requesting the Department of Defense to assess the status of security cooperation and assistance with Pacific Island Countries and the feasibility of expanding it.

The Department of Defense currently operates a Maritime Security Initiative in the South China Sea that works to build regional capacity to address a range of maritime challenges. This effort includes a wide range of assistance including International Military Education and Training, Foreign Military Financing, operations combating the narcotics trade, and the transfer of excess defense articles.

Our nation launched this program, in part, to help check Chinese influence in the region. China provides its assistance without regard for America's principles for a free and open Indo-Pacific that has governed the region since the end of World War II.

Given the rise of Chinese influence in the Pacific Island Countries, the question we have before us is can this program be replicated to help the island nations in the Pacific who are seeing a push by China to expand its influence into Papua New Guinea, Vanuatu, the Solomon Islands, Fiji, the Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, Kiribati, the Marshall Islands, Nauru, and Tonga. This Chinese influence threatens the blood, sweat, and treasure spent by our country during World War II in an effort to ensure freedom and the rule of law would thrive throughout the Indo-Pacific.

My amendment takes the first step to see what can be done to protect these nations who share our values and are under pressure for Chinese influence. The amendment would direct the Defense Department to assess the current status of security cooperation and assistance with Pacific Island Countries and the feasibility of expanding it to advance our national security objectives in the Indo-Pacific.

I urge support of my amendment to determine how to ensure our traditional allies in region have the tools and training needed to help America ensure a free and open Indo-Pacific.

Madam Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment directing our military intelligence agencies to determine the degree of foreign influence in the Pacific Island Countries and to assess how to close any intelligence gaps our nation has in the region.

Because my home state of Hawai`i is closer to Asia than Washington D.C., I have met with many leaders from the Pacific Island Countries, which includes Papua New Guinea, Vanuatu, the Solomon Islands, Fiji, the Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, Kiribati, the Marshall Islands, Nauru, and Tonga.

Time and time again, I have heard stories of troubling Chinese influence in the region. Efforts to bribe senior government leaders.

Questionable foreign business investments near U.S. military installations, and even an effort that might have thrown a parliamentary government into crisis. We need our intelligence community to assess what is happening so we can determine how to respond.

To address these threats, my straightforward amendment only asks for three things. First, the Defense Department would assess the actions of foreign militaries in the Pacific Island Countries. Second, the department would assess any gaps in our intelligence collection capabilities that may undermine this intelligence assessment, and third, the Defense Department would determine how to eliminate any gaps in our intelligence.

With this information, we can fully assess what is happening in the Pacific Island Countries to and determine how we should respond to ensure that our partners in the region are not undermined by a foreign influence that is combating our nation's goal of ensuring a free and open Indo-Pacific.

Madam Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment directing the Department of Defense to provide a report regarding the risks posed by non-military aircraft flying over our nation's military installations.

Not unlike many other states, on the Island of Oahu in my home state of Hawaii we have multiple military installations situated near a major international airport and a large airport supporting general aviation.

Although agreements have been made to help control this air traffic, on a regular basis these agreements are violated. For example, I have personally seen tour helicopters fly right over sensitive locations around Pearl Harbor, the home of the U.S. Pacific Fleet and Pacific Air Forces.

My amendment seeks to achieve two commonsense steps to address the potential risks from these nonmilitary aircrafts operating near U.S. military installations. First, the Department of Defense will assess the encroachment challenges and security risks posed by non-military aircraft that fly over military installations, to include operational impacts, installation and personnel security and intelligence concerns. Second, the department would propose practicable strategies and recommendations for mitigating any significant risks.

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment so we can start responding to encroachment and security risks from non-military aircraft today before waiting until an incident forces us to act because our nation's security and safety have been compromised.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the 75th birthday of one of the most iconic ships ever to sail the seven seas, the U.S. Navy's USS Missouri.

Mighty Mo, our last battleship, was commissioned June 11, 1944, after being laid down and launched at the Brooklyn Navy Yard. She went on to one of the longest and most distinguished careers of any Navy ship ever, earning 11 battle stars in three wars: World War II, the Korean war, and Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm.

But she is best known for her role not in war but in peace. For of course it was on her decks at anchor in Tokyo Bay on September 2, 1945, V-J Day, that General Douglas MacArthur accepted the surrender of Japan, ending World War II.

Mighty Mo was finally struck from the register in 1995. For the last two decades, she has been moored in a place of honor at Pearl Harbor, alongside her fallen sisters--most notably, the USS Arizona--as a living museum under the loving stewardship of the USS Missouri Memorial Association in partnership with the U.S. Navy.

On her decks next year, on September 2, we will recognize the 75th anniversary of the end of the Second World War. But for today, let us simply

wish Mighty Mo a heartfelt hau'oli la hanau, happy birthday, and many more to come. Mahalo.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1261) to establish a national program to identify and reduce losses from landslide hazards, to establish a national 3D Elevation Program, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the measure under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. DelBene).

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1261, the ``National Landslide Preparedness Act.''

H.R. 1261 establishes a national program to identify and reduce losses from landslide hazards and a national 3D Elevation Program.

The bill also authorizes a study of ground subsidence.

