Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for working with us on this and for yielding time.

I also want to thank the chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and the ranking member for all their assistance.

Mr. Speaker, this bill doesn't just include money, which, of course, is very, very important. It also includes language and changes that I would consider to be priceless. It includes things like applying lessons learned, reducing disaster response costs, and, importantly, speeding up recovery--things outside Washington called common sense and applying it to how we handle disasters. It pivots from being reactive and spending billions of dollars after disasters to being proactive.

You can look back since 1980. We have had well over 200 disasters in this Nation that have cost over $1 billion each. In fact, when you add it all up, we are looking at approximately $1.3 trillion in disaster costs in this Nation.

As the chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee said, this bill includes text from H.R. 4460 and H.R. 4438 that transforms this process: instead of just coming in and picking up the pieces after a disaster, actually leaning forward and making sure our communities are more resilient, making sure they are prepared for disasters, making sure they are prepared for the future.

This bill includes very important provisions to the State of Louisiana that address this duplication of benefits issue, some nonsensical policy that someone came up with that a loan is duplicative of a grant. It eliminates these barriers that prevent us from spending hazard mitigation grant programs on federally authorized Corps of Engineer projects to prevent flooding and prevent hurricane damage to our communities.

It applies common sense. It ensures that deficiencies like the I-12 barrier in Louisiana are addressed. It provides funding to respond to the 2016, 1,000-year flood that we had in the capital region in Louisiana.

It provides flexibility for these STEP program housing program-type concepts that ensure that we are not wasting money that is only ripped out later on, but it truly provides long-term solutions.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, it addresses inefficiency in food banks and churches and others, and it makes them eligible. I urge adoption of this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to extend a heartfelt thank you to Dr. Bruce Murphy for his service as president of Nicholls State University in Thibodaux, Louisiana. Dr. Murphy has spent his career investing in higher education and has tirelessly served as Nicholls' fifth president over the last four years. Throughout his tenure, many universities across the country struggled to attract and retain students, but Nicholls' actually increased enrollment four consecutive semesters. I am most impressed by his efforts to prepare students at Nicholls University for successful integration into the real world that awaits upon graduation. The school's partnership with Fletcher Community College, for example, has resulted in significant progress in workforce development. Aside from his service as president of Nicholls State University, both President Murphy and his wife, Jeanne Murphy, are retired from the U.S. Army, having earned the rank of lieutenant colonel and colonel, respectively. Dr. and Mrs Murphy generously served on our military academy review board. I am proud that they devoted time in their busy lives to play an active role in the recruitment of young Louisiana leaders to our nation's military service academies. Thank you Dr. Murphy for your commitment to excellence at Nicholls, your service to the state of Louisiana, and your service to our nation. My sincerest congratulations on an incredible career and your time served as Nicholls' president.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to extend a heartfelt thank you to Dr. Bruce Murphy for his service as president of Nicholls State University in Thibodaux, Louisiana. Dr. Murphy has spent his career investing in higher education and has tirelessly served as Nicholl's fifth president over the last four years. Throughout his tenure, many universities across the country struggled to attract and retain students, but Nicholl's actually increased enrollment four consecutive semesters. I am most impressed by his efforts to prepare students at Nicholls University for successful integration into the real world that awaits upon graduation. The school's partnership with Fletcher Community College, for example, has resulted in significant progress in workforce development. Aside from his service as president of Nicholls State University, both President Murphy and his wife, Jeanne Murphy, are retired from the U.S. Army, having earned the rank of lieutenant colonel and colonel, respectively. Dr. and Mrs. Murphy generously served on our military academy review board. I am proud that they devoted time in their busy lives to play an active role in the recruitment of young Louisiana leaders to our nation's military service academies. I thank Dr. Murphy for his commitment to excellence at Nicholls, his service to the state of Louisiana, and his service to our nation. My sincerest

congratulations on an incredible career and time served as Nicholls' president.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Alabama for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, there are fundamental problems with flood insurance. We all know that. The program, by some estimates, has a debt, recently, of up to $24 billion, and it is going to be compounded by Hurricanes Maria, Irma, and Harvey and the other disasters that we have had this year. We have had extraordinary damages this year.

