Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join a number of my colleagues in strong support of the National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities. These venerable institutions, which both recently celebrated their 50th anniversaries, are a cornerstone of American cultural expressions. Sadly, they are also under attack.

The President's recent budget outline called for the defunding and dismantling of the Endowments. So I have gathered here with my friends and colleagues in the hope that we can help the President change his mind and demonstrate to him the immense benefit that the NEA and the NEH bring to our districts, our country, and, in fact, the world.

Being a Rhode Islander, I have always felt a special connection to the arts and humanities. Rhode Island was founded as a colony that welcomed free expression of religion, and that freedom of thought quickly translated into an independent mindedness that drove creative endeavors. It is no wonder, then, that into such an environment was born one of the 20th century's great statesmen and a champion of the arts, our late senior Senator, Senator Claiborne Pell.

Senator Pell was a mentor of mine, and I actually had the privilege of interning with him twice at one point. He is rightly lionized for many of his legislative achievements, including the Pell grants that bear his name. But I believe that no issue was closer to his heart than that of preserving and promoting American art and culture.

Anyone who knew the Senator knew that his own passion was reflected and redoubled by his wife, the indomitable Nuala Pell, one of the great supporters of the arts that my State and our country has ever seen. The National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities can trace their beginnings to the passions of the Pells, the vision of President Kennedy, and the determination of President Johnson.

President Kennedy began his term with a focus on American culture, when he invited Robert Frost to read a poem at his inauguration. He soon followed this up by appointing August Heckscher his Special Consultant on the Arts. Heckscher's report entitled, ``The Arts and the National Government,'' led to the creation of the President's Advisory Council on the Arts.

Meanwhile, Senator Pell, the chairman of the Senate Special Subcommittee on the Arts and Humanities, was hard at work. He began his first hearing in 1963 with this statement: ``I believe that this cause and its implementation has a worldwide application; for as our cultural life is enhanced and strengthened, so does it project itself into the world beyond our shores. Let us apply renewed energies to the very concept we seek to advance: a true renaissance--the reawakening, the quickening, and above all, the unstinted growth of our cultural vitality.''

So over the next 2 years, working with legislators including Senators Hubert Humphrey and Jacob Javits and Representatives Frank Thompson and William Moorhead, Senator Pell crafted President Kennedy's vision into a reality. With the full support and assistance of President Johnson, the National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Act was signed into law on September 29, 1965.

The first Chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities, incidentally, was another Rhode Islander, Barnaby Keeney, then president of Brown University.

Mr. Speaker, I begin this hour with a survey of history for a couple of reasons. First, I think that it is vital that both Members and the President understand the care and consideration that went into creating the Endowments. So years of deliberation by some of our finest legislators went into the determination made in the arts and said:

While primarily a matter for private and local initiative,

the arts and humanities are also appropriate matters of

concern of the Federal Government.

So there is no doubt that private foundation and corporate philanthropy are the bedrock of artistic funding in this country. Nonetheless, there is an important role for government at all levels to play, and the Endowment serves as the catalyst for governmental involvement.

Second, looking back helps remind us of the aspirations that drove the creation of the Endowments in the first place. Last week, we learned of the death of Yevgeny Yevtushenko, a Soviet poet who defied his totalitarian government. When President Kennedy brought poetry to his inauguration, it was in direct contrast to the Soviet Union, where literary dissidents were imprisoned or exiled and not given freedom to create.

What a message to send to the world in the 1960s, that the United States prized artistic expression, celebrated scholarly inquiry, and believed in the strength and progress embodied by multiculturalism. So the playwright in New York was not censored. He was cheered. A historian in North Carolina was greeted not with accusation, but acclaim. The painter in Nevada was not imprisoned; she was empowered.

Placed in context, the message sent by the creation of the Endowments was that America's culture was not just an asset to be protected, but a powerful tool for promoting freedom worldwide.

