Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of Nancy Dow Moody and her decades of extraordinary public service as a nonprofit leader as she retires from Lifehouse.

Nancy's distinguished career spans more than 40 years in service to people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Nancy joined Lifehouse as Director of Services in 1992, bringing with her years of experience in managing programs that support the disability services community. In 2005, she was promoted to Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, and in 2008, she assumed the role of President and

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

It is our third day back from a 5-week recess. We have 15 days left here in Washington before the election. It should be a time that we are trying to get some real work done, but instead of doing that, instead of doing a single thing to help our constituents who are struggling under skyrocketing costs of groceries, gas, and electricity bills, Republicans are scraping the bottom of the barrel to come up with any bill that their chaotic Conference can find a way to pass, and one of the surest ways, it seems, is to find a way to do another favor for the President's friends and for foreign-owned mining conglomerates.

We could actually use some responsible, balanced mineral policy in this country to meet our needs, but, of course, that is not what we are here to do today.

We could all agree that we have been overreliant on adversaries for critical minerals for too long. As demand for these minerals grows, we should also want to strengthen our domestic and allied supply chains strategically with American security, sustainability, and human rights at the center of those efforts.

Unfortunately, this administration seems to have a different approach. They are throwing billions of taxpayers' dollars at the projects that only seem to benefit themselves. There is a lot of money flying right now in the name of strengthening the mineral supply chain, but when you look beneath the surface, it is going to projects that will not actually help the American people.

We have seen this administration make major investments and backroom deals with mining projects with no transparency about who benefits, about what the national security rationale is, or how these decisions actually reduce our dependence on foreign adversaries.

Who is actually benefiting? The President's sons, Secretary Lutnick's sons, and campaign donors are all profiting off their personal investments and business ventures.

Democrats are asking questions. Unfortunately, we are not getting any help from our friends across the aisle. We are getting stonewalled.

Handing out favors to industry and boosting your children's stock portfolios is not a mineral strategy that helps the American people.

Now this brings us to H.R. 1501. This bill would codify mining and mineral processing as covered sectors under FAST-41. FAST-41, of course, creates an alternative permitting pathway for covered infrastructure projects. It covers 18 specific sectors, including energy production, surface transportation, semiconductors, and more.

The FAST-41 permitting process includes some positive transparency provisions like a centralized public platform that tracks Federal permitting timelines and milestones. Covered projects can also receive additional coordination and resources to help agencies move them through the process more efficiently.

It also places some limits on public input, including for Tribes. It also limits judicial review, and it includes limits on court-ordered protections.

Here is the thing, Mr. Speaker: We have just heard the main rationale for this bill, that we have to make sure critical minerals mining projects and the processing projects for those critical minerals are eligible for FAST-41. They made it sound as if today's bill would finally make that possible.

Well, I have a news flash for everyone. Mining is already a covered sector under a regulation adopted during the first Trump administration. Mineral processing projects are also allowed on FAST-41 as manufacturing, so we have an advertised solution here to a problem that does not exist.

What is this bill all about? That is the other half of the bill, the part that would potentially tie the hands of this and future administrations from using FAST-41 in a smart and targeted way that would focus on actual critical minerals projects that were in our national interest, that were all about our national competitiveness.

I will explain. The Permitting Council, which implements FAST-41, has limited resources. Its job is to provide additional coordination and attention to projects that meet the statutory requirements of FAST-41 coverage. Under this bill, every single mining project could be eligible for that treatment, regardless of whether it advances our national interests, our strategic mineral needs, et cetera. FAST-41 Permitting Council is required to put all eligible projects forward even though they have limited resources.

The Biden administration began considering a regulatory change to limit coverage to just critical minerals. That is what this bill is all about. H.R. 1501 would block that change from ever taking effect. That regulation was not finalized. It is not being implemented, but this bill would preemptively block anything like that from ever taking effect.

Under this bill, a gold mine with no connection to our national security could receive FAST-41 treatment. The same would apply to a mine controlled by a foreign adversary or a mine that plans to ship its minerals straight to China for processing, with no benefit to the American supply chain.

Under this bill, the Permitting Council would be required to devote precious time and resources to expedite these projects, to the detriment of real critical minerals projects, and it may prevent a future administration from ever narrowing the scope. How does that make America more secure? The answer is it doesn't.

Democrats have offered straightforward solutions. We have proposed targeted FAST-41 coverage for projects involving critical minerals, projects that actually strengthen key supply chains essential to our national security and our economic resilience.

