Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I want to pay tribute and recognize a distinguished member of Congressional staff, Catherine Petty.

With the loss of our friend, the late Dean of the House Congressman Don Young, there is presently no member seated from the great state of Alaska who may rise and recognize members of his staff within this body--even as they continue to serve our nation's largest Congressional district. Therefore, it is my distinct honor today to recognize Catherine Petty, and to thank her for her years of service.

Catherine Petty grew up in Boston, Massachusetts where she acquired an accent that she proudly never fully outgrew. She joined the United States Air Force in 1971 which stationed her in Germany twice, Iceland twice, North Dakota, Texas, and New Mexico. In 1983 she left the Air Force as a Staff Sergeant in order to devote additional time to her young family. She next went to work for the Department of Defense, then as a civilian employee of the Air Force. Catherine Petty arrived in Alaska at 5:00 p.m. on October 5, 1990, at what was then Elmendorf Air Force Base. She continued in federal civilian service until she was urged by a friend to apply for a position with Alaska's lone member of Congress--the legendary Don Young--who she admitted at the time she knew very little about. However, as fate would have it, Catherine applied and got the job--starting on June 15, 2006 in his Anchorage district office amidst a tumultuous election cycle.

Catherine Petty's talents and leadership qualities were quickly recognized by Congressman Young. In 2007 he promoted her to be his Deputy State Director. On a personal level, Catherine became especially close with Rep. Young's wife, Mrs. Lu Young, until her passing in August of 2009.

Mrs. Petty continued to faithfully serve Congressman Young as his Deputy State Director with great distinction. Her Congressional casework accomplishments include personally completing a remarkable tally of over 7,000 constituent cases. It is no wonder that Alaskans continued to return Congressman Young to the House for a record 25 terms--with such effective public servants like Mrs. Petty on his team.

Madam Speaker, Mrs. Petty's service in the office of Congressman Don Young and to the

Office of Alaska At-Large epitomizes what it means to be an effective caseworker, capable public servant, and loyal staffer. She has mentored her fellow staff, gained the admiration of colleagues across agencies, and earned the gratitude of countless constituents. Some of Mrs. Petty's most memorable successes include aiding constituents faced with urgent needs such as passports and visas, assisting Alaskan families as they navigated naturalization, and helping servicemembers overcome bureaucratic hurdles in order to receive the benefits they have earned.

Mrs. Petty's lengthy career of service which spans 50 years, including in the Armed Services, as a civilian federal employee, and as staff with the United States House of Representatives, proves that Mrs. Petty's values and work ethic are deeply held. Some of those values and work ethic could be witnessed by anyone brave enough to show up to the office before 7:00 a.m., or unwise enough to shirk a task they had promised to complete. Though never a slouch, Mrs. Petty has always been known to be a fan of a good office prank. Her good nature and humor will be missed by her colleagues, who all wish her the very best as she looks forward to her upcoming retirement.

Catherine Petty served Congressman Young and the House of Representatives for 16 years. On behalf of the institution she has so well served, all of the constituents in Alaska she has helped in the name of the boss over the years, and as a former Congressman Don Young staffer myself, I say thank you to Catherine for a job well done and may God bless her.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, let's be clear. Everybody in this Chamber supports lowering prescription drug costs, lowering these outrageous costs that all of our constituents are paying across the country. We all support clean, affordable energy and access to those resources. We all support lowering inflation.

The difference is, where the credibility gap exists, is that the very problems, the very crisis that our country is experiencing today, were actually caused by the Biden administration's policies.

We went from, in my hometown, $1.80 a gallon for gasoline to, recently, I paid $4.20. We have seen a tripling of natural gas costs. Their own policies have caused this.

Nearly a quarter of all Americans today can't even afford to pay their electricity bills. The Biden administration policies have caused record inflation, making Americans unable to even afford grocery costs.

The Biden administration policies have resulted in higher emissions, not lower emissions, as compared to the previous administration. Biden administration policies resulted in this President going to countries like Saudi Arabia and asking them for energy while telling Americans that we can't produce.

Mr. Speaker, I can't help but reminisce over Jack Abramoff, a disgraced lobbyist, convicted, who created problems and then charged clients to fix them. The difference between this bill and Jack Abramoff is that Jack Abramoff actually fixed problems for his clients.

This bill is a disaster. There is a credibility gap. They have caused problems, and now we are being asked to trust them to fix them, and we simply can't. Oppose this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I am somewhat baffled by this amendment.

Why would we, for any reason, decide that we are just going to look at climate resiliency?

Mr. Speaker, we have had hurricanes, we have had floods, we have had forest fires, we have had tornadoes, winter storms, earthquakes, tsunamis since the planet has been here. Why would we decide that we are just going to compartmentalize climate resilience and just look at that and ignore everything else?

Why would we decide that we are going to choose to bias only frontline communities versus those that are truly most vulnerable?

This is what I used to do for a living. I did it for years and years. I am glad this is comical. This is what I used to do.

This might be the stupidest thing I have ever seen. Why in the world, Mr. Speaker, would you compartmentalize different types of vulnerability?

If you are concerned about climate, why don't you go and talk to this administration about the fact that under President Trump, emissions went down 2.5 percent a year, and under President Biden, they have gone up 6.3 percent a year. And we negotiated an agreement with China where they get to increase emissions 150 percent while everybody else cuts.