Just as importantly, the 1965 act recognized that American culture was not static. Rather, its evolution over time was the source of its power. However, I believe the most important reason to begin with the history of the Endowments can be found in the Arts and Humanities Act itself: ``An advanced civilization must not limit its efforts to science and technology alone, but must give full value and support to the other great branches of scholarly and cultural activity in order to achieve a better understanding of the past, a better analysis of the present, and a better view of the future.''

Why do we study the arts and humanities? Why do we promote them in the Halls of Congress? ``To achieve a better understanding of the past, a better analysis of the present, and a better view of the future.''

Mr. Speaker, I co-chair the Congressional Cybersecurity Caucus, a caucus that owes its very name to the work of an artist, William Gibson, who first coined the phrase ``cyberspace'' in 1984. Gibson helped create the lexicon that we use today to describe the internet as we know it and, in so doing, helped to shape its development and growth--a better view of the future, indeed.

For years, I promoted the STEM to STEAM movement, the concept of adding art and design to the STEM disciplines of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.

Incidentally, this movement is another product of my home State, courtesy of the brilliant minds at the Rhode Island School of Design, in particular, as I understand it, then former President John Maeda, who, as I understand, coined the term ``STEM to STEAM.''

Incorporating principles of art and design in STEM helps foster creativity, encourages collaboration, and can engender sudden, inspired breakthroughs, all by helping to better analyze the present.

So in my role in the Armed Services and Homeland Security Committees, I am presented daily with new threats brought on by the advent of new technologies or fast-moving global events. The temptation to act quickly is strong, and sometimes immediate reaction is warranted; but more often than not, it is through examination of the past that I find a path forward.

These United States have weathered many crises over the centuries-- some of our own making--but by better understanding of them, I can better analyze the present and better see a future of America peaceful, prosperous, and free.

Mr. Speaker, I know my colleagues have stories to tell of the great works that the NEA and NEH have supported in their districts, and I will share some of those stories as well. But I hope my words on the history of the Endowments have helped shape our understanding of their incredible purpose and ideals of President Kennedy, President Johnson, Senator Pell, and their colleagues.

America is better for the Endowments existing. The world is better for it. To cast them away in a budget outline that zeros them out without even a word of justification is a tragedy.

It dismisses the ideals of our forbearers as insignificant. It ignores the half century of work that many of my colleagues here have done to promote our culture through the Endowments. And in the cruelest of ironies, it does so without engaging with the very disciplines it dismisses as unneeded. It cannot and will not go unchallenged.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price). The gentleman has co-led this effort with me, and he proudly co-chairs the Caucus on the Humanities.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his outstanding comments, his insights, and his leadership on the arts and humanities issues. As co-chair of the Humanities Caucus here in the Congress, I appreciate his efforts in helping me organize and colead this effort to speak out against the effort to zero out the National Endowments for the Arts and the Humanities budget. We hope it will not stand, and we hope that the President will reconsider his initial budget proposal.

I am proud to yield to a number of my colleagues and want to begin with the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), no shrinking violet himself, someone who is artistic and colorful in his own right, but it is no surprise to me that being from New Jersey he would be here since it was one of his late colleagues, the former Congressman from New Jersey, Frank Thompson, who was the House sponsor of the National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Act.

Mr. Speaker, I know everyone is on a tight time schedule, but I thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell) for staying and contributing his thoughts and his support to this effort.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline). I know that he is on a tight schedule to try to catch a train at noon.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Cicilline from Rhode Island for his comments and also for his partnership in helping to support the arts and humanities back home in Rhode Island and in our country as a whole. As the gentleman said, we have a special connection to the arts and humanities, given the leadership of our late senior Senator Claiborne Pell who created the National Endowment for the Arts and Humanities in the first place, along with the support of his wife, Nuala Pell, who David and I both know very well.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Adams).

I thank the gentlewoman for her presence here today but,

most especially, for her outstanding words and participation in this effort. Thank you for what you have contributed here today, your wonderful perspective. I hope it catches the President's attention and, hopefully, reverses this effort to zero out funding for the National Endowments for the Arts and the Humanities.