We also proposed preventing companies owned or controlled by our foreign adversaries from receiving this fast-track status. These amendments were rejected by Republicans in committee and blocked from consideration on the floor here today.

This should not be a partisan issue. We have the opportunity to build a mineral supply chain that is secure, resilient, and independent of our foreign adversaries. To achieve that, we should be making strategic investments, not handing out blanket favors.

Mr. Speaker, I oppose this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

The chairman has touted the number of projects added to FAST-41 under the Trump administration. Therein lies the problem. Many of those projects are not critical minerals.

The Permitting Council only has so much budget, only so many resources

in order to administer this FAST-41 process. When you throw the door wide open to any old sand, gravel, gold mining project, when you invite in projects that might just have investments from the President's sons or Secretary Lutnick's family or your Mar-a-Lago oligarch pals, when the door is widened in that way and there is no new resources for the Permitting Council, then actual critical minerals projects and projects that are actually important to our competitiveness and our national security suffer. They go more slowly. They get less attention.

The Chair is actually making our point. We need to allow prioritization and focus so that this FAST-41 process can actually work as it was intended to work.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Mrs. Grijalva).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Arizona.

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

Mr. Speaker, a little blinding flash of the obvious: When it comes to sand and gravel, we are not dependent on China

or any other foreign adversary or any other foreign country. We have a lot of sand and gravel in this country. This is not about critical minerals. This is not about our competitiveness.

It is about sand and gravel which we can mine, as we always have. It is not what FAST-41 was intended to do or intended to benefit. But you just heard it right here on the floor in this debate, Mr. Speaker, that my colleagues on the one hand are selling this bill as urgent to meet our competitive situation with China. On the other hand, they are opening FAST-41 wide open to anything that can be pulled from the ground including sand and gravel. It just makes no sense whatsoever.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hoyle).

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, we agree with the gentleman from Utah that we need to be taking seriously our dependence on foreign adversaries when it comes to critical minerals and processing. That is why time and again my Democratic colleagues and I have offered amendments to make sure that when it comes to opening up our public lands--and, in this case, when it comes to opening up the benefits of this fast-tracked FAST-41 process--we are not handing it over to our foreign adversaries.

We have proposed amendments time and again, and those amendments have been opposed by our Republican colleagues. We have yet to hear a good reason why they keep opposing this, nor is there one. The language we have proposed time and again comes from one of their own Republican colleagues, the Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party chairman, Mr. Moolenaar. We have proposed his exact language time and again as a commonsense guardrail to make sure that our public resources and the benefits of this fast-tracking are not simply used to hand a gift to the very foreign adversary we say we are so terribly concerned about.

It keeps getting rejected time and time again, which makes you wonder what this bill is really about. It is definitely not the competitive rivalry with China.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, this argument that we need this legislation to address our dangerous dependency on foreign adversaries for critical minerals continues to ring very hollow. One of the ways that we can avoid being too dependent on foreign adversaries is to develop trading relationships with our allies, none closer to us than Canada.

Canada, for example, is one of our largest mineral trading partners. They exported about $76 billion in minerals to the United States in 2025. If making sure that we are not dependent on adversaries like China was really important to us, I should certainly hear a lot of alarm from my friends across the aisle about the fact that President Trump is starting a trade war with Canada, our neighbor, one of our closest allies and a critical minerals trading partner that makes us less dependent on foreign adversaries. Instead we hear crickets.

He is even trying to rename Lake Ontario to further antagonize this trading partner, and we hear nothing from the other side.

This bill is about many things, but it is certainly not about reducing our dependence on minerals from foreign adversaries.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, this administration has demonstrated that it is all too willing to abuse the tools at its disposal to promote projects that simply line the pockets of members of this administration, their family, and their oligarch pals.

I will give you a few examples. Not too long ago, the Trump administration announced that it would invest over a billion dollars and take an equity stake in USA Rare Earth, a mining and manufacturing company. Reporting uncovered that USA Rare Earth hired Cantor Fitzgerald, a firm chaired by Brandon Lutnick, the son of Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. How about that coincidence?

Last October, the Trump administration announced equity investments in the mining company Trilogy Metals while simultaneously directing agencies to fast-track permitting for Ambler Road, the controversial project needed to access Trilogy Metals' proposed mine site.

Trilogy Metals' third-largest shareholder is John Alfred Paulson, a Trump MAGA donor and economic adviser. His Trilogy shares increased by $70 million in value after that announcement.