This is simply just ill-informed. It doesn't make any sense at all, and I urge rejection of this ill-conceived amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I have to tell you. Coming from a disaster-prone State, I am absolutely shocked that anyone would propose an amendment like this. Here it is, 1:15 a.m., a 48-page amendment is being offered to codify or memorialize a process that has done nothing but revictimize disaster victims in the aftermath of a hurricane or other type of natural disaster.

Mr. Speaker, in 2016, this Congress provided about $1.7 billion in the aftermath of a disaster--about $1.7 billion--trying to help out those who were impacted by a thousand-year flood, trying to get money in their hands.

Yet, 6 years later--6 years later--only one-third of those funds had actually been allocated to the disaster victims. Almost $500 million had been paid to the contractors administering the program.

Mr. Speaker, HUD is not a disaster agency. Look at the Government Accountability Office reports. They have said over and over again that all you have is this alphabet soup of agencies that aren't coordinated. You have HUD that doesn't have disaster experience.

This is a flawed approach. You can look at other programs that are capable of getting money out the door faster.

In fact, in this legislation, it actually codifies--it says that you first have to help those in poverty. What if they are not impacted, but it requires that they are first helped?

What we need to be doing is we need to be getting assistance in the hands of those that need help, not in the situation where in 2019, the Government Accountability Office looked at this and said that funds that had been appropriated in 2015, 4 years prior, that less than 80 percent of the money had actually even been allocated yet.

This agency is the wrong agency. They have a clear record of complete failure and lack of urgency and are simply revictimizing-- revictimizing--disaster victims.

Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to this amendment and reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, listening to the gentlewoman talk about this amendment,

clearly there is a divide between what she is expressing and what this amendment actually does.

The gentlewoman said that this would help to get the money in the hands of those who are most impacted. That is not what this does. To the contrary, it actually requires that those that are in poverty be prioritized. It doesn't matter if they have been impacted or not. There is not even a requirement in here to determine that they are most impacted.

In fact, this amendment actually codifies a low- and moderate-income requirement that doesn't take into consideration the actual impacts of that person.

It also has a provision in here that discusses the impact to households but not individuals. So maybe if you are single, you are not even eligible under this because in some cases, it makes reference to individuals. In other cases, only families or households.

Mr. Speaker, the bottom line: We have been through this program over and over and over again.

I am completely shocked, the sponsor of this amendment, in 2017 when we appropriated $35 billion, his home State of Texas in 2019 had only drawn down $18 million.

In the case of Florida--keep in mind, this was in the aftermath of Harvey, Irma, and Maria. In the case of Florida, in 2019, nearly 2 years after the disaster funds had been appropriated, only $1 million had been drawn down.

In the case of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, zero.

This agency is not capable of doing anything other than revictimizing our disaster victims. It is the wrong agency. It is the wrong program. This language has not been vetted by disaster experts. All it is going to do is memorialize or codify what we are doing to disaster victims now, which is funding a bureaucracy, funding contractors that profit off of this flawed approach, and simply not helping those get back on their feet that are most in need.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for actually expressing the real intent behind this, and this is, I think, the jurisdictional desire of the Financial Services Committee to be involved in disasters.

The reality, as we all know, Mr. Speaker, the Transportation Committee has jurisdiction over FEMA. We have jurisdiction over disasters, and not just jurisdiction but actually expertise.

What happens when you have folks who don't have expertise in this issue is that you end up with legislation like this that will actually--I am going to state it a third time--revictimize disaster victims. It is going to fund a bureaucracy. It is going to fund contractors and not actually get the funds in the hands of folks who most need it.

Mr. Speaker, I urge rejection of this amendment and yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Madam Speaker, I was in a meeting during this vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 239.

Members Recorded Pursuant to House Resolution 8, 117th Congress

Barragan (Beyer)

Bass (Blunt Rochester)

Boebert (Gaetz)

Brooks (Fleischmann)

Brown (OH) (Beatty)

Bucshon (Gibbs)

Cardenas (Correa)

Crist (Wasserman Schultz)

DeFazio (Stanton)

Evans (Beyer)

Frankel, Lois (Wasserman Schultz)

Gomez (Garcia (TX))

Guest (Fleischmann)

Johnson (SD) (LaHood)

Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)

Kirkpatrick (Pallone)

Krishnamoorthi (Garcia (IL))

Lamb (Blunt Rochester)

Leger Fernandez (Neguse)

Loudermilk (Fleischmann)

Lowenthal (Beyer)

McEachin (Beyer)

Moore (WI) (Beyer)

Moulton (Neguse)

Payne (Pallone)

Price (NC) (Manning)

Ruiz (Correa)

Rush (Jeffries)

Ryan (Beyer)

Sanchez (Garcia (TX))

Sewell (Beatty)

Sherman (Beyer)

Sires (Pallone)

Spartz (Banks)

Strickland (Takano)

Suozzi (Beyer)

Swalwell (Correa)

Taylor (Fallon)

Thompson (PA) (Keller)

Torres (NY) (Blunt Rochester)

Vargas (Takano)

Walorski (Banks)

Waters (Garcia (TX))

Welch (Pallone)

Wilson (FL) (Neguse)

Mr. Speaker, this bill is very important and includes important hurricane protection for the Upper Barataria area, which is going to help Jefferson, St. Charles, and Lafourche Parishes, all the way up to Ascension Parish. If this had been in place when Hurricane Ida made landfall, we would have had fundamentally different conditions.

It is going to make higher, stronger levees. In the New Orleans area, $3 billion in new investments there, which we worked on with Congressman Carter and Congressman Scalise.

It clarifies the cost-share for the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet, something that never should have been in contention.