Mr. Speaker, some may think of the arts and humanities as just luxuries or extras, but they are not. They are central to who we are. It is also about the jobs they create and how the artists and the folks from the humanities contribute to our economy, people who earn a living and pay taxes and, again, are a vibrant part of our communities, our States, and our country. So that is something else that is important to remember.

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud now to yield to my colleague from New York (Mr. Tonko), who has an important perspective to offer.

I thank the gentleman from New York for his comments and for his leadership on this issue.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time we have remaining?

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield now to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Foster).

I thank the gentleman from Illinois for his great comments and for his participation here today. It is very deeply impactful, and I am grateful.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time remains?

Mr. Speaker, like my colleagues, I too have stories of the impact that the National Endowments for the Arts and the Humanities have back home, and some of these stories are small and deeply personal. I would like to thank the wonderful leaders of the Rhode Island Arts and Humanities Council for helping to collect them so that I can share them with everyone here today.

The State of Rhode Island is deeply indebted to Randy Rosenbaum and Dr. Elizabeth Francis for their work in promoting the arts and humanities. The State councils are an essential component of the Endowments' efforts, and we are incredibly lucky in Rhode Island to have Elizabeth and Randy heading up our initiatives.

One of the stories they shared comes from FirstWorks, an NEA- supported organization that helps connect students experiencing new types of performance with artists premiering new pieces. FirstWorks recently helped bring together a Philadelphia hip-hop group with high school students in downtown Providence. The students participated in a workshop with one of the dancers one day and followed it up with a lecture and a matinee performance the next.

FirstWorks had just created a Spanish-language version of their student survey, which they administered after the matinee performance. Students were asked to rate their enjoyment and explain why they gave their answer. Two Spanish-speaking students responded that they loved the performance because it was ``the first time they went to one.''

The FirstWorks team weren't exactly sure what the students meant. Was it the first matinee? Was it the first time seeing the hip-hop group? So they followed up with the teacher, who wrote back: ``These students have never been to a live performance. It just goes to show you how important these opportunities are for our population. They will remember this forever.''

This is the kind of impact the arts can have on our communities.

Another story comes from an artist who has, with the help of State Arts Council funding, been working with underserved communities for 6 years. She helps students learn to apply themselves to art projects in a way that builds self-confidence and helps them learn the power of their imaginations. About an elementary school student named Danny, she wrote: ``When I first started working with him, he did nothing but whine and cry and insist he couldn't do anything. With my encouragement, he took his own ideas and went with them--in a puppet workshop, he made three stuffed animals instead. He sleeps with them every night now. They make him feel safe.''

There are hundreds of these stories in Rhode Island alone, and they would simply not be possible without the support of the Endowments.

Of course, some projects supported by NEA and NEH are on a much larger scale. It is virtually impossible right now to find a Rhode Islander who, today, doesn't know about WaterFire, Providence's massively successful creative placemaking project. I have experienced this wonderful WaterFire many times myself.

For those of my colleagues who have not had the pleasure of attending a WaterFire--and, Mr. Speaker, I am happy to extend an invitation to all of my colleagues to come and to visit--it is a dynamic sculpture, basically, with dozens of these metal baskets or metal braziers transforming the rivers of downtown Providence.

This groundbreaking artwork has completely transformed Saturday nights in Providence, with tens of thousands of people flocking downtown for each lighting and the performances, music, and camaraderie that accompany it. It is hard to describe it in words, but it has been transformative. WaterFire really has fundamentally altered the way Providence is viewed and the way the people of Providence view themselves. Support from NEA is helping WaterFire further explore creative placemaking, and it is incredibly meaningful.