But what is being missed is that this legislation really doesn't even fix the problem. You can look back over the last 37 years. Since 1980, we have had 218 disasters that have exceeded $1 billion. We have spent $1.3 trillion responding to these disasters.

This bill is projected to, perhaps, save $18 million a year--$18 million, I will say it again. We have spent $1.3 trillion since 1980. There are fundamental problems that need to be addressed.

Mr. Speaker, 40 percent of this Nation's population lives in just 10 percent of the land area adjacent to the coast--10 percent. Forty percent of the population lives there, and it is growing. It is going up. We have got to get good at resiliently living in these coastal areas.

Now, let me show you something, and this is what is happening in Louisiana. Louisiana drains, literally, from Montana to New York, and the Canadian Provinces are all coming down.

Mr. Speaker, as we get additional development in the United States, what happens with that water? It comes down to us.

So let me give you a scenario.

Somebody builds their dream home or somebody starts a small business, and they fully comply with the regulations that are in place at the time for baseline elevation. They build a home or business exactly where it is supposed to be. They start getting additional water down from this watershed or maybe from the coast because the Corps of Engineers has caused 2,000 square miles of the coast of this Nation to erode.

So, yes, we are more vulnerable. We are getting more water down or we have the Gulf of Mexico encroaching on our citizens.

Why should our citizens be responsible for that? They have no control over what is happening. They have complied with the regulations and complied with the guidelines at the time of construction.

Mr. Speaker, I view this as a tax. If our citizens are being burdened with additional fees or expense as a result of the government's inability to do its job to properly manage resources and water, then that is not a premium increase; that is a tax, Mr. Speaker.

While I commend people for working on this bill and trying to address this, the fundamental premise of the bill is flawed. It is fundamentally flawed. You can't charge people for things over which they have no control. You can't charge people whenever they stepped up and did exactly what the government told them to do when they built a home or built a business.

These things aren't portable structures. You can't just pick up a home and say, ``I am going to move it.'' You can't pick up a business and say, ``I am going to move it.''

But that is exactly what this bill does. It increases the premiums and, in some cases, even kicks them out of their homes and businesses, these dream homes and these lifesaving investments.

Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to the underlying bill.

Mr. Speaker, I'd like to honor my constituent and friend, Pam Testroet, as incoming President of the Louisiana REALTORS Association. Pam and her leadership team will represent over 13,000 REALTOR members and have proven to be exemplary and dedicated volunteers to the organization. Home ownership is an important goal for most Americans, and certainly for citizens of Louisiana. It bolsters our state and local economies and helps with job creation. More importantly, home ownership is not just an aspiration that is part of the American Dream; to many Louisianans, it is a dream come true. REALTORS remain at the forefront and work tirelessly to help their clients achieve that dream. At a young age, Pam braved adversity and helped champion diversity in the historic story of Ruby Bridges. This kind of example gives us all hope for a better tomorrow. Pam had an extensive career in the telecommunications industry before earning her real estate license in 2003. She is passionate about education and homeownership and has served on the local, state and national level in various committees and roles. Pam is a proud REALTOR member with a passion for advocacy, policy, and fostering relationships to protect homeowners. I look forward to working with her, the leadership, and all the REALTORS in the coming year.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Dr. Paul Coreil. Dr. Paul Coreil, born and raised in Ville Platte, Louisiana, has enjoyed a distinguished career with the 4H Program--the most recent achievement being his induction into the 4H National Hall of Fame. Honored as one of only 16 inducted across the nation, Dr. Coreil has played a major role in the program for more than 34 years and currently serves as the Director and Vice Chancellor Emeritus for the Louisiana State University Agricultural Center. His work on the Marsh Maneuvers and the Louisiana 4H Foundation Squirrel Hunt has helped raise thousands of dollars to benefit Louisiana 4H programs. Dr. Coreil has received numerous awards and accolades for his contributions 4H and to the great state of Louisiana. I applaud Dr. Coreil for his work and commend him on this well-deserved honor.

