Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, today is the 50th anniversary of the Pell Grant Program.

This program was authorized in 1972 to provide direct financial aid to low-income students for access to higher education and the opportunity to pursue their full potential.

The effort that year was bipartisan, and the program maintains bipartisan support today, 50 years later.

More than 80 million students have received the Pell grant to attend college, and currently, 7 million students, about 40 percent of undergraduates, are utilizing the Pell grant to earn a degree today.

At Pennsylvania's land-grant institution, Penn State University, annually, about 18,000 students are using the Pell grant to access and afford a great degree at 20 undergraduate campuses throughout the Commonwealth, including two Penn State campuses in the counties I serve.

Mr. Speaker, for individuals, this program is critically important to access and affordability, but it also encourages degree completion, on- time graduation, and lower levels of student debt. For the Nation, this program is an essential investment to maintaining and strengthening our Nation's skilled workforce and enhancing global economic competitiveness.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the accomplishments of Mr. Andrew Rugh, an Eagle Scout from Troop 28 in Rocky Grove, Venango County, as he celebrates completing all 138 merit badges offered by the Boy Scouts of America.

Andrew has been a member of Troop 28 for more than 7 years and has had the support of his parents, Chad and Christina Rugh, throughout his time in Scouting.

Becoming an Eagle Scout is a great honor. Only 8 percent of all Scouts attain the rank of Eagle Scout, and less than half a percent of Scouts are estimated to have completed all available merit badges.

On his path to earning each merit badge, Andrew was challenged to learn various skills ranging from law and chess to archery and welding.

Alongside millions of young men and women in Scouting, Andrew embodies the values of patriotism, courage and self-reliance.

Madam Speaker, as an Eagle Scout myself, and a member of the Scouting community for more than 50 years, I can attest to the significance of Andrew's achievement.

Congratulations, Andrew, on your accomplishment in Scouting and your contribution to your community. Well done, Scout.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the distinguished career of Mr. Dale Moore as he celebrates his retirement from the American Farm Bureau Federation. For 40 years, Dale has been an instrumental leader in agriculture policy.

Dale earned his bachelor's degree in animal science from Fort Hays State University. Dale then began his professional career as a legislative assistant to former U.S. Congressman and Senator Pat Roberts. Dale then transitioned to the House Committee on Agriculture to serve as legislative director while Mr. Roberts was chairman.

After years of hard work on Capitol Hill, Dale served as executive director of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association. Dale then became the USDA's chief of staff for all four Secretaries under President George W. Bush.

Dale has spent the last 11 years of his career with the American Farm Bureau

Federation, serving as the executive director of public policy before being appointed executive vice president in 2018.

Dale has maintained an exemplary reputation for decades. He will be sincerely missed as he enters retirement, and his positive contributions to agriculture policy will be remembered for many years.

Congratulations, Dale, on your successful career. Best wishes to you in your next chapter.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize June as National Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Awareness Month. During the month of June, we raise awareness for those suffering from post- traumatic stress disorders.

After a trauma or life-threatening event, it is common to have reactions such as upsetting memories, increased jumpiness, or trouble sleeping. If these reactions do not go away, or if they get worse, you might suffer from PTSD.

PTSD is especially prevalent for those who have served in the military, affecting nearly 30 percent of Vietnam veterans and up to 20 percent of veterans who served during the global war on terror.

As a former rehabilitation specialist, I know firsthand the incredible strides individuals can make when they have access to appropriate rehabilitation.

PTSD Awareness Month is not only an opportunity to raise awareness about PTSD; it is also an opportunity to raise awareness about treatment options.

I applaud all the organizations that raise awareness about this important issue during June. There is help and support for those who have PTSD.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 7606 because, simply put, this bill does nothing in the immediate future to lower food and fuel costs.

Long before Russia's invasion of Ukraine, America's farm families and consumers were struggling with fractured supply chains, skyrocketing input costs, and historic levels of inflation, each of which continue to contribute to increased food prices and diminished inventories.