The administration is making a pattern out of picking winners and losers in the mining industry and a suspicious number of those winners have close ties to Donald Trump.

These deals tie taxpayer dollars to corporate balance sheets and incentivize administration officials to prioritize individual corporate interests over the broader public good. To date, there has been no public disclosure of safeguards or procedures to ensure that these ownership stakes do not influence permitting, regulatory enforcement, contracting, and other agency decisions relating to these mining and minerals projects.

Before we give this administration yet additional power to enrich themselves at the expense of everyday Americans, let's get some answers to some of these questions we have been asking about all this corruption and self-dealing.

We have been talking about whether the administration should prioritize when it comes to doling out the limited capacity of the FAST-41 Permitting Council. If everything is a priority, nothing is.

H.R. 1501 ties this and any future administration's hands from doing any prioritization to make sure that FAST-41 permitting is limited to critical minerals projects.

This does nothing to help lower prices for Americans. It just gives gold mines or even mines owned by our foreign adversaries the same access to FAST-41 streamlining as minerals projects needed for our national or economic security interests.

This ties up limited staff and resources meant to get nationally important projects built faster. It gives this corrupt administration another tool to abuse, to help their buddies get ahead. Let's be clear, even though the Permitting Council is supposed to work with any eligible project that is put forward by a sponsor, we know that that won't stop this administration from pushing to prioritize their favorite projects, which seems to be determined more and more by the President's profits than by the public interest.

This is an administration that has repeatedly put pressure on agencies to do favors for their buddies, whether that is pushing the National Park Service to give part of Yosemite to a private developer or making a call to the Department of Defense to speed up a funding deal for a mining company with ties to the President's son.

Why would this permitting be any different?

To rein in possible abuses, we did offer commonsense amendments to limit fast-track eligibility to critical minerals projects, projects that are by definition actually critical to our national and economic security, but Republicans voted it down in committee and then blocked it from even being considered here on the House floor.

Let's be clear: This legislation is not about what is best for our country. It is about giving one more of the President's favorite industries carte blanche for special treatment.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Sven ``Craig'' Anderson for nearly three decades of extraordinary public service as a nonprofit leader. Craig's rich and varied career over the years is inspiring, but today, we celebrate his retirement and many positive accomplishments during his tenure at LandPaths.

Craig joined LandPaths in August 1997, a year after the organization was established. Under his energetic and enduring leadership, the organization grew from a small nonprofit into a thriving, robust, and renowned nonprofit focused on conservation, environmental education, and community stewardship. His work has permanently transformed how Sonoma County connects with and cares for its natural resources.

Shortly after Craig started with LandPaths, the organization, in partnership with the Bay Area Ridge Trail, created a Sonoma Mountain trail segment and launched its inaugural free public outings. Over the years, he Rewarded major land acquisitions, championed equitable access to nature, and mobilized thousands of volunteers through community- focused stewardship programs.

Under Craig's guidance, LandPaths preserved critical landscapes, including the Grove of the Old Trees, a stand of ancient redwoods saved from a Timber Harvest Plan, and Calvi Ranch, working closely with Indigenous partners and multi generation ranching families to protect this historic 70-acre property. He has sparked and nurtured youth and community engagement through innovative programs such as in Our Own Backyard and Inspired Forward, bringing environmental education to Title I schools and beyond. Further, he successfully promoted inclusive, science-grounded citizenship in the outdoors, fostering deeper community bonds with the land.

Throughout his tenure, Craig's integrity, generosity, and humor have inspired colleagues and community members alike. His vision and leadership have been appreciated and recognized in the community, including in being named Bay Nature Magazine's Local Hero for Conservation in 2014.

Mr. Speaker, it has been my privilege and honor to work with Craig in a variety of roles over the course of his notable career. Please join me in expressing our profound gratitude for his remarkable contributions and in extending our warmest wishes for a richly deserved and fulfilling retirement.

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

Mr. Speaker, the Congress returned yesterday from a long district work period where most of us heard a lot of things from our constituents. They told us about the grinding cost of groceries, gas, and healthcare and the instability their small businesses face

thanks to President Trump's trade war with Canada.

What is the House majority prioritizing this week?

It is a bill that will push a critically endangered whale closer to extinction. I don't think many of us heard this as a priority from our constituents.

H.R. 9436 would extend the regulatory pause on North Atlantic right whale protections from fishing gear entanglements through 2035. This bill sells our fishing communities a false promise. We may hear that kicking the can down the road saves the Maine lobster fleet. In reality, this bill would lock in a broken status quo that guarantees disaster for both our historic coastal industry and the critically endangered right whale.