It helps to manage water on the Mississippi River, expedites the Comite project, and makes tens of millions of dollars in additional authorizations for water and wastewater in the capital, river, and bayou regions.

Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of people who helped with this legislation. One of them is Paul Sass, and I thank Paul for his nearly 20 years of service to this House and to this committee. Had he not been around working on many of these bills, it simply would not have happened, and I appreciate it. Having worked with the ranking member for some period of time, I couldn't imagine working 20 years with him. Amazing.

Mr. Speaker, I also thank Ranking Member Sam Graves for his hard work on this. I thank Chairman DeFazio, Tim Petty, Leslie Parker, and Melissa Beaumont for their work on this important legislation.

This is all about making investments of millions of dollars before disasters happen in order to prevent billions of dollars in disaster recovery and loss of life.

Lastly, I thank Water Resources and Environment Subcommittee Chair Napolitano, as well as Ranking Member Rouzer, for their hard work on this legislation.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in order to share a story of Cajun ingenuity and recognize a man who went beyond the call of duty for his community. Windell Curole, Manager of the South Lafourche Levee District, fought tooth and nail to build a more secure flood protection system. Mr. Curole knew the area's levees weren't high enough to defend against a major storm; he began gathering funds and bringing in the necessary resources to raise the levees. Mr. Curole understands his community and gained their support--guided by his leadership, the Parish self-taxed in order to improve their own levee system.

Mr. Curole is no stranger to challenge: the U.S. Corps of Engineers issued cease and desist orders, even going so far as to threaten him with legal repercussions for lacking the correct permits. Driven by a just cause, Mr. Curole simply kept building. Mr. Curole's efforts successfully protected South Lafourche from Hurricane Ida, which devastated most of the surrounding area. His vision and efforts prevented extensive flooding and helped the region back on its feet after this terrible storm. Come hell, high water, or even legal threats, Windell Curole has always and will always take appropriate action to defend his community. I am proud to call Mr. Curole a fellow Louisianian--and friend.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in order to share a story of Cajun ingenuity and recognize a man who went beyond the call of duty for his community.

Windell Curole, Manager of the South Lafourche Levee District, fought tooth and nail to build a more secure flood protection system. Mr. Curole knew the area's levees weren't high enough to defend against a major storm; he began gathering funds and bringing in the necessary resources to raise the levees. Mr. Curole understands his community and gained their support--guided by his leadership, the Parish self-taxed in order to improve their own levee system.

Mr. Curole is no stranger to challenge: the U.S. Corps of Engineers issued cease and desist orders, even going so far as to threaten him with legal repercussions for lacking the correct permits. Driven by a just cause, Mr. Curole simply kept building. Mr. Curole's efforts successfully protected South Lafourche from Hurricane Ida, which devasted most of the surrounding area. His vision and efforts prevented extensive flooding and helped the region back on its feet after this terrible storm. Come hell, high water, or even legal threats, Windell Curole has always and will always take appropriate action to defend his community. I am proud to call Mr. Curole a fellow Louisianian--and friend.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for the recognition and the yielding of time today.

Mr. Speaker, I spent, like you, much time in Louisiana visiting small businesses and visiting with people who are just trying to make ends meet. It was National Small Business Week a few weeks ago. Visiting businesses, I heard over and over and over again the pervasive impact, the incredible impact, of high gasoline and high energy prices.

Stephanie Towns in Chicago said: I have got kids. I have got to get them to school every day. The gas prices are just so high, I can't make it.

Mr. Speaker, we have had people talk about the inability to visit and take care of grandchildren, the inability to fuel their cars to go to work, the inability to even buy groceries because of the profound cost that we have seen related to energy and related to gasoline.

But this shouldn't have been a surprise to anybody. During the campaign, President Biden said: ``We are going to phase out fossil fuels.'' ``I guarantee you we are going to end fossil fuel.''

The Secretary of the Interior, the Cabinet official responsible for producing American energy, said, ``I am wholeheartedly against fracking and drilling on public lands.''

Incredible, incredible statements.

I will say it again. None of this stuff should be a surprise to anybody. This is a post we put up on January 27 of last year, and we said, ``As a result of President Biden's energy policies, this is exactly what is going to happen.'' Let me say it again, January 27 of last year, 6 days after some of these policies. We are going to have higher electricity bills, higher prices at the gas pump, lost revenue for hurricane protection and flood control and coastal restoration because there is revenue sharing. That is where these dollars go--I have no idea what the President is going to tell these communities whenever we end up having another hurricane on the Gulf Coast--higher delivery costs that would be passed on to consumers; more dependence on foreign energy sources like Iran, Russia, China, and other countries that don't share American values; and a net increase in global emissions.

I remind you, Mr. Speaker, under President Trump, we saw emissions go down an average of 2.5 percent per year. Under President Biden, we have seen them go up 6.3 percent.

Why is this happening? We have seen this administration try to blame price gouging, try to say that we are going to fix it through the Strategic Petroleum Reserve releases. We have heard him even say that we are going to come in, and this is a result of what is happening with Ukraine and Russia.

But let me go back to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. As a result of their announcement to release all of this oil, guess what has happened? China has bought some of it and others. We have actually moved it from one storage cavern to another, and they are paying to store it in the other place. It doesn't make any sense.

Meanwhile, prices have only gone up. I have a feeling Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster are going to be the next responsible entities for higher energy prices.