Despite these crises, Democrats have neglected to take serious action to incentivize increased American production. In fact, we are here today to debate a bill that compounds the situation, further limiting American farmers' abilities to meet global food demand and doubling down on the idea that more spending and big government will feed the world.

Adding insult to injury, the White House has been quick to blame the private sector and alleged industry concentration for the current crisis.

Economists across the spectrum--including former Obama and Clinton administration officials--have dismissed the strategy as misleading, at best, or otherwise, blatantly political.

So it is not surprising that at the behest of the White House, we are debating a package where the anchor piece of legislation perpetuates a tired narrative of blame, duplicates existing authorities, ignores industry and producers, and undermines the Department of Justice.

It is also not surprising the party of defund the police also has become the party of more cops for cows. At every turn, this administration has obsessively pointed the finger at the packing industry, in particular, blaming them almost singlehandedly for rising food costs.

They have done so via blog posts, contrived public events, and press briefings, all without any acknowledgment of the culpability of their own reckless spending and heavy-handed regulatory agenda.

My Democratic colleagues have dutifully played along, executing sensationalized hearings and political theatrics designed to support unvetted and controversial bills.

Mr. Speaker, it is no wonder many of us question the seriousness of the bill before us today. If this were a serious exercise, my Democratic colleagues would not have paired such an egregious example of legislative overreach with several other very thoughtful, very bipartisan bills.

If this were a serious exercise, my Democrat colleagues would not have added two unvetted Democrat amendments that are more about political point-scoring than genuine near-term policy solutions.

If this were a serious exercise, my Democrat colleagues would have worked with Republicans to form a concrete, immediate policy solution with a chance of consideration in the Senate.

Now, I know both parties understand the gravity of these issues. While we may have disagreements on policy, I was confident that we could find common-ground solutions, if given the opportunity.

I am dumbfounded as to why Democratic leadership would choose this moment--when consumers are deciding between gas in their cars or food on their tables--as an attempt to score political points, especially on the heels of a nearly 9 percent increase in consumer prices, the worst this Nation has seen since the Carter administration.

So, Republicans forged ahead, and we developed solutions. Earlier this week, Leader McCarthy and I, along with nearly 100 of our Republican colleagues, sent a letter to President Biden outlining administrative actions that he could take immediately to mitigate rising input costs, and strengthen the role that American agriculture plays in global food stability.

And yesterday, I, along with many of those same Members, introduced H.R. 8069, the Reducing Farm Input Costs and Barriers to Domestic Production Act. This bill would reverse many of the more harmful regulatory burdens spearheaded by this administration, address escalating input costs, and provide certainty to farmers, ranchers, agribusinesses, and other entities across the food and agriculture supply chain.

Specifically, the bill provides relief from EPA's unprecedented actions related to pesticides and other vital crop protection tools; offers clarity related to WOTUS regulations; rescinds the SEC's harmful proposed rule on climate-related disclosures; reinstates the 2020 NEPA streamlining; and requires an economic analysis on the costs and the benefits of GIPSA rules. These are all actions which would provide immediate relief to our farm families and households across the globe, and they all were rejected by the Rules Committee majority as amendments to the bill before us.

The letter and this bill stand in stark contrast to what we have seen from the White House and the Democrats in Congress and their efforts to scapegoat private industry for skyrocketing gas prices and sustained supply chain failures.

So, in short, the crises we are facing cannot and will not be mitigated with unfunded mandates, duplicative authorities, politicized agencies, and Big Government, all of which are laced into H.R. 7606.

I remain opposed to this bill and the process which got us here but stand willing to work with my colleagues on commonsense, near-term solutions to provide immediate relief to farmers, ranchers, foresters, and American consumers.

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

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas), the former chairman of the full House Agriculture Committee, who continues to this day to be an incredible advocate for agriculture and a mentor of mine as I have worked my way into this leadership role.