Right now, fewer than 380 North Atlantic right whales remain on Earth, with only 70 breeding females. Over 85 percent have experienced at least one fishing gear entanglement, and since 2022, at least 31 whales have suffered severe injuries or death because of entanglements.

In late 2022, Congress inappropriately paused all additional measures to protect these whales from fishing gear entanglements until 2029. This pause was advertised as a stakeholders' window of opportunity to give NOAA time to partner with fishermen, States, and technology companies to gather data to test and deploy safer fishing gear, namely, ropeless gear.

Instead, that pause becomes a license for complacency.

NOAA is lying down on the job, dragging its feet, firing staff, axing science, and deprioritizing ropeless gear, perhaps because they think Congress will bail them out and kick the can a little further down the road. All of this is illegal, and all of it is causing massive uncertainty for the lobster fishery.

Now, 2 years ahead of the deadline, this bill would add another 7- year delay.

Instead of holding NOAA accountable, House Republicans want to freeze action until 2035, abandoning accountability and setting up our fishermen for failure. The solution already exists. On-demand ropeless gear reduces deadly entanglements of whales without sacrificing catch. We can have this fishing industry. We can protect it for the long haul with this win-win solution. Fishermen are actively testing and using ropeless gear right now. They have landed over 1 million pounds of seafood using these methods.

This bill, though, would destroy the market incentives to deploy these safer and innovative technologies, damaging consumer confidence in the environmental sustainability of American seafood. It would unfairly place greater conservation burdens on the other Atlantic coast communities, from Florida to Maine, who are actively trying to do their part to save this whale from extinction.

Mr. Speaker, let's stop pretending that House Republicans and this administration care about the fishermen, coastal communities, or these iconic whales. If Congress can arbitrarily grant a decade-plus statutory exemption to bypass protections for a critically endangered species, then the Endangered Species Act is reduced to a hollow success.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to fight for strong, sustainable fisheries and to defend Federal wildlife protection laws, reject this dangerous precedent, and vote ``no'' on H.R. 9436.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from more than 30 community environmental and civic leaders in New York and New Jersey urging Congress to defend science-based management of the North Atlantic right whale and opposing this legislation.

August 31, 2026.

Dear Members of Congress: As community, environmental, and

civic leaders based in New York and New Jersey, we write to

express our strong opposition to H.R. 9436. This legislation

would delay urgently needed protections for the North

Atlantic right whale for seven years, freezing management

progress until 2035.

North Atlantic right whales are regularly seen in waters

off of Long Island, New York and the Coast of New Jersey.

Migrating over 1,000 miles from their northeast feeding

grounds to their southern calving grounds, they have already

been recorded in the New York Bight and southeast of Atlantic

City, New Jersey this year. In 2024, scientists from the New

England Aquarium recorded 82 Right whales--including 56 in

one day--forty miles south of Long Island. This represents

nearly a quarter of the total population.

Extinction is permanent, and the crisis facing the North

Atlantic right whale demands immediate, courageous

leadership. With fewer than 400 individuals remaining--and a

critically low count of roughly 70 breeding females--every

single year of delayed action brings this species closer to

disappearing forever. The science is undisputed: accidental

entanglement in vertical fishing lines is one of the primary

drivers of serious injury and death for these whales, with

over 86 percent of living right whales carrying scars from

past entanglements. These injuries and deaths are

preventable, but only if

our national policy allows science-based solutions to move

forward.

H.R. 9436 sets a dangerous precedent by locking our ocean

management into outdated status quo practices for nearly a

decade. Specifically, the bill would prevent NOAA Fisheries

from developing and implementing science-based management

measures that could reduce the risk of entanglements, such as

modifying fishing practices in areas and at times of highest

risk, and expanding new technologies that both protect whales

and maintain fishing opportunities. Protecting endangered

wildlife and fostering resilient coastal economies are not

opposing goals. Pushing safety measures off to 2035 stalls

the momentum behind collaborative ocean stewardship, science-

based dynamic management, and crucial federal resources that

help both whales and coastal communities thrive.

Communities in New York and New Jersey have consistently

supported forward-thinking, science-based approaches that

safeguard our shared marine heritage while ensuring our

coastal economies can adapt and flourish. Halting progress

for another seven years undermines the work our region has

done to promote a healthy ocean ecosystem.