Don't take my word for it. Look, the Blackstone CEO said we are going to end up with a real shortage of energy. What happens when you have a shortage of supply? Prices go up. If we have a shortage, it is just going to cost more, and it is probably going to cost a lot more; exactly what we have seen. The Blackstone CEO says if you try to raise money to drill holes, it is almost impossible to get that money. They have prevented access.

Here are the real reasons this administration came out and, on the first day, issued an executive order saying that they were going to ban new oil and gas production in the United States. Under this administration, under the Biden administration, we have nearly tripled dependence on Russian oil. They, through this House of Representatives, passed a bill with up to a $10,000 a mile a year pipeline fee. They have increased royalty rates through this House of Representatives by up to 50 percent, and the administration unilaterally announced the same thing.

Mr. Speaker, what happens when you impose higher costs? Do you think the money just invents itself? No. They pass it on to consumers, and boy, have they nailed it. They have nailed it.

Let me quote a former Treasury official for the Biden administration: Lower gasoline prices ``undercuts the administration's climate change goals--where really to care about fossil-fuel consumption, we don't want lower prices for fossil-fuel buyers, we prefer higher prices.'' They nailed it. They nailed it.

The problem is the impact to the average American. We can't afford this. It is undermining our ability--like I said, grandchildren, groceries, energy bills, we can't even afford to live our lives.

Mr. Speaker, as noted by Mr. Burgess, there is a solution: the American Energy Independence from Russia Act. If we defeat the previous question, we are going to be able to bring up this legislation that unlocks American energy, allows us to produce energy.

I don't know what these people have against Americans. Why are we carrying out policies that benefit Russia, Iran, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia? Do you know who I care about? I care about domestic energy producers. I care about American workers. Why can't we meet our own energy demands just as this bill does?

Congressman Westerman and Congresswoman McMorris Rodgers have legislation that unlocks American energy, allows liquefied natural gas terminals to be permanent, reduces the regulatory burden. It ensures that the Keystone pipeline can be built, not the policies that Democrats are advocating for where, in the United States Senate, Senate Democrats said they want to urge Saudi Arabia to use their swing capacity to increase world oil supplies or the current runup of world oil prices is effectively a tax on American families' energy discretionary budget, except that the money goes to the OPEC cartel rather than the U.S. Treasury.

Actually, on this one, Mr. Speaker, I fully agree. I urge that we defeat the previous question; we unlock America's energy resources; and we lower energy prices for all Americans.

Madam Speaker, our hearts are heavy. Nearly six years ago, there was an attack on our community.

The attack was designed to be divisive--to rip our community apart. It did not work. Evil was overcome by the goodness--the Godliness--in our community, our state and the nation. Evil did not take hold.

Rather, we came together to support the six peacekeepers shot in the line of duty after answering the call.

The reports on Deputy Nick Tullier were not good. We heard over and over again from the doctors and nurses, that he wouldn't make it another hour, another day, another week--that he couldn't make it. None of them knew Nick. He had more work to do, or as the men and women in blue refer to it, it was not yet the ``end of watch'' for Nick.

At Tiger Stadium the other night, Garth Brooks put it another way: Nick ``had more dance to share.'' God had more work for Nick to do here on earth.

Against all odds, Nick fought like hell for 2,119 days. He was absolutely immersed in the love of his family, old friends, new friends and complete strangers. Blue and black bracelets labeled ``Pray for Nick'' or ``Nick Tullier Strong'' popped up all over. Even President Trump signed onto to ``Team Nick.''

God has now summoned Deputy Tullier among the peacekeepers that have finished their last call. He's on a different patrol with Corp. Montrell Jackson, BRPD, Officer Matthew Gerald, and Deputy Brad Garafola, EBRSO.

Mary and James' constant presence and endurance demonstrated the boundless and unending love of a mother and father. Nick knows he was loved and countless parents in our community and around the world are inspired by their overflowing love and support of their son.

Trenton and Gage's father's two decades wearing the badge made our community safer. He certainly did not do it for the money. Our community benefited from his sacrifice. Nick's life embodies a servant's heart. They should be inspired by the life he lived as a peacekeeper.

Jamie and Shannon's brother was a machine. His physical workouts and fitness were impressive. I can only guess that he must have beat the heck out of them growing up. I hope they cherish those memories of the time growing up with their brother and don't make him come back and knock them in line again. Seriously, they are charged with ensuring Nick's passing does not create a void on earth.

I hope that all of Nick's family, friends and supporters know that his legacy will be felt beyond his time among us. On July 17, 2016 and the weeks following, we did not allow evil to take hold. Rather than giving in, we came together and rose up. We united against evil and came together for what was good and what was right. Much of that coming together has died down or subsided for us.

For the past six years, Nick's fight never died. Every day, with the support of his family, he continued. He persevered.

Just because Nick returned to the Father, just because it is the end of watch for Nick Tullier--the fight is not over.

Nick taught us that we can overcome all odds. Nick made clear that miracles are possible. Just as we united against the forces of evil six years ago, we can continue to be inspired by Nick's enormous heart. We can be inspired by his parent's incredible dedication.

Let us honor Nick by continuing to work together against the evil that is trying to take hold, trying to get traction in our community. Let's rise up and support our peacekeepers, back the blue--and, Sheriff Gautreaux, the green too. We are better than this.

Garth Brooks went on to sing that, ``I could have missed the pain, but I'da had to miss the dance.'' As tough as today is, anyone that came into to contact with Nick would agree that the dance was worth it.

Louisiana and America would be less safe without our men and women in blue.

We will remain Nick Tullier Strong. God bless.