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

Mr. Speaker, I think we should see an extension, a little bigger of that poster that we saw there. That concentration occurred because of exactly what we are seeing today of government and Democrats leveling regulations. It was regulations that caused the concentration within the meatpacking industry. What happened when you put on more regulations, small- and medium-sized processors weren't able to continue to work. They couldn't cope with the compliance costs. They just couldn't handle those increased regulations.

Today, we are seeing not just additional regulations, but a whole new police officer being created under the poison pill within this legislation, special investigator bill.

I would argue that maybe we ought to blow that chart up a little more so we can see and project just how much more concentration occurs when we force more small- and medium-sized processors out of the business. It will result in increased concentration with this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Mann), a

great member of the Agriculture Committee who represents the Big First Congressional District.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman.

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

During the recent packer hearing, Chairman Scott mentioned that he used a chart compiled of what really was cherry-picked data with zero context to accuse all four of the major beef packing CEOs of price- fixing and collusion.

The packing executives explained the multitudes of supply and demand dynamics supporting the data, including the cyclical ebbs and flows of cattle production. Each of them denied the chairman's accusation under oath.

Despite their denial, this week at the Rules Committee, the chairman accused the packers of lying under oath. According to the chairman, a price-fixing scheme is the only plausible explanation for increased meat prices. It is no wonder I have serious doubts about this administration's ability to objectively carry out these new authorities.

I agree with the chairman, who is a dear friend. We work well together on well over 99 percent of everything that we engage on, just not this particular poison pill today. USDA is the right place to be the cop on the beat for this. In fact, they already are.

USDA already has an entire Packers and Stockyards Division charged with enforcing the Packers and Stockyard Act that has been in place since the 1930s. Based on the latest available data, they have filed and closed almost 1,900 cases just in 2020 alone. The division already consists of a team of seasoned attorneys, market specialists, and auditors, and it has the option to pursue administrative enforcement through USDA's Office of General Counsel before an administrative law judge or through the Department of Justice in Federal court.

I agree the USDA is the place for oversight of the packing industry, and it is already in place. This duplicative mandate with all the issues it brings is not warranted.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Crawford), the vice ranking member of the House Agriculture Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Rouzer), a member of the Committee on Agriculture.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Smith).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Rose), a strong agriculture advocate and a leader in agriculture.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Jackson).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Allen), a great member of the Agriculture Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am honored to yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Cammack), who is another great member of the House Agriculture Committee.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time is remaining on each side of the aisle.

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

Mr. Speaker, I just want to replow some of the fields and the comments that have been offered here today. One of my friends on the Agriculture Committee on the other side, Ms. Spanberger, claims industry support. She referenced two specific organizations. But it is certainly not widespread support among farmers and ranchers.

I will offer up this fact: Organizations that are constituted by farmers and ranchers, including the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, which is a large cattlemen's association throughout this country made up of men and women in the cattle industry, and the National Pork Producers Council are organizations that oppose this piece of legislation. The National Pork Producers Council is made up of farmers who raise hogs in so many different States in the United States of America. It is a huge industry in terms of agriculture. That organization opposes this bill.

The National Chicken Council--poultry--is huge certainly in the State of Virginia, the State of Pennsylvania, and the State of Georgia. They oppose this piece of legislation that is on the floor today. The same thing with the National Turkey Federation and the North American Meat Institute. All are in opposition to this bill that we are voting on today.

The American Farm Bureau Federation is not opposed publicly to the bill, but they have raised a litany of concerns and unanswered questions.

This bill comes with an additional price tag of $700 million, not offset, on many of the other provisions. Quite frankly, there are zero dollars for this duplicative poison pill part of this bill, the special investigator for cattle and pork. That leaves me concerned that the existing enforcement resources that I have already made reference to with USDA and the Department of Justice is going to be drained. We are actually probably going to see less effective investigations as a result of this.

We are going to see an increase in consolidation because it is a new layer. If you are a packer of any size, not just the four big ones, but medium and small size, and you have a new cop for cows on the beat, then you are going to have to add compliance staff to be able to prepare when, quite frankly, the Department of Justice and the Packers and Stockyards Division is already doing an incredible job. Active investigations are going on.