A final thought to share comes from Professor Touba Ghadessi, a board member for the Rhode Island Council on the Humanities. Professor Ghadessi was asked to share her thoughts on why NEH matters for all Rhode Islanders, and I truly cannot improve upon her words. This is what she had to say:

``The Rhode Island Council for the Humanities uncovers beautiful stories about individuals and places and brings them to life--these stories become our history and make us understand that we, too, write the narratives that construct culture. The intentionally diverse programming that RICH supports builds communities that, eventually, will view diversity as normalcy--this normalcy is the one I aspire to construct for the next generation. RICH allows for our best selves to come forward and celebrate together what culture teaches us--from the struggles of social justice, to the legacy of first peoples, to the craft of filmmaking for children. All of these things matter. All of these things make us better human beings. All of these things turn us into ethical and engaged citizens of the world. Without an understanding of the humanities, opinions become facts and truth is debatable. History has offered us a roadmap to behaving with integrity--we can't ignore it or ignorance wins.''

Mr. Speaker, I cannot think of more important words for these times, and I would ask all of my colleagues to reflect on what it will take to view diversity as normalcy and why it seems today that the truth is debatable.

Mr. Speaker, I thank all my colleagues for being here today. I am proud to share my thoughts on why it is so important that we not zero out the National Endowment for the Arts and Humanities and the incredible impact they have on our communities.

I have one more story from my district about the impact of the arts and humanities that I'd like to share.

It, too, relates to the legacy of Senator Pell, but it also points to the broader cuts to arts and humanities in the President's budget outline.

A decade after the passage of the National Foundation for the Arts and Humanities Act, Senator Pell was again at the forefront of cultural preservation and promotion when he sponsored legislation creating the Office of Museum Services.

While the Office was eventually rolled into the Institute of Museum and Library Services, it continues to support great work, which I saw firsthand last year in my district when the Tomaquaq Museum in Exeter was awarded the prestigious National Medal for Museum and Library Service.

Recently, we in Rhode Island have been celebrating the 350th anniversary of our charter and Roger Williams's respect for the Indigenous People he lived among.

But far too often, this story treats Rhode Island's tribes as bit players rather than delving into their rich culture and history.

The Tomaquag Museum's founders recognized this flaw in the narrative in the 1950s, and while I'm disappointed it took the rest of us so long to catch up, I'm incredibly proud of all the recognition it's received of late.

The Tomaquag Museum remains the only Rhode Island institution dedicated solely to the history and culture of the state's indigenous population, and I have experienced its power to start conversations and change attitudes in our communities.

Unfortunately, IMLS, too, is slated for defending under the President's budget outline.

We are very lucky that my home state Senator, Jack Reed, has taken up Senator Pell's mantle in pushing for its reauthorization and full funding.

But it is important that all of my colleagues join together to protect the NEA, the NEH, IMLS, and support for the arts and humanities throughout the federal budget.

We must do so because of the lives touched and forever altered by these organizations.

We must do so in order to achieve a better understanding of the past, a better analysis of the present, and a better view of the future.

We must do so because it is good policy.

I hope that hearing the stories shared today has helped cement that fact in the minds of my colleagues, and I look forward to working with them to continue to promote the arts and humanities.

With that, I again thank all my colleagues who joined me this morning.

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

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, dozens of Syrians suffered yet again at the hands of Bashar al-Assad when he employed chemical weapons in an attack that left children gasping for air and suffering in the middle of the streets. In the deadliest chemical attack in Syria since 2013, the death toll has now surpassed 70 and continues to rise.

This attack was morally reprehensible, but let's be clear: this attack is the fault of President Assad, and it is a war crime. He must be held accountable for his actions, as must the Russian regime that continues to enable his acts of carnage.

Such barbarism is an attack on our collective humanity, and a chemical attack of this nature must never happen again in Syria or anywhere else in the world, and the world must not look the other way.

Mr. Speaker, I condemn this attack and these actions in the strongest possible terms. I am grateful to the humanitarian groups and the medical personnel who are tending to these wounds today. My heart breaks for the victims who were injured and killed in Syria.

Let us speak out as a world with one voice to condemn this attack and say: Never again.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this resolution of disapproval, which would repeal broadband privacy rules being implemented by the FCC.