Mr. Speaker, I often hear at home from folks who are frustrated with their experiences with air travel and airport security.

We have an opportunity to address part of the problem to reduce flight times, prevent involuntary bumping, save fuel, reduce emissions, reduce the number of government employees, and save money both in the public sector and out of our constituents' pockets.

The FAA is spending billions of dollars attempting to implement new technologies and next generation air traffic control management systems. They are failing.

Right now, we have the 21st Century AIRR Act, which is a step in the right direction. It is going to unleash American innovation and allow us not just to catch up with other countries but to surpass them.

It is about American jobs. It is about providing the American public with the service they deserve.

I urge Members to support and advance the 21st Century AIRR Act.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Pastor Kevin McKee, who opened with the prayer this morning in this Chamber.

Kevin and his wife, Mary, have been amazing pillars in our community as we have been through extraordinary challenges associated with Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, Gustav, Ike, and Isaac; a thousand-year flood last year; the worst oil spill in the Nation's history; the incredible shootings of five of our police officers last year; and racial divisiveness.

Kevin and Mary have been incredible at propping up our community and sharing the Word in eastern Europe, China, and around the United States. I want to thank both of them for their incredible service to our State, our Nation, and our community as we have been through these times of challenge.

Mr. Speaker, when folks think of innovation and new technology, Louisiana often comes to mind.

We have been able to pioneer cell phone technology and have been involved in genetics and DNA. We have incredible naval technologies, with offshore oil and gas at depths never before even contemplated. We have been able to power this Nation's economy.

Once again, Mr. Speaker, with the Laser Interferometer Gravitational- Wave Observatory receiving the Nobel Prize in Physics for the discovery of and measurement of gravitational waves, Louisiana is recognized once again.

I want to give a shout-out to LIGO and Livingston Parish for their amazing discovery in 2015 and for being recognized with the Nobel Prize in Physics

Mr. Speaker, this bill has fundamental problems. Number one, the flood insurance provisions that are in this legislation are provisions that are related to flood insurance. The current program expires on December 9.

Why are we dealing with this one component right now?

I agree that this bill passed the House unanimously previously, but it has fundamental problems advancing in a vacuum outside of the larger reform. And mark my words: this provision is going to result in the insolvency

of the Flood Insurance Program much faster. It is going to increase the debt of the United States. Watch. I promise this is going to happen, and I am looking forward to talking about this more later.

Number two, Mr. Speaker, explain to me the difference between a flood victim in Texas, a flood victim perhaps in Florida, and one in Louisiana. Explain to me how those are any different.

We had a 1,000-year flood in my community just last year. We introduced legislation to provide this same tax relief to our citizens.

Why are Texans better?

I don't understand that.

Now, look, I want to be clear. I think that Texas deserves--the hurricane victims absolutely deserve tax relief, there is no question, as do the victims in Florida, Puerto Rico, and elsewhere--the victims of Harvey, Irma, and Maria. But I don't understand this discrimination, and I certainly can't go back home and explain it or defend it.

This is absurd. It is absolutely absurd that we have been waiting for 13 months for this exact same tax relief, yet the victims of the other hurricanes get it within weeks. I would love for somebody to explain or justify that to me. You can't do it.

Mr. Speaker, look, I will say it again. The FAA absolutely needs to be extended. If this Ross-Castor bill was so great, after it passed the House unanimously, the Senate would have taken it up; but they didn't because it shouldn't be done in a vacuum. It needs to be part of the larger reauthorization that expires on December 9, where we can incorporate it into there.

The reason this is being done is because it is trying to artificially increase National Flood Insurance Program rates. It is trying to artificially expedite the insolvency of the program.

Think about this for just a minute. We are getting ready to have one of the greatest demands upon the National Flood Insurance Program for claims from Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria, yet we are diverting the revenue stream.

Why in the world would you do that? Where is the money going to come from to pay the claims from people who flooded?

Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I just want to say that there are some things in here that matter. The FAA needs to be extended. We need to provide disaster tax relief without question.