I agree with an earlier speaker, I think it was Mr. Lucas from Oklahoma, if there is evidence of price-fixing and collusion, we have a regulatory mechanism and a litigation mechanism. People should be held accountable to that.

Although there are some really good parts of this bill, I am also disappointed. We know that the only way we really get legislation through the other side of the Capitol, in the Senate, is where we show cohesion and where we stick together and work together. We have complete consensus on basically all the other aspects of this bill. We did request that this bill be divided and that the special investigator portion come out of the bill.

I think we could be scoring some victories for the American people and for the American farmers. But, quite frankly, I think to be in line with President Biden, because President Biden's approach to everything, all the problems that have been created with his ill-fated policies, is that it is somebody else's fault.

This is blaming the private sector, which works hard to provide us with the food that we need. This is blaming them when, quite frankly, it is a failure to take responsibility for what has happened on day one, starting with President Biden.

We would love to work with President Biden to make sure we can address inflation, but adding this $700 million today, I have never seen, in my lifetime anyway, or my experience, how you can spend more money and spend your way out of inflation. It just doesn't work that way. The economics do not work that way. The inflation issue, again, I have never seen inflation reduced by spending more money.

I would respectfully encourage, because we can go back to the drawing board and take each of these bills that are really good bills, the bipartisan and strong bills, we ought to take those up individually and give Congress an opportunity to speak on behalf of the American people and affirm that these are good bills. Let the special investigator stand on its own.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage a ``no'' vote on H.R. 7606, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I express my appreciation to the gentleman for bringing forth a concept that could provide relief, but not for many years.

This is an amendment to a bill that talks about immediate reduction in food prices, but this is kind of a long-term investment. I appreciate that concept, but it is not what this bill says. It really doesn't contribute to immediate relief to American consumers or reducing input costs for our farmers in the immediate or near term.

Working together is how the House Committee on Agriculture solves problems. The committee has been working together with the Department to better understand this amendment, its purpose, and its implications.

Mr. Speaker, the Department and I have agreed that this is not a near-term solution to the high price and limited availability of fertilizer.

As the gentleman knows, this amendment was pulled from consideration by my Democratic colleagues in a recent committee markup.

Unfortunately, we have not learned much since then, which furthers my opposition to it. Growing the size of government by codifying the Biden administration's half-baked initiatives, authorizing $100 million, specifying further use of the Commodity Credit Corporation, and minimally funded research programs is no way to tackle rising inflation or to address skyrocketing fertilizer costs. In fact, it leaves us in a rather more tenuous situation when it comes to our farmers.

The Commodity Credit Corporation is what we use and what we depend on and rely on when our farmers fall on difficult times. And they are there, these input costs.

Not in all commodities but in most commodities, we see a record price that they are getting for their commodity. But the fact is that agriculture is a business. Farming is a business. Ranching is a business. At the end of the day, it is the margin. It is not what you get paid. You have to consider what you are paying in input costs.

With this inflation, with these types of policies we are talking about today, there will be many commodities that soon will be upside down. They will be more expensive to produce than what they are able to get for price. There are commodities that are already at that point.

Draining the CCC in any year, in 2022, is not only wrong; it is dangerous. We are not going to have the resources to be able to help our farmers to keep them farming and to use the CCC for what its primary purpose and mission was about.

Even more perplexing is the idea we would want to solidify in law concepts that USDA admittedly has not developed into programming or policy, as the public comment period was just extended yet again.

Now, we would have been better served by considering Republican amendments, all of which would have provided immediate relief through reversing the regulatory assault stifling the innovation and exacerbating strained supply chains.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in opposing this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

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

The gentleman offered an amendment. He is a good friend. We do work together. Another area of jurisdiction on the Agriculture Committee that shocks people, actually, is cryptocurrency because it is a commodity and traded and overseen by CFTC. He has been such a great partner as we have worked together with those solutions.

The whole concept of bipartisan work, it is alive and well in the Agriculture Committee, but just not reflected with this poison pill that is in this particular piece of legislation.