As co-chair of the Congressional Cybersecurity Caucus, I hope I can offer some additional perspective on this debate. Studying the many threats our country faces in cyberspace, I have become deeply aware of how ingrained the internet is in every aspect of our lives and our economy. And that has also helped me understand the unique role of broadband service providers to grant access to the great potential of the Information Age.

By necessity, ISPs see every bit of traffic that leaves your network for the broader internet. Even when you use encryption, ISPs can still capture data about whom you are talking to or what sites you are visiting. These data are sensitive, and consumers have a right to decide whether or not they can be shared or monetized. Unfortunately, the resolution of disapproval under consideration would strip consumers of that right and presumptively allow sharing and selling without your permission.

Mr. Speaker, the resolution before us today that the Republicans have proposed is downright creepy. It is going to allow potentially unprecedented abuse of personal or private information be shared without your permission. This cannot stand. I urge my colleagues to oppose it.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the Republican effort to gut the Affordable Care Act, an effort that will result in millions of people across the country and tens of thousands of my constituents in Rhode Island to lose their health coverage, and it will ultimately result in costs rising.

Before the ACA was passed, the House held 79 hearings over the course of a year. Today's Republican plan was pushed through three committees without a single hearing and with substantial changes being made behind closed doors in the dead of night.

Mr. Speaker, I am a veteran of many healthcare debates, and I can tell you this is not how sound policy is made, especially policy that will have real consequences for hardworking Americans.

Since the passage of the ACA, I have had faith that Republicans and Democrats could come together to strengthen the law and further improve healthcare for all Americans. There is still that opportunity to come together, Mr. Speaker, but the rule, along with the underlying bill, has shaken that faith.

Supporting the rule means putting ideology above the well-being of the American people. This does not have to be a zero-sum game. I know that we can come together.

Let's defeat this rule and the bill. Come together in a bipartisan way to fix the problems of the ACA.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the Republican effort to gut the Affordable Care Act.

Twenty million people, including 100,000 Rhode Islanders, receive health coverage under the ACA. Because of the proposed plan to repeal the ACA that the Republicans are proposing, they are now threatened with losing that coverage.

Instead of working in a bipartisan manner to improve the law, this bill will eliminate coverage for 24 million people, while drastically increasing healthcare costs on hardworking middle class Americans.

Over the next 5 years, Rhode Island officials estimate Medicaid cuts would cost the State $595 million to make sure that 75,000 low-income adults don't lose coverage.

Now, this is a burden that my State or others cannot afford to bear, and it will decimate services and supports for low- and middle-income adults, children, seniors, and especially people with disabilities.

Mr. Speaker, we are better than this as a country. Americans' health will be jeopardized if consumer protections and comprehensive coverage developed under the ACA are cast aside in a partisan push to repeal.

Let's not do this. Let's join together instead and make improvements to the ACA to make it better. Let's not work against us to repeal it.

I urge my colleagues to oppose this unconscionable bill.

Mr. Speaker, exactly 7 years after the Affordable Care Act became law, we now anticipate a vote this week on a Republican plan to gut it.

Mr. Speaker, the ACA expanded health coverage to 20 million people and expanded Medicaid to help our most vulnerable populations, changes that resulted in coverage for more than 100,000 Rhode Islanders.

Last week, I joined Democratic colleagues at a hearing to discuss the Republican plan, a hearing Republicans should have organized to assess the impact of their bill, which CBO estimates will result in 14 million additional uninsured by 2018 and 24 million people losing their health insurance by 2026.

Mr. Speaker, the Republican plan is not the solution to strengthen our health system. It ignores the sick, the poor, the disabled, and the elderly. Mr. Speaker, Americans cannot benefit from the systemic changes in care delivery, the breakthrough treatments of tomorrow, or improved access to today's therapies if the Republican plan is passed.

Mr. Speaker, we should be working in a bipartisan way to improve the Affordable Care Act, not gutting it.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the mission of NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, now under attack by the Trump administration.