Mr. Speaker, last year there were over 60,000 police officers who were assaulted in the line of duty. Over 60,000 were assaulted, and 295 of those officers died. This year already we have had over 123 police officers who have been shot.

This is National Police Week. This is the time when we need to reflect upon the difference between total chaos in our community and civilized order, holding people accountable for the crimes that they commit, ensuring that we are not defunding the police but we are lifting up the police, and that we are holding these peacekeepers and their families in our prayers.

Mr. Speaker, on July 17 of 2016, we had five police officers in my hometown of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, shot. Brad Garafola, Matthew Gerald, and Montrell Jackson died that day. They died. Bruce Simmons and Brad Montgomery were both injured.

Nick Tullier was an East Baton Rouge Parish sheriff's deputy. Nick took three bullets--one to the head, one to the chest, and one to the abdomen. Every single medical professional--doctors, nurses, and hospital officials--everyone said that he wasn't going to make it through the rest of that day, July 17. Nearly 6 years later, Nick Tullier was still fighting for his life. He sat there for 2,119 days-- 2,119 days--with his father, James, and his mother, Mary, by his side fighting. Nick was unbelievable.

This shooting was designed to rip our community apart. It was designed to attack law enforcement, to attack peacekeepers, and, I think, to offend the police and to intimidate the police. It did completely the opposite. Rather than ripping our community apart, it brought all of us together--all of us--together. No matter political party, race, socioeconomic situation, or neighborhood, everyone came together in support of these officers, their families, their departments, and what they did, their sacrifice.

These people are underpaid and overworked, and every single day when they leave the house they kiss loved ones and they kiss dependents because it may be the last time they come home.

Mr. Speaker, Nick Tullier didn't let the evil win. He didn't let the bad guys win. Nick was completely a fighter. He sat there, and against all odds he refused to let death prevail.

Mr. Speaker, Nick inspired our entire community and our State. You saw these bracelets all over the place: ``Pray for Nick Tullier'' or ``Nick Tullier Strong.'' Even the President signed a note to him a few years ago. It was a rallying cry for our community.

Mr. Speaker, the numbers that we have seen this year alone in not lifting up the police and supporting the police--supporting these peacekeepers--but rather disrespecting them is absolutely inexcusable.

These people--I can't say it enough--put their lives on the line for our communities so we can be safe. Nick Tullier fought, he beat that evil, and he defied all odds. But, sadly, on Tuesday of this week, he was buried after 6 years of fighting death, of saying no, of upholding good, and of bringing our community together.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the amazing work of his parents again, Mary and James Tullier, who every single day were at his side making it clear to Nick that not just they were there for him but the entire community was and that their boundless love for this man would be so clear to him throughout this process. It was so clear.

I thank his sons, Trenton and Gage. I remind them their father was a role model for our community. I say to his brothers, Jamie and Shannon, please don't let the void that Nick's passing to the Father has created. Do not let that become a void here on Earth. Continue his mission, the Nick Tullier Foundation, St. Jude, and others.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I just want to say the difference between chaos and order is what our peacekeepers do. Underpaid, underappreciated, and overworked, these are great people. We cannot allow this trend of seeing an increase in shootings. There were over 60,000 attacks against our law enforcement officers last year alone. We cannot allow this to continue.

Madam Speaker, Pharma Bro Martin Shkreli should have dozens of jailbird colleagues for the unethical practices of many in the pharmaceutical industry. There is no question that the price of insulin, EpiPens, asthma inhalers and hundreds of other drugs are multiple times what they should be and that needs to change. While I support the goal of H.R. 6833, as written the bill does nothing to actually lower the price of insulin--and zero for other drugs. The bill simply mandates that the out-of-pocket cost not exceed $35 for insulin. If you think insurance companies are just going to eat this extra cost then I've got a bridge to sell. Insurance companies will simply increase premiums to cover the extra cost. This means everyone pays more. It's a shell game. Obamacare has been a mess and that law doesn't need any help in further raising insurance premiums. For that reason, I will vote `NAY' for the bill. The solution here is to actually lower the cost of the prescriptions. This can be done by stopping patent abuse by pharmaceutical companies, allowing importation of drugs from countries with appropriate quality control, and incentivizing generic manufacturers. H.R. 19 is a bill that takes steps in the right direction. I would vote for that, but I am working with another bipartisan group on a better solution.

Mr. Speaker, today we spend an average of $100 billion a year responding to disasters; $100 billion. This is a number that we can't afford to continue responding, continue reacting to disasters.

The National Institute of Building Sciences has done all sorts of analyses looking at the efficacy of making investments on the front end, Mr. Speaker, so we are not in a situation where, as in the chairman's case, we are having to go into Oregon, Washington, California, or other States out West, and pick up the pieces of these communities destroyed by forest fires; so we don't have to go into these communities that have been impacted by severe winter storms, communities living along rivers that have been inundated by floods, or communities on the southern coast, the Gulf Coast, or the East Coast that have been pummeled by hurricanes, such as our home State of Louisiana, with just in recent years, Hurricanes Laura, Delta, Zeta, Ida; some of the most powerful hurricanes to ever make landfall in the United States.

The National Institute of Building Sciences has found that for every $1 you invest in natural mitigation solutions, you get up to $13 in savings. By adopting more resilient building standards, building codes, you get up to $11 in savings.