With this amendment, I think, as I said before, yes, we need to be looking long term. But this legislation we are dealing with today, according to the Democrats, is supposed to have an immediate reduction in inflation.

While I believe we do need to do an investment long term and look at other methods of producing fertilizer, this doesn't really fit with reducing prices for American families today. To do it and do it right, we really do need USDA on board. We need to have their input. We need to have their ability to do this through their programming.

This is something I look forward to continuing to work on with the gentleman. I continue to voice my opposition to this amendment.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I express my appreciation to the gentlewoman from Virginia for bringing forth an idea, and I do wish the same courtesy had been extended to my Republican colleagues who were denied the opportunity to bring their amendments forward for debate.

Working together is how the House Committee on Agriculture solves problems, and the committee has been working together with the Department to better understand this amendment, its purpose, and its implications.

As the gentlewoman knows, this amendment was pulled from consideration by my Democrat colleagues in a recent committee markup. Unfortunately, we have not learned much since then, which furthers my opposition to it being considered prematurely on the floor today.

I cannot support this amendment as written, an amendment that falls short of its advertised goals, and does not offer any immediate relief to farmers, ranchers, or consumers, because that is the myth that my Democrat friends are trying to sell with the overall bill today, which will not happen. In fact, I am afraid inflationary costs, more concentration, are going to occur as a result of a specific part of the package.

Growing the size of government by codifying the Biden administration's half-baked initiatives is no way to tackle rising inflation or address rising fuel and fertilizer costs.

Even more perplexing is the idea that we would want to solidify in law concepts that USDA admittedly has not developed into programming or policy.

Now, we would have been better served by considering Republican amendments, all of which would have provided immediate relief through reversing the regulatory assault stifling innovation and exacerbating strained supply chains.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in opposing this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, to reiterate, in my comments, I said it was premature, and I do believe it is. I think that this is a concept that the gentlewoman is pursuing that is worthy of consideration, worthy of development and full development so that we can have an appropriate consideration of the text of this particular amendment.

I also think it is out of place with this particular bill because the context, the pretext that my Democratic friends are presenting here, is a false promise that whatever would pass, and if this would somehow find a pathway through the Senate and be implemented, that it would immediately lower food and fuel costs. That is just not the case.

This is more of a long-term vision. I appreciate that because I think we should be looking long term when it comes to the needs of input costs for our farmers because, quite frankly, when we have inflation, when we have burdensome regulations, when we have an administration that is really out of control from a regulatory perspective, sidelining their scientists at the EPA--which, by the way, actually, part of those are funded under a public-private partnership with agribusinesses to make sure that farmers can have access to crop protection tools, significant crop protection tools that have been sidelined by this administration, when these same scientists have found them to be safe in application in the past.

What I would say is that I look forward to working with the gentlewoman in the future on this concept, but I continue to remain in opposition.

This is not quite ready for prime time, not ready for consideration. We need to be working more. We need more time working in a bipartisan way and, quite frankly, hearing from the administration as well and

Mr. Speaker, I continue to offer my opposition to this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, June is Alzheimer's and Brain Awareness Month. Worldwide, there are an estimated 47 million people living with Alzheimer's and other dementias. Without a change, these numbers are expected to grow to 76 million by the year 2030.

Alzheimer's is the sixth leading cause of death in the United States and is the only leading cause of death that cannot be prevented, cured, or even slowed. Sadly, one in three seniors will die with the disease.

This disease took my mother's life.

Alzheimer's has a devastating impact on those who are diagnosed with the disease and their caregivers and loved ones. More than 16 million Americans provide unpaid care to family and friends living with Alzheimer's and other forms of dementia.

Compared with caregivers for people without dementia, twice as many caregivers for people with dementia indicate substantial emotional, financial, and physical stress.

Madam Speaker, the time to act is now. This month, let's wear purple and help raise awareness and advance Alzheimer's care.

Mr. Speaker, today is Flag Day and the U.S. Army's 247th birthday.