An assault on NOAA, Mr. Speaker, is an assault on science. NOAA is a data-driven organization with proven research in the public interest. NOAA defends our coasts from the surges we have seen from Sandy, Irene, and other storms. NOAA's satellites keep watch day and night, providing up-to-the-second data to farmers, forecasters, and fishermen.

Mr. Speaker, I acknowledge the Trump administration's denial of climate damage, but I do not understand it. Defunding NOAA, as the President's budget purportedly does, does not make our climate problems simply go away. The mission of NOAA isn't just about our environment. American businesses rely on its data every day to give them an economic advantage. After all, there is a reason NOAA is in the Department of Commerce to begin with.

Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 153, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``Aye.''

Stated against:

Mr. Speaker, I am deeply troubled and disappointed that Republicans have chosen to move forward with their plans to dismantle the Affordable Care Act rather than working in a bipartisan fashion to improve this landmark legislation.

Republicans have had 7 years to work across the aisle to find solutions. Instead, they have chosen to ignore the ACA's success in pursuit of their single-minded focus on gutting the law. They have voted over 60 times to repeal the ACA. Could not even one of those votes have been to try to improve it if they saw these shortcomings?

Mr. Speaker, the ACA expanded healthcare access to over 100,000 Rhode Islanders and 20 million people nationwide who otherwise did not have health insurance. Unfortunately, the Republican proposal jeopardizes the comprehensive, affordable, quality coverage Americans received under the ACA.

Mr. Speaker, the Republican plan will lead to higher costs and less accessible coverage, and it will strain, not strengthen, our healthcare system. Their plan disproportionately harms seniors, people with disabilities, and those who rely on Medicaid.

I have long said, Mr. Speaker, that the ACA isn't perfect, but it is an important first step toward fulfilling our Nation's promise of compassion and opportunity because health care is a necessity. It is something that is a right, not a privilege. Unfortunately, the Republicans' American Health Care Act will break this fundamental promise by undermining the healthcare coverage of millions.

Mr. Speaker, on February 14, 1917, the Diocese of Providence, the Dominican Friars of the Providence of St. Joseph, and the State of Rhode Island established Providence College.

Like our great Nation, Providence College was founded on principles of tolerance and acceptance. Its charter states that no student shall be denied admission or honors due to religious opinion. One hundred years later, Americans would do well to follow this example.

Led by Reverend Brian Shanley, the president of this outstanding academic institution, Providence College continues to enrich the lives of its students and the State of Rhode Island. It is a leader in research and academic excellence, and its scholars encourage young people to question the world around them and serve their communities.

The Ocean State is fortunate to be home to such a venerable institution. As a lifelong Rhode Islander, I am so proud to celebrate its centennial and recognize its continued success today.

Happy 100th anniversary, Providence College.

Mr. Speaker, I am so pleased to join the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson), my friend and co-chair of the Career and Technical Education Caucus, to recognize February as Career and Technical Education Month.

In Rhode Island and across the country right now, employers are struggling to find workers with the skills that they need to fill jobs in STEM, in manufacturing, in IT, and so many other skilled trades. Hundreds of thousands of high-skilled, high-paying jobs are open right now, going unfilled, and this number is growing.

To close the skills gap, we must better align education and industry to make sure that what we are teaching in classrooms is better meeting the needs of real-world companies right now. We must increase work- based learning and build education pathways to help students become career and college-ready.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support investment in CTE in the 115th Congress, including by reauthorizing the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act to adapt our workforce to the 21st century economy.

Mr. Speaker, this act passed with strong, bipartisan support in the last Congress, and I hope we can quickly bring it up again to pass it with strong bipartisan support in this Congress as well.

I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson) for his leadership.

Mr. Speaker, in recognition of National School Counseling Week and in honor of the many dedicated school counselors in Rhode Island and across the Nation, every day, school counselors are out on the front lines helping our students navigate their educational and career pathways. They provided advice and support during the most formative years of students' lives, helping them develop the skills to succeed in school, in the workforce, and in life.