Let me say it again, Mr. Speaker. We can't afford to keep doing this. $100 billion a year. As Ranking Member Graves noted a few minutes ago, back in 2018 we worked on a bipartisan basis to, actually, enact the BRIC program, to really take the PDM, the Pre-Disaster Mitigation grant program, and put it on steroids. Based on the incredible popularity of the program, the progress that has been made, this legislation helps to advance it even further. By increasing the funds that are available and, most importantly, by eating into that $100 billion we are spending in taxpayer funds every year responding to disasters, reducing that cost, Mr. Speaker, and the most important thing is the actual impact on the ground.

Those communities out West that are dealing with forest fires, helping to stop, prevent, and contain those forest fires.

Those communities that are experiencing devastation from winter storms, helping to protect and make them more resilient.

Communities that are getting repetitive floods, making sure those communities can withstand those floods, and those communities that we represent in south Louisiana that have had hurricane after hurricane that are truly challenging the existence, the livelihood of those communities, helping to make sure they can withstand these storms, and we can continue to live life and enjoy life in coastal communities like south Louisiana.

Lastly, Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Chairman DeFazio and Chairwoman Titus, Ranking Member Graves, and Ranking Member Webster.

We were able to include two amendments in here. Number one, we worked with Congressman Dunn on a very important amendment. Right now, FEMA takes so long to reimburse communities in the aftermath of a disaster, in many cases our parishes, our counties, and States have to take out loans, so there is an amendment added to this bill that mandates that FEMA pay the interest costs of the loan. If they are going to take forever to reimburse, they can at least cover the loan costs, the interest costs on the loan.

The second one is a government efficiency provision. Right now, the Corps of Engineers has the most arduous process in the Federal Government for developing projects, including cost-to-benefit ratios, environmental analysis, and technical feasibility, yet under current law, Corps of Engineers' projects are prohibited from receiving funds under the BRIC program or PDM. This fixes it. If that is the best solution, if that is the greatest cost savings, if it is the best efficiency of the dollar, my goodness, we shouldn't be stopping it, we should be incentivizing it.

I want to thank all the folks who worked together on this legislation. I look forward to enactment. I urge adoption of the bill.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record additional tributes from staff and friends of the late Rep. Don Young.

Michael Songer

DY Senior Legislative Assistant & Defense Policy Advisor

(2017-2022)

When it comes to the job, Congressman Young was the best

there ever was. I remember we were going to an event on Joint

Base Elmendorf-Richardson (JBER) and due to a

miscommunication, there was no memo for the Boss. So, there I

was, hand writing a memo on the hood of a pickup truck, in a

JBER parking lot. If I am honest, when I finished the memo, I

was quite proud of myself. However, because of how good he

was at doing the job, he didn't even need to refer to the

memo. Without looking at that piece of paper, he conveyed a

hopeful message full of jokes, pride, and an eye toward the

future. His off the cuff remarks to that audience of

servicemembers were better than anything I could have

written.

When you ask anyone who worked for Congressman Young about

their time working for ``The Boss,'' they will all have

numerous stories and experiences they will happily share. But

one thing they will all say is he was the best boss ever.

When I came on board, little did I know what the office and

the Boss would come to mean to me. Over 49 years, Team DY has

formed a family that has each other's backs. The Boss took a

chance on me and allowed me to join this family and I will

forever be grateful for the opportunity. I will miss him

greatly. But I know that when I look up at the sky and see a

raven flying, he's out there, watching over his family.

Nahali (Holly) R. Croft

Team DY--Personal Staff (2008-2011)

A lot has been said in the days since Congressman Young's

passing about how he was a tough, gruff fighter for Alaska.

I'm grateful to Congressman Garret Graves for allowing me to

share a memory that reinforces how important his constituents

always were.

When I'd been newly promoted to Legislative Correspondent--

a position in the Young office that handled a small portfolio

as training for taking on bigger issues once promoted to

Legislative Assistant--I turned in my first memo on

legislation in my purview being considered on the Floor that

day. To be honest, I was pretty proud of it. After all, I'd

read the information on the bill from our Whip's office, and

I'd consulted a few conservative think tanks for their

assessments as well. I handed the memo to the Legislative

Director, who approved it, and into the Congressman's office

I went, ready to give my vote recommendation. I handed

Congressman Young a copy of the memo, and he listened as I

went through the high points. Then, he sat back in his chair,

crossed his arms, and said, ``Okay, Miss Holly, now argue it

from the other side.''

I must have given a shocked look because he chuckled,

``It's important to know both sides. Just because we're

recommended to vote a certain way from our leadership doesn't

mean that we should.'' I think I must have continued to look

surprised, or perhaps confused, because I don't remember

responding before he continued, ``We need to choose what's

best for Alaska. That's not always what's best for the Lower

48. It makes me very unpopular at times with my colleagues,

and that's okay because I'm not here to represent them, am

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to thank Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Sam Graves, Subcommittee Chair Carbajal, and Ranking Member Gibbs for their bipartisan efforts on this legislation. I want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi), my friend, for working with us to ensure that American mariners are given a level playing field, and I want to thank all Members involved for the efforts to help to bolster the Coast Guard.

Mr. Speaker, the Coast Guard is often described as a Swiss Army knife. You take all the laws that are enforced on terrestrial grounds, and we effectively put all of those on the Coast Guard men and women to be carried out or enforced on America's oceans, on our seas, and our near-shore waters. This is an incredible task. Everything from maritime safety, maritime security, counter drug, alien interdiction and many, many other missions.

We have got to make sure if we are going to ask them to do such a challenging task that we give them the equipment. This bill authorizes the twelfth National Security Cutter. It authorizes six of the Fast Response Cutter, the Sentinel-class vessels that are going to bring better interoperability, better offensive capabilities, faster transit speed, the ability to operate in much more adverse conditions in regard to sea state, many, many other things.