Every year on June 14 we celebrate our Stars and Stripes. We celebrate on June 14 because on this day in 1777 the Continental Congress approved the design for our first flag.

Over the years our flag has been changed to reflect the growth of our Nation, but one thing remains the same: It will always stand for freedom.

Our flag is a glorious symbol of hope for our brave servicemen and - women who salute it, defend it, serve it, and, in some cases, die to protect our freedom and liberty.

Today is also the U.S. Army's birthday. For the last 247 years, our servicemembers have been defending freedom at home and abroad.

Today, our Nation celebrates our Army and our flag, which symbolize both America being the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Cranberry High School and Middle School robotics teams from Venango County, Pennsylvania's 15th Congressional District.

Cranberry High School sent 19 students and 2 teachers to Dallas, Texas, to compete in the 2022 VEX Robotics World Championship in May. While in Dallas, Cranberry High School teams competed against more than 800 other teams from around the country and the world.

When it came time to compete, each team was paired randomly with another team to showdown against two other randomly paired teams. Each team participated in 10 2-minute rounds throughout the tournament.

To win, each team's robot had to coordinate with their allied team's robot to complete certain tasks in the rink before their opponents did. This required each team to work together with a team of strangers, sometimes from another country.

This opportunity allowed Cranberry High and Middle School students to broaden their horizons, as well as explore future careers in the robotics and engineering fields.

Congratulations to the 19 students who participated in such a great event.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize June as National Dairy Month.

As Republican leader of the House Agriculture Committee, I am proud to be a descendant of a long line of dairy farmers. In fact, Pennsylvania is one of the largest milk-producing States in the Nation. We are home to more than 474,000 cows.

National Dairy Month began as National Milk Month in 1937. Now, it has developed into an annual tradition that celebrates the contributions the dairy industry has made to the world. From calcium to potassium, dairy products like milk contain 13 essential nutrients, which may help to better manage your weight, reduce your risk for high blood pressure, osteoporosis, and certain cancers.

Yet, for too long, dairy products like milk have been unfairly demonized. Not only does it hurt our dairy industry, but it has also resulted in the loss of nearly an entire generation of milk drinkers. Kids have been cheated out of the nutrition that they need.

Madam Speaker, whether it is protein to help build and repair the muscle tissue of active bodies or vitamin A to help maintain healthy skin, dairy products are a natural nutrient powerhouse. Those are just a few reasons we should celebrate dairy, not just in June but every day all year long.

Happy National Dairy Month.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Pat Pecora, Pitt-Johnstown's wrestling coach, on his fourth NCAA Division II National Wrestling Coach of the Year Award.

This award is presented to the coach who has demonstrated outstanding effort throughout the season in developing and elevating their program on campus and in the community. Pat has previously received this award in 1995, 1999, and 2019 for his efforts at Pitt-Johnstown.

This season, Pat led the Mountain Cats to a 13-1 dual-meet record and the program's 24th NCAA regional title. This year's team won a share of the PSAC dual-meet title for their sixth straight conference championship.

This recognition is well-deserved for Pat; and he is the all-time winningest coach in college wrestling at all divisions of the NCAA. In his 46 years at Pitt-Johnstown, he has recorded 631 victories.

Madam Speaker, Pat is an incredible coach and a great role model for the Pitt-Johnstown community.

Congratulations again on this well-deserved recognition and award.

Go Mountain Cats.

Madam Speaker, first of all, I thank my colleague from Virginia for hosting and coordinating this time tonight on an incredibly important issue for rural America.

Madam Speaker, this year marks the 30th anniversary of the 340B Federal drug pricing program. I am very familiar with this program, having worked for 28 years in rural hospitals where this 340B program was incredibly important for consumers, for patients, to be able to get access to the medications that they require but also equally important as a lifeline for our rural hospitals.

Rural hospitals today, in my experience, having worked within these facilities for almost three decades, most hospitals are lucky to break even, especially rural hospitals. It is very challenging financially, but we know how important they are.