This is a fundamentally flawed piece of legislation. We should be sending a clean FAA extension to the Senate and address these other things elsewhere.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, there has been a lot of talk during this discussion about the flood insurance program, about making sure we are providing for the hurricane victims. There is talk about the FAA.

Let me be clear: we support the FAA. We support making sure that we provide all the resources necessary for the hurricane victims, from Hurricanes Irma, Harvey, and Maria. Where things are getting distorted is that this bill includes extraneous provisions that will actually undermine these very objectives.

I want to explain.

Under the legislation that has been attached--the flood insurance legislation--it does allow private insurers to come in, which all of us support, but not in a vacuum. What is going to happen when you do this in a vacuum is that you are going to cause premiums to be diverted from the program.

This is the program where these people have been paying premiums for years, and the program is not going to have the resources to pay their claims, which means it is going to have to borrow more money, which is going to make the premiums go up even greater.

You are going to see the private insurers come in and cherry-pick low- and moderate-risk policies, which is only going to leave the high- risk policies in the program trying to pay a debt and not having a diverse portfolio of low-, moderate-, and high-risk policies.

This is a flawed approach. It needs to be addressed on December 9, when this current program expires. We should be addressing this holistically.

I want to say it again. Those of you who have hurricane victims are undermining their very recovery by supporting this legislation.

One of the other major flaws is this, Mr. Speaker. This shows flooding in Louisiana last year, flooding in Texas this year.

Mr. Speaker, I rise and want to make comments actually echoing a lot of the comments that were made already.

The gentleman from Massachusetts talked about this needing to be a bipartisan bill, and I agree. The gentleman from New Jersey talked about Hurricane Sandy tax relief, and I agree. The gentleman from Florida talked about the need to ensure that we are responding quickly and appropriately in response to the devastating disasters that have affected his State of Florida and the State of Texas. I also support the gentleman from Pennsylvania's comments regarding a short-term reauthorization to the FAA so we can continue to move forward on reform.

But you may be wondering why, Mr. Speaker, groups like the Association of State Floodplain Managers and the Consumer Federation of America have expressed opposition to this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I include these letters in the Record.

Association of State

Floodplain Managers, Inc.,

September 24, 2017.

Re Private flood insurance in H.R. 3823, Disaster Tax Relief

and Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2017.

Dear Leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives: Early

this week, the House will consider legislation promoting

development of private flood insurance as part of a bill to

reauthorize the FAA for 6 months and provide hurricane tax

relief. The bill is scheduled to be taken up under suspension

this week. ASFPM strongly objects to consideration of private

flood outside the reauthorization of the NFIP. The proposed

bill does not insert HR 2901 from the 114th Congress as

mentioned in press reports, but inserts HR 1422, the Ross-

Castor bill from the 115th Congress as Title 4, with

provisions that as written could substantially weaken and

undermine the critical functioning of the National Flood

Insurance Program,. The NFIP not only provides flood

insurance, but is a comprehensive flood risk management

program.

Although we understand the potential benefits of more flood

insurance options, we point out that the private market has

been readily expanding since Biggert-Waters 2012 was passed

authorizing private flood insurance. ASFPM cannot support

authorization for private flood insurance as written in HR

1422. The temporary extension and reauthorization of the NFIP

expires on 8 Dec 2017, giving Congress ample time to consider

the full scope of the NFIP, into which private flood must

integrate, without causing irreparable damage to the other 3

fundamental elements of this comprehensive flood risk

management program. Those are floodplain mapping,

implementation of local floodplain ordinances to protect new

development, and hazard mitigation grants to reduce damage

and loss of life from flooding.

ASFPM has stated that three modifications of that HR 1422

language must be made to ensure continuity of the

comprehensive flood risk reduction aspects of the NFIP that

exist today. A federal policy fee on all NFIP policies pays

for almost half the cost of floodplain mapping and all of the

costs of floodplain management including technical assistance

to over 22,000 communities that have joined the NFIP. Hazard

mitigation grants are funded by premium income to the

program. None of these functions are provided by private

flood insurance policies.