Unfortunately, in too many schools across the country, students do not have access to school counselors and counselors do not have the resources they need to do their jobs.

Mr. Speaker, it is Congress' responsibility to provide schools and counselors with the funding that they need to properly educate and guide our Nation's youth.

In recognition of National School Counseling Week, I ask my colleagues to join me in renewing our promise to fulfill that responsibility. Our students, Mr. Speaker, are depending on us.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.J. Res. 40, disapproving of the Social Security Administration's (SSA) rulemaking on the Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007. While I have reservations about the rule, I do not believe the Congressional Review Act is the way to fix it.

Under the rule, individuals with a severe, long-term mental disorder who SSA determines are unable to manage their benefits would be placed on the NICS list and prohibited from purchasing a firearm. That tens of thousands of Americans die each year due to gun violence is unconscionable, and I do believe that the government has a role to play in alleviating this public health crisis.

However, as Co-Chair of the Bipartisan Disabilities Caucus, I understand the concerns of many mental health and disability rights advocates that this rule also has the potential to perpetuate the stigma that people with psychiatric or intellectual disabilities are more prone to violence, when they are often more likely to be the victims of violence. I also believe the due process procedures in this rule can and should be strengthened. Nonetheless, I believe these concerns can be addressed without resorting to the Congressional Review Act, and I cannot support this resolution of disapproval.

This is particularly true as passage of the resolution of disapproval could limit SSA's future regulatory activity in this area and could discourage other ongoing efforts to improve gun safety laws. I look forward to working with both the disability community and the Administration to protect the rights of individuals with disabilities while maintaining the integrity of the rulemaking process.

Mr. Speaker, ``Never stop believing.'' Those words are going to be on the front page of The Providence Journal tomorrow morning.

Like all true tests of faith, last night's Super Bowl wasn't easy going, and there were times, I have to say, when I was tempted to throw up my hands and just go to bed, but I followed the words of our quarterback and--oh, boy--was I rewarded.

What a game.

If there were any doubts, Mr. Speaker, about who the greatest quarterback of all time is, Tom Brady answered them last night; if there were any who questioned whether Bill Belichick was the best coach on the planet, this morning, they are silent; and I am sure they would all admonish me if I didn't say that football is a team sport. So, for those who had not yet been satisfied that the amazing string of successes my New England Patriots put together makes them the NFL's finest team, Super Bowl LI speaks for itself.

Mr. Speaker, it was truly a team effort, and I offer my heartfelt congratulations to Bob Kraft and to the entire Patriots franchise.

Congratulations, Patriots and Patriots Nation.

Mr. Speaker, there are so many ways to describe Mr. Milton Bronstein. He is a kind and generous person, who is always willing to lend a hand when he sees a friend in need. He is a committed and hardworking public servant who puts service above self. He is a capable and respected labor leader who dedicated much of his life to improving conditions for Rhode Island workers. He was a devoted husband to his late wife, Claire. He is a wonderful father to Harvey, Andrew, and Cindy.

And to me and to so many other Rhode Islanders, Milton--who today turns 100 years old--is a steadfast and dependable friend.

Milton's career started in the Department of Treasury, where he would remain for three decades. He is perhaps best known, however, for his work as a labor organizer, serving as the first president of Rhode Island's AFSCME Chapter, Council 94. Countless laborers in my home state of Rhode Island are better off thanks to his tireless work, and when you speak to labor organizers today, it is clear that Milton has set the gold standard of how to effectively lead. After stepping down as Council 94 president, Milton jumped right back into action, serving as the retiree chapter's vice president until he retired just last year at the age of 99. Even today, at 100 years old, Milton remains a trusted mentor and adviser to many in the labor movement and in public service.

I want to wish a very happy birthday to Milton as he celebrates 100 years of a life well lived. Milton, has been a changemaker in our state and in the lives of those of us who have been lucky enough to know him and work with him. I cannot thank him enough for his service and for his support through the years. Rhode Island owes him a debt of gratitude. Happy birthday.