We know that these tend to be the economic engines within our rural communities. These are the source of great jobs. This is access to quality healthcare. When these rural hospitals close, the economic impacts, the healthcare impacts, the health impacts are significant and negative for those communities.

I can't tell you how many times, Madam Speaker, I have seen the 340B program be the difference between a red, losing year, where you bleed money, you lose money--and you can do that for only so long until a hospital has to shutter its doors and lay people off--and perhaps breaking even or even just a slight margin.

In rural healthcare, a rural hospital, a 1 to 2 percent margin is a banner year. It is a great year. That is hardly enough to invest in modern, lifesaving technology or to invest in your staff to recruit and retain those qualified providers that are the key part of all healthcare. It really comes down to the providers, having those folks and retaining them.

The 340B program, I can tell you in all the decades of my healthcare experience where I have seen it, has made the difference of having a margin to be able to keep the lights on; to be able to invest in lifesaving advances, technology, equipment; and, quite frankly, retain and recruit the best and the brightest.

This was enacted in 1992, originally. The 340B drug pricing program requires pharmaceutical companies to provide certain healthcare organizations, like federally qualified health centers and rural hospitals, discounts on their drugs in exchange for having their drugs covered by Medicaid.

The program was created with a purpose to ``stretch scarce Federal resources to reach more eligible patients and provide more comprehensive services''--a worthy cause, a worthy mission.

As the Member representing Pennsylvania's 15th Congressional District--it includes 14 counties, nearly 25 percent of the land mass of the Commonwealth--I am a strong advocate for the 340B program as it is a lifeline to many of my constituents. As I said before, I have worked within those systems. I have seen it firsthand.

Sadly, the 340B program is under attack. Some drug manufacturers have stopped honoring the 340B discounts. In other words, if a health center receives 340B savings, it is usually unable to keep them because third parties have found creative ways to pick the 340B savings out of the center's pockets. This is simply unacceptable and hurts those who truly need these medications.

For these reasons, I am proud to be a cosponsor of H.R. 4390, the PROTECT 340B Act, which prohibits these types of practices and ensures 340B savings remain where Congress meant them to go: with the safety- net providers and the medically underserved patients that they care for.

Madam Speaker, I am going to continue to support policies that strengthen the 340B program. I am going to work to ensure any developments that threaten the ability of safety-net providers to provide critical health services, including the many in my congressional district, are stopped in their tracks.

I really very much appreciate the gentlewoman from Virginia for her leadership on this and all of my colleagues who have come together tonight to defend a program that is about access for healthcare consumers and access to healthcare in rural America.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the storied career of Mr. Jeff Shipp as he celebrates his retirement from the Farm Credit Council.

Jeff has worked in and around the Farm Credit System for virtually his entire adult life. Raised as a true D.C. native, Jeff earned his bachelor's degree from the University of Maryland before obtaining his master's at Tulane University.

Jeff's notable career working on Farm Credit issues started as an internship on Capitol Hill before he moved to USDA and what was then known as the Farmers Home Administration.

He then went to work representing farmers at the National Wheat Growers Association, which led him to the Farm Credit team in 1987.

Perhaps one of the most distinguished moments of his career was when he worked to help pass the Farm Credit Act of 1987, which stabilized Farm Credit and set it on the sustainable path the organization continues to enjoy today.

Jeff's representation in Washington is second to none. Jeff has been the face of Farm Credit for many on Capitol Hill, and he will certainly be missed as he enters retirement.

Farm Credit, American agriculture, and our country are better off because of Jeff's exceptional work.

Congratulations, Jeff, on your very successful career, and best wishes to you and Susan for a long and happy next chapter.

Mr. Speaker, Lions Clubs International is on Capitol Hill this week for their annual meetings with Members of Congress. I am a member of my hometown

organization, the Howard Area Lion's Club, so I know firsthand the good that this club does around the world.