Climate change charges us with the responsibility to study significant landslide threats to mitigate damages and protect our citizens.

The 3D Elevation Program (3DEP), authorized under H.R. 1261, systematically collects 3D elevation data in the form of light detection and ranging (lidar) data for the conterminous United States, Hawaii, and the U.S. territories, with data acquired over an 8-year period.

Mr. Speaker, due to global warming, high river levels provoke floods and landslides, which block roads and hinder people from escaping life- threatening situations.

More than 30,000 people worldwide were killed by landslides between 2004 and 2010, according to the Geological Society of America.

And in the U.S. between 25 and 50 people are killed by landslides every year, according to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).

Slides can occur in all 50 states, but regions like the Appalachian Mountains, the Rocky Mountains and the Pacific Coastal Ranges have ``severe landslide problems,'' according to the USGS.

Mother Nature is unpredictable and can endanger our constituents' lives and homes if advanced warning procedures are not established.

Continued wet weather has also resulted in rivers reaching increasingly dangerous levels.

As of 25 February, National Weather Service data showed over 250 rivers in the Midwest, South and East to be above flood stage.

In February 2019, one person died in flash flooding in Tennessee after a storm system was caused by a landslide brought on by record- breaking rain to the Nashville area.

The Cincinnati metropolitan area is another region that faces constant threats of landslides.

It sits in part on what's called the Kope shale formation, which breaks down easily and is highly prone to landslides.

In 2010, the Cincinnati metro area faced landslides that wrecked properties and caused damages that were difficult to assess.

Losses from landslides in the United States were estimated in 1980 to exceed $1 billion per year.

The U.S. Geological Survey estimated annual losses to be between $2 billion and $4 billion per year.

However, landslide costs across the country are not currently tracked or measured in a uniform way by any one agency.

Passage of H.R. 1261 will result in the:

publication of a national strategy for landslide hazards, risk reduction, and response in the United States (including territories);

Development and maintenance of a publicly accessible national landslide hazard and risk inventory database;

an expanded early warning system for debris flow; and

the establishment of emergency response procedures for the rapid deployment of federal scientists, equipment, and services to areas impacted by a significant landslide event.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1261 incentivizes geologic investigations, good engineering practices, and effective enforcement of land-use management regulations to reduce landslide hazards.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1261 to establish and strengthen the nation's emergency preparedness procedures to assess and evaluate landslide damages and threats.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 559) to amend section 6 of the Joint Resolution entitled ``A Joint Resolution to approve the Covenant To Establish a Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands in Political Union with the United States of America, and for other purposes'', as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the measure under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 559 would provide relief to a small group of long- term Northern Mariana Islands legal residents who will otherwise be forced to leave the Commonwealth by June 29 of this year if this legislation is not passed.

This legislation is similar to legislation introduced back in 2011, which was ultimately included in bipartisan, comprehensive immigration legislation which passed the Senate in 2012 and to legislation which has extended their status previously.

Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from the Northern Mariana Islands (Mr. Sablan), the sponsor of the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

I commend my colleague from the Northern Mariana Islands for so ably representing his people. As the Representative proudly representing Hawaii, I recognize him and his constituents as members of our Pacific Islands ohana, and I commend him also for working very closely with the administration to get this bill right from both sides' perspectives. It is a truly bipartisan bill.

It is a necessary bill, and I urge my colleagues to support the legislation.

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

Madam Speaker, today, with my colleague, Mr. Young of Alaska, I rise to introduce the Filipino Veterans Family Reunification Act. I also welcome the companion version of this bill introduced today in the U.S. Senate by Senator Hirono of Hawai'i and Senator Murkowski of Alaska.

This bipartisan, bicameral legislation would exempt immigrant visa applications of children of Filipino World War II veterans from existing caps and allow them to gain green cards on processing and approval of their applications, which are still carefully vetted in line with existing immigration standards. This bill will not only assist these veterans in their senior years but also provide a fitting recognition of their critical service in the War.

In 1941, more than 250,000 Filipino soldiers responded to President Roosevelt's call-to-arms in the Philippines and elsewhere and fought for the U.S. during World War II. Many of these brave individuals returned from the War only to be denied many of the benefits promised for their service, and they have spent decades fighting recognition of their service. Many such veterans became proud U.S. citizens, though today there are only a few thousand Filipino veterans still alive and living in the U.S.

In October 2017, Congress finally awarded the Filipino veterans of World War II the Congressional Gold Medal to honor their service to our country, but we must do more as we promised. These Filipino American veterans long sought to gain entry and citizenship for their children, yet our immigrant visa backlog has forced family members to wait up to decades and thus effectively prevented these aging veterans from reuniting with their families.

In 2016, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services created the Filipino World War II Veterans Parole Program, a temporary administrative fix that allows these veterans to request parole for their children or siblings. Under this policy, they can live in the U.S. pending processing of their permanent resident applications, which may still take years if not decades. However, as these veterans near the end of their lives, they deserve the certainty of a non-revocable permanent solution. This bill would grant them that.

In this Asian Pacific American Heritage Month and in further recognition of the selfless service and contributions of Filipino veterans of World War II to our country, I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting and passing this bill.