Yet private insurance companies acknowledge that mapping

(i.e. identification of flood risk areas and areas of

mandatory purchase of flood insurance) and floodplain

management (i.e. reduced risk due to local requirements for

hazard-resistant construction) help them to target their

marketing and to price premiums lower where floodplain

ordinances exist.

First, private policies must also carry the federal policy

user fee to support the mapping and floodplain management

functions. Private flood policy holders, private insurance

companies, as well as the NFIP and its policy holders,

benefit from these functions by identifying at-risk areas,

ensuring building construction standards which facilitate

lower flood insurance premiums, and targeting areas and

structures which could benefit from mitigation actions

leading to lower premiums. As policies migrate to the private

sector, millions of dollars in revenue to support those

floodplain management and mapping functions will be lost

unless there is an equivalent policy user fee on private

policies.

Second, private policies to satisfy the mandatory purchase

requirement for properties in floodplains must only be sold

in communities that participate in the NFIP (meaning

they have adopted floodplain management ordinances to guide

safer development). In smaller communities with only a

handful of properties required to purchase flood insurance,

if that requirement can be met with private policies, those

communities may drop out of the NFIP and no longer maintain

floodplain management ordinances to reduce future losses.

This could result in lack of abililty to reduce future flood

losses and in taxpayers picking up disaster costs.

Third, several provisions of the existing definition of

private flood insurance must be retained. The Biggert-Waters

2012 legislation (42 USC 4012a(b)(7)) defines private flood

insurance, among other things, as providing coverage ``at

least as broad as'' that provided by the NFIP. The language

provides consumer protections to ensure policies would not

have excessive deductibles, exclusions, or eliminate some

essential coverages like Increased Cost of Compliance, which

provides assistance to policyholders to rebuild in a manner

that reduces flood damage in the future. Without these

important provisions in place, policyholders could face

unaffordable deductibles when they have a claim; communities

would find it much harder to help homeowners become eligible

for mitigation funding; and there would be a greater chance

that claim payments would not be applied to building repairs

resulting in increased community blight. ASFPM further notes

that with this language in place, the private market has

already been growing. The private flood insurance bill

strikes this language.

The nation's floodplain managers strongly urge adoption of

these elements if private flood language is added to the

House NFIP reauthorization bill. This would preserve the

flood risk mapping and floodplain management functions that

the NFIP provides and would protect consumers from purchasing

low-cost policies that provide less than adequate coverage

and/or higher deductibles they could not pay. This would not

happen if insureds had an NFIP policy.

The Association of State Floodplain Managers (ASFPM) and

its 36 chapters represent more than 17,000 state and local

officials, as well as other professionals engaged in all

aspects of floodplain management and flood hazard mitigation

including management of local floodplain ordinances, flood

risk mapping, engineering, planning, community development,

hydrology, forecasting, emergency response, water resources

development and flood insurance. All ASFPM members are

concerned with reducing our nation's flood-related losses.

Again we urge you to oppose inclusion of these ill-advised

private flood provisions outside of the context of

comprehensive NFIP reauthorization legislation. The

suspension package makes it impossible to properly address

these issues. Thank you for seriously considering these

recommendations from the Association of State Floodplain

Managers.

Very sincerely,

Chad Berginnis,

ASFPM Executive Director.

Mr. Speaker, extraneous provisions on flood insurance that should not be pasted into this legislation were included. These provisions actually undermine the very solvency of the program. They are establishing a private market at a time when the National Flood Insurance Program--the Federal program--is going to need the resources to pay claims. Establishing a private market within 60 days is going to divert resources from the Federal program to private insurers. It is going to divert these dollars to where they don't have the resources to make the payments.

Private insurance companies are already involved in flood insurance, and once we authorize them to step into these markets, they are going to be able to cherry-pick low- and moderate-risk policies, leaving the National Flood Insurance Program with only high-risk policies, leaving them with the burden of flood mapping and leaving them with the burden of a $24.6 billion debt. I don't understand how the program is going to have the resources to pay the claims it underwrites.