This also includes a provision that Don Young included that prohibits Russian vessels from being in Alaskan waters, and I think that is very important, especially considering what we are going through right now. I think that is absolutely critical.

It also includes a provision that Congressman Huffman and I worked on on a bipartisan basis to ensure that AIS, the automatic identification system, requirements for fishing vessels of certain sizes are being applied to prevent illegal fishing or fishing that is beyond catch limits in our waters, so very, very important legislation being advanced today.

I want to thank everybody for working on it and, most importantly, I want to thank the fact that this bill is being named after Congressman Don Young. This is much deserved. I had the chance to work for him under John Rayfield when he was chair and absolutely very much deserve. I support the legislation.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and submit extraneous materials.

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Hill).

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Huffman).

Madam Speaker, I thank my friend from California.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Babin).

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Babin).

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Stauber) that served on both the National Resources Committee and the House Transportation Committee with Congressman Young.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. LaMalfa).

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Bost).

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Palmer).

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert).

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Higgins).

I thank my friend from Louisiana for his heartfelt message.

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Baird).

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mast).

I thank my friend from Florida.

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman), the ranking member of the House Natural Resources Committee.

Madam Speaker, it is an honor to yield to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the distinguished majority leader of the House.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Maryland for his remarks.

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

Madam Speaker, Don Young served in this Chamber for nearly five decades, for nearly 50 years. Prior to that, he was a teacher, a trapper, a gold miner, a boat captain, a legislator--an incredible background for somebody to serve in this Chamber, such a diverse background and diverse experiences.

I was in a meeting with him last year at the White House, and he stood up and said to President Biden: I need a picture with you. I have had a picture with nine other Presidents, and I need one with you.

I mean, just think about that, with nine other Presidents that he worked with, that he served with. The history there is unbelievable.

Everybody in this Chamber has a Don Young story. Everybody has an interaction that is incredibly memorable.

One of them that I won't forget is when we were at the White House and a bill was being signed into law that opened up the energy production in Alaska in an area--I think he told me he had been working on this for 30 years. He was so excited about it, and he turned around, looks back, and says: What I lack in intelligence, I make up for in perseverance.

Thirty years to get something done, but he wasn't going to stop.

There are so many stories about Don Young and that famous knife. That knife has been pulled out and involved in so many stories across that 50 years. I will bet that everybody in this Chamber has a story about that knife.

I believe there have been over 2,170 Members of the House who served with Don Young, and I think that all of them have a story of the knife.

I was standing in the back of the Cannon Caucus Room during a Conference meeting where there was a heated discussion about changes in indirect spending, and Don Young took it to the back of the room with the then-Speaker of the House, John Boehner. Don is right up in Speaker Boehner's face. I think that this is covered in Speaker Boehner's book. He got right up in his face, and he is yelling at him. Don takes that knife out--and to be clear, it was not open--but he had that knife right at the Speaker's neck. The Speaker's security detail starts walking in, and Boehner looks at them, and he is like, no, he is harmless.

There are so many stories, and they are all true--so many more. But I also want to say that while many people view this and believe this is the Don Young, the Don Young with the scowl that is portrayed in the media, I think this is the Don Young that so many of us actually know.

Don Young would swear. He would scream. He would yell. He would have his growls and his scowl. But this is the Don Young that we knew. He was a grizzly bear on the outside, but Don Young was a teddy bear on the inside.

I have been subjected to the yelling and the screaming and cursing and everything else, and I finally realized after years that I could just go to him and say, ``Don, shut up,'' and he would just make that face and start chuckling, the biggest teddy bear of a man.

There is a lot more to Don Young.

This is Don Young and Congressman George Miller, who was the ranking member of the House Natural Resources Committee. This was in the late nineties.

Don Young actually enacted 123 pieces of legislation, one of the most successful legislators to ever serve in this body.

This picture was taken after years of negotiation among these folks. This is Congressman Chris John of Louisiana, as well as the famous Congressman John Dingell of Michigan and Congressman Billy Tauzin of Louisiana. This was landmark conservation legislation that these guys worked on.

Don recognized the art of the deal. He recognized when you could actually get something done working together with other people. I will say it again, with 123 bills signed into law, Don was an amazing legislator.

He was also tough as nails. Something that people don't know, and I will go ahead and violate his HIPAA privacy here: Don Young was scheduled to have back surgery this week. He goes to the doctor, ``I have been having back pain,'' and folks will remember him walking around with a cane. He goes and gets a back X-ray and an MRI. He had a broken back. He had a broken back and was walking around, continuing to do his job fighting for the people of Alaska with a broken back. Don, I will say it again, was tough as nails.

Madam Speaker, to the citizens of Alaska, I would like to tell you that Don Young absolutely bled for your State. He fought for it; he defended it; and he bled for the State of Alaska. I will tell you that I know this because I worked for him. I had the honor of working for Chairman Young on the Transportation Committee, and it was always Alaska first.

There is a huge alumni class of hundreds and hundreds of people. I would tease Don all the time that I was the only person that was able to overcome the stigma of Don Young and make something of myself. I said that in jest, I want to be clear to the hundreds of Don Young alumni who are out there that is a phenomenal group of people.

Some people advocate for term limits in this body, and I agree. I think that term limits should happen. I think that some people when they are here for 2 weeks it is pretty clear that they should be term- limited.

But I will also tell you that Don Young, after nearly five decades fighting for the State of Alaska, he shouldn't have been subjected to term limits. He fought for that State every single day.