Just a few years ago, during a Lion's Club reception at the Capitol Visitor Center, I spoke with a Lion named Jimmy Ross. Jimmy is a past president of Lions Club International, and he organized the Capitol Hill visit that year. He shared an idea to create a congressional caucus to highlight the work and the policies of nonprofit service organizations like Lions, Rotary, Kiwanis, Optimist, and others, and I loved the idea.

Together with Congressman Jimmy Panetta of California, who is a Rotarian, we founded the Congressional Service Organization Caucus in 2019. Tomorrow, the Congressional Service Organization Caucus will host its first briefing. Speakers from Lions, Rotary, Kiwanis, and Optimist clubs will share how their members strive to make the world a better place one community at a time.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join the Congressional Service Organization Caucus to ensure that service to others remains a vital part of American life for generations to come.

Madam Speaker, this weekend, tens of thousands of law enforcement officers from across the country will arrive in Washington for National Police Week.

Established by a joint resolution of Congress in 1962, National Police Week pays special recognition to those law enforcement officers who have lost their lives in the line of duty for the safety and protection of others.

National Police Week is a collaborative effort of many organizations dedicated to honoring America's law enforcement community. The National Peace Officers' Memorial Service and Candlelight Vigil will take place later this evening, allowing the Nation to pause and remember the officers who have made that ultimate sacrifice.

This week honors the men and women in blue who gave everything to protect their country and their communities.

Earlier this year, Pennsylvania mourned the loss of two State troopers, Martin Mack III and Branden Sisca, who were killed in the line of duty on March 21, 2022.

Our officers put on their uniforms each day knowing that they can be in harm's way at any moment.

On behalf of a grateful Nation, thank you to all our officers who serve.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.

Today, we have the great opportunity to move one step closer to reducing poverty across the Nation. The community services block grant is the only Federal program with the explicit and overreaching goal of reducing poverty regardless of its cause.

Originally, created in 1964, the program established local community action agencies to help identify why people were in poverty and how to address it using public and private resources. It was a public-private partnership. Community action agencies are governed by boards that are largely made up of business and industry community leaders in those counties.

Funds for this program help families and individuals achieve self- sufficiency, find and retain meaningful employment, attain an education, make better use of available income, obtain housing, and achieve greater participation in community affairs. Virtually every county in the United States has a community action agency which helps low-income individuals and families move from poverty to independence.

CSBG has not been reauthorized in more than two decades, and today's vote will renew our commitment to reducing poverty and strengthening communities across the country.

H.R. 5129 reauthorizes the community services block grant program for 10 years at an annual level of $1 billion for the first 5 years. It maintains local control of community action planning and activities. It is largely business and industry leaders that constitute those boards. It authorizes a broadband navigator program to respond to the broadband and digital needs of low-income families and communities to find pathways out of poverty.

Madam Speaker, it does so much more.

CSBG requires some modernization to allow agencies the ability to tap their full potential and better serve families and communities. While this program has a strong history of bipartisan support, some of my colleagues have alleged faith-based organizations will no longer be able to participate in the CSBG program if this bill becomes law. This is simply untrue.

Faith-based organizations are longstanding and essential partners in community action networks. They serve as incredible forces of good in their communities.

Philippians 2:4 tells us, ``Let each of you look not only to his interests, but also to the interests of the others.''

Madam Speaker, as a man of faith and longtime member of the Congressional Prayer Caucus, the last thing I would do is support legislation that removes faith-based organizations entirely from actively and equally participating in CSBG. There have been longstanding Federal regulations which were expanded under the George W. Bush administration that allow faith-based organizations to partake in Federal programs without compromising their religious beliefs. These regulations now apply to nine Federal departments and agencies, including HHS.

The Trump administration also reaffirmed these regulations through the final rule titled Equal Participation of Faith-Based Organizations in the Federal Agencies' Programs and Activities.

This bill makes Federal policy clearer, and it maintains the same protections for faith-based providers in CSBG-funded activities.

Madam Speaker, it is time for Congress to reaffirm our Nation's commitment to reducing poverty by reauthorizing the CSBG, and I urge my colleagues to support the passage of this righteous legislation.