Next, Mr. Speaker, one of the other big problems we have is that this shows floods in Texas, floods in Louisiana, and gutting homes in Louisiana here and in Texas there.

These were both 1,000-year flood events. I don't understand the difference on why we choose these folks get tax relief and these don't. We introduced nearly identical legislation to address this.

We shouldn't be discriminating against folks in New Jersey and New York and Louisiana in exchange for the others.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I certainly sympathize with many of the comments that the sponsor of this amendment has brought up. Certainly, none of us have any intention of trashing the environment, of causing environmental degradation in any of our coastal areas in the United States.

But the thing is that this amendment doesn't cut production. It would not result in any reduction in oil and gas exploration and production activities. And if it were to do that, then all that would happen is it would increase our dependence upon foreign imports of oil.

The reality and statistics are very clear. You are less safe transporting energy than you are producing it. The statistics are very clear. Putting it into a ship is less safe. Putting it into a pipeline is less safe than actually producing it. So you are not doing anything to benefit the environment.

The next thing is that, within approximately 1 month of the Obama administration's being sworn into office in 2009--as I recall, I believe it was on February 10--Secretary Salazar stood

up and said: We are rewriting the 5-year offshore leasing plan of the previous administration.

They walked right in and said: We are throwing this out.

Which the amendment's sponsor said was billions of dollars in implications and much planning.

It is exactly what the Obama administration did. So if the Trump administration chooses to take a fresh look at these resources and these resources, then I want to quote the Obama administration saying that these are offshore energy resources that belong to all Americans.

Mr. Chairman, I want to make one other note. If you read the amendment, it says that none of the funds made available in this act may be used to repair a 5-year offshore oil and gas leasing program that would schedule any Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas lease sale before 2022. This wouldn't just prohibit making changes to it, such as, perhaps, the idea of expanding it if public comments and other input found that that was the best thing to do, but it also would prevent slowing down the lease sale schedule.

Mr. Chairman, I urge opposition to this amendment. While I certainly support the gentleman's intent to prevent any type of environmental harm and degradation, I just want to say in closing that I was the lead trustee for the State of Louisiana in the Deepwater Horizon spill.

When you look at Outer Continental Shelf energy production, we had produced trillions of cubic feet of natural gas. We had produced billions of barrels of oil. What the courts found in the BP incident was that there was gross negligence and willful misconduct.

They didn't find that there were problems with the rules and other things. That is why, as the gentleman correctly started, that they had to spend tens of billions of dollars paying for their gross negligence and willful misconduct, which is very different than the trillions of cubic feet of natural gas, and billions of barrels of oil that we have produced safely; we produced them in the United States; and we have not put them in pipelines and tankers in other less safe mechanisms of transportation.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert), the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee.

Mr. Chairman, in closing, I just want to say that, once again, while I understand the gentleman's intent to prevent any type of environmental degradation--I think everyone shares that objective--the reality is that this amendment doesn't do anything to advance that objective. And potentially, should there be some type of emergent situation where you would want to slow down lease sales, this amendment would actually prohibit that from happening.

We should take a fresh look with public input and with the best science to determine where we produce, how we produce, to maximize domestic energy production, to maximize or to reduce dependence upon foreign energy, to maximize economic opportunities and employment opportunities in the United States.

Mr. Chair, I urge opposition to this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from Alabama and the gentleman from New Jersey for their help.

The coast of Louisiana has experienced extraordinary challenges over the last several decades--everything from the management of the Mississippi River system through levees, the BP oil spill, and now, an invasive end sector scale on some of the vegetation in coastal Louisiana.

When you add up the cumulative impact of all of these things, our State has lost about 2,000 square miles of our coast. That is 2,000 square miles that the Gulf of Mexico has encroached upon; that is 2,000 square miles where our communities are much more vulnerable now to hurricanes. And we are certainly all sensitive to that with Hurricane Harvey just hitting our State and Texas, and Hurricane Irma currently headed toward the mainland of the United States.