On the Wednesday before his death, he and I stood right over on the side of this Chamber, he was in his wheelchair, and we had a conversation. He was talking about the House versus the Senate. He was talking about how in the Senate, his senators had to work together and figure it out.

He talked about how, for Alaska, he was the people's voice. He was the only one. He was the people's voice. There was no delegation to fight with or negotiate with. It was Don--a State that is nearly one- fifth the size of the Continental United States; three times the State of Texas. Take that, Texas.

Many people believe that the fact that Alaska has one Member of Congress is because of a pesky little thing called the Census, or counting population, or the Constitution.

Madam Speaker, I submit to this body that the reason the State of Alaska has just one Member is because all you needed was Don Young.

Madam Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the distinguished gentlewoman from the State of California (Ms. Pelosi), the Speaker of the House.

Madam Speaker, I want to give tribute to Don's wife Anne and to his daughters, Joni and Dawn, his sister, but his family goes well beyond that. I have a number of statements from former alumni of the Don Young staffer world that submitted statements.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record several statements written by former staffers of Congressman Don Young: Michael Henry, Pamela Day, C.J. Zane, Sherrie Slick, Duncan Smith, Zack Brown, Jerry Hood, Jim Coon, Sophia Varnasidis, Lisa Pittman, Colin Chapman, Holly Lyons, David Schaffer, Jason Suslavich.

Michael Henry

Staffer to Dean Donald Edwin Young (R-AK)--Personal Office

(June 1996-November 1997)

House Committee on Resources

(November 1997-January 2000)

House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

(January 20001-November 2002)

Since the world lost the Dean of the House of

Representatives, Congressman for all Alaska, husband to Anne,

father to Joni and Dawn, friend and mentor, Don Young, I have

been asked several times to share a story or memory. How do

you sum up a person so impactful to your life, such a big

personality and titan legislator? I have been frozen, unable

to share much to encapsulate the man so important to so many,

including my family.

What keeps returning to my mind is the dichotomy of Don

Young. He was both gruff and held as large a heart as anyone

I have ever met. He was strategic in what he did and said and

will be remembered for what appeared as gaffs. He lived

without bias and will be remembered for straight forward

opinions. And he lived every day on his own terms and was one

of the most selfless people I have ever met. Which is why no

one version of Don Young could ever sum the totality of his

complex personality.

While our society is unlikely to allow another trapper

turned tugboat captain turn into a prolific legislator, we

should cherish the brash honesty that accompanied his sincere

caring and steadfast loyalty. While like all of us, I'm sure

he would choose to handle many situations differently with

the benefit of hindsight, I'm not sure he held any regrets.

And for those who disliked, Don Young for the caricature he

was made into, I will say it is that emotion which has fueled

the love the rest of us hold for the Dean of the North.

Nobody likes to be disliked, but that energy became part of

his lore and so many fiercely loyal to him.

One thing that wasn't complicated about Don Young was his

proficiency as a legislator. The numbers simply do not lie.

And, with his passing, we owe him the reflection of what he

truly was--one of the greatest legislators our country will

ever know. Don Young was the original sponsor of 123 bills

signed into Law by 10 Presidents--8 more bills signed into

law than the ``Lion of the Senate'', Ted Kennedy advanced

during his similar time in the Congress. And while that

statistic makes clear his importance to the legislative

branch of government, it was one I don't recall him ever

boasting about.

Don Young was far prouder of his service to the people's

body, the House of Representatives. Which spanned nearly 50

years. He routinely spoke about the 10 Presidents he worked

with and the 2,178 Members of the House of Representatives he

served with. It was the people and the relationships that

mattered to him, not how many votes he made (or missed),

getting the better of an opponent at a hearing or the

deference that was paid to him everywhere he went. He

appreciated a good deal and a real connection to the people

involved. He loved his colleagues and everyone he met with.

These were the people, as he liked to reflect, who taught him

something new every day. And that's what kept him in Congress

for so long--new issues that accompany each Congress and the

recalibration that comes with an ever-evolving body.

As I try to bring a story to close my reflection on

Congressman Don Young, my Chairman on two full Committees,

House Committee on Resources and Transportation and

Infrastructure, I am drawn to the fact that one of the

greatest negotiations of his career occurred during the time

I worked for him. It was a negotiation that had him to

working, and often arguing, with Republicans as forcefully as

Democrats. And ably navigating the Senate as well as a

formidable President Bill Clinton. At one point, his dutiful

staffer (me) added in a relatively junior Congressman Richard

Pombo (R-CA) to a high-level negotiation. Some of us were

concerned that Chairman Young needed a conservative backstop

so as not to give too much to the Democrats as we pursued a

deal. The result was his getting his way with all the various

factions and the crafting the most significant conservation

legislation of the time. Unfortunately, this bill was not one

of the 123 Don Young sponsored that became law, but

nonetheless, one of his greatest legislative achievements.

Even though the Conservation and Reinvestment Act (CARA) was

controversial on the left and right, he won a vote of 315 in

the House. That is legislating and that is what Don Young did

best.

The speed in how fast legislators are forgotten is off

putting, but Don Young's legacy is secure. He was the best

boss hundreds of staff could have dreamed to have. He

empowered us to be creative. He was mostly supportive, even

after a blunder. He always took the time to help us get

better and never begrudged any the opportunity to grow

outside his office with a career move. He spent every day

with a servant's heart. He worked to make the institution of

Congress better and came to work each day seeking

opportunities for Alaskans. We are all a less with his loss.

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