An amendment that was agreed to as part of this en bloc package simply transfers $400,000 from an administrative account to research through APHIS, to study this invasive scale. And this may sound like some small issue that doesn't matter, but it is causing significant impact, to the tune of square miles of additional coastal loss in Louisiana that is going to make our communities that much more vulnerable and cause significant environmental impact.

So I want to thank the gentleman from Alabama and the gentleman from New Jersey for their assistance and including our amendment today that is going to ensure that we can research this, that we can find a solution, and that we can be proactive and prevent additional loss and additional assault on the coast of Louisiana.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the public service career of Cynthia K. Dohner. Cindy served the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service with distinction and honor for more than 24 years and will leave the Service on August 30, 2017.

Cindy's love of the outdoors began while fishing Pennsylvania's Susquehanna River

with her father and tagging along on his deer hunting trips. It was at this point in her life that she knew that she wanted to make a positive difference. Those experiences set her on a course that led to a bachelor's degree in marine biology, a master's degree in fisheries and aquaculture, and a long career protecting fish and wildlife and the untamed places upon which they depend.

Cindy made conservation her career. She has worked for a private environmental consulting firm and held positions in several state and federal agencies before joining the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 1993. Prior to her time in the Southeast Region, Cindy worked with the Service's Division of Fish Hatcheries and as the Branch Chief for Recovery and Consultation in Washington, D.C. She came to Atlanta in 1999 to serve as the Assistant Regional Director for Ecological Services and later served as Deputy Regional Director.

For the last seven years, Cindy has led the Southeast Region in a daily mission to make a difference for fish, wildlife, plants and the people who live and work in communities across the region. As Regional Director, she provided vision and leadership for more than 1,300 employees in 10 southeastern states, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and has continuously worked toward producing successful management solutions that have positively influenced our national conservation efforts. On any given day, you are just as likely to find her working with employees and partners on issues as big as the restoration of Louisiana's coast and as small but no less consequential as the partnership work and proactive conservation that led to removing the Georgia aster from the list of candidate species under the Endangered Species Act.

I witnessed Cindy's dedication to protecting and conserving America's natural resources firsthand while working together with her to restore Louisiana's coast and the Gulf of Mexico following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. At the time of the spill in 2010, she led an extraordinary effort to respond to this unprecedented event that deployed thousands of employees to stations in four Gulf Coast states over the first year. Additionally, she was instrumental in securing funds to rebuild Brenton Island--an area that has provided protection for our bird habitat as well as fishing habitat for Louisiana's saltwater anglers. Whether the need was simple or more complicated, she worked tirelessly to solve a host of environmental and economic needs. While serving as the Department of the Interior's Authorized Official for the Deepwater Horizon Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration, Cindy was a committed partner to the State of Louisiana and the other Gulf states in working collaboratively to help us get on the right path to repairing our ecosystem, and restoring the Gulf's abundant natural resources and the economy its people depend upon.

She is recognized throughout the Southeast as an honest partner and innovative conservation leader. Under her leadership, the region has joined forces with states, private landowners, other federal agencies, the Department of Defense, and several sectors of industry and business including energy, timber, and finance among others to find creative ways to conserve fish and wildlife resources. This collaboration has resulted in notable conservation successes including removing the Louisiana black bear from the endangered species list, upgrading the status of the West Indian manatee and wood stork and precluding the need to list more than 100 fish, wildlife, and plants petitioned for federal protection in the past seven years. She worked closely with many partners to restore more than one million acres of bottomland hardwood habitat in the South and reverse the decline of longleaf pine forests so critical for migratory birds and wildlife in decline. Her recognition of the little things to build lasting relationships that so often have big implications and make conservation success possible on larger scales is something I will miss. I commend Cindy for her desire to make a lasting difference and hope the Service will continue to build on her outstanding conservation legacy.

I speak for myself and I think for many policymakers, business leaders, and lovers of the outdoors when I say Cindy Dohner and her passion for wildlife will be missed. I appreciate the many years of public service she has to the Southeast Region and people that call Louisiana home and make it a Sportsmen's Paradise. I ask that my colleagues join me in expressing our deepest appreciation and gratitude for her public service and wishing Cindy success and happiness in her future endeavors.