The North Atlantic right whale cannot afford to wait until

2035, and neither can the communities that care about the

future of our oceans. We urge you to reject H.R. 9436 and

stand up for the recovery of one of the most endangered

species on Earth.

Sincerely,

New York

Candis Whitney, Executive Director, Amelia Island Whale

Ambassadors.

John Balet, MS, SUNY Master Science Teacher, Ballston Spa

High School, Ballston Spa, New York.

Diana Hernandez, Managing Director, Beyond Plastics,

Albany, New York.

Carolina Korth, Co-President, Beyond Plastics Queens,

Queens, New York.

Nancy Tudor, Climate Steward, Beyond Plastics Schenectady,

Clifton Park. New York.

Michael Rosenthal, President, Capital Region Vegan Network,

Albany, New York.

Adrienne Esposito, Executive Director, Citizens Campaign

for the Environment, Farmindale, New York.

Barbara Heinzen, Member, Clean Air Coalition of Ravena-

Coeymans, New Baltimore, New York.

Christina Rupp, Ecological Artist, Ulster County, New York.

Jean Citarella, Leadership Team, Forest Hills Indivisible,

Forest Hills, New York.

Catherine M. Filloux, Playwright, New York City, New York.

Sara Gronim, Co-leader, 350Brooklyn, Brooklyn, New York.

Jennifer Vogt, Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter, East

Northport, New York.

Carl Safina, Endowed Professor in Marine Science,

University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, New York.

Brody Eggert, Eastern Long Island Chapter Manager,

Surfrider Foundation, East Hampton, New York.

Natalya Khorover, Founder/Educator, Repurposer Collective,

Mamaroneck, New York.

Jessica Welshans, Volunteer Member, Rensselaer Enviro.

Coalition, Rensselaer, New York.

Chris Allieri, Executive Director, NYC Plover Project,

Rockaway Beach, New York.

Barry Pendergrass, Volunteer, Religious Action Center for

Reform Judaism, Albany, New York.

Mindy Block, President, Quality Parks, Port Jefferson, New

York.

Megan Wolff, Executive Director, P-SNAP Network, New Paltz,

New York.

Rob Weltner, President, Operation SPLASH, Freeport, New

York.

Gail Tierney, New York Field Representative, Oceana,

Brooklyn, New York.

Saman Mahmood, Director of Advocacy, NYC Bird Alliance, New

York City, New York.

Joseph Butera, President, NE Ecological Recovery Society,

New York.

Susan Schwarz, Board member, LWV Riverowns, Tarrytown, New

York.

New Jersey

Casey Deacon, President, Alliance for a Living Ocean Surf

City, New Jersey.

Allison McLeod, Interim Executive Director, New Jersey

League of Conservation Voters, New Jersey.

Gregory A. Remaud, Executive Director, NY/NJ Baykeeper,

Trenton, New Jersey.

Doug O'Malley, Director, Environment New Jersey, Trenton,

New Jersey.

John Turner, Conservation Policy Advocate, Seatuck

Environmental Association, Setauket, New Jersey.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, for the benefit of the chairman and others here, the facts are these: Since 2022, 31 whales have died or been seriously injured by entanglements.

Entanglements are a huge problem. It is not even in serious dispute. Eighty-five percent of living whales have been entangled at least once, and 60 percent at least twice.

In terms of the alleged progress in the past year or so for this whale, they are not reproducing nearly fast enough to avoid an extinction trajectory. There are right now more Members of the House of Representatives than there are North Atlantic right whales living in our ocean.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Beyer).

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

Mr. Speaker, I was confused a moment ago because the chairman suggested that the effort to develop all this data and perfect ropeless gear is going really well. These investments are rolling out and this is all being taken very seriously, but here we have a bill that would shut all of that down 2 years early.

This is about running out the clock, Mr. Speaker. We were told that the 6-year pause granted in 2022 was for all these same things, for data collection and to allow time for collaboration and open rulemaking process, and more.

Congress invested $20 million in ropeless gear development, testing, and deployment. The States and the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission ran programs for fishermen to test the gear, but under the Trump administration, NOAA has shut this down. They have been telling the New England Fishery Management Council to deprioritize ropeless gear.

This is not a process that is being taken seriously or that is going well and, therefore, needs more time. This is a stalling tactic that has already begun and is about to receive 7 more years by virtue of the Republican Congress.

This administration has not provided Congress, by the way, with the annual reports on progress toward 2029. That is required in the law. They are ignoring it. They have 2 more years to do their job. States need to finalize that data collection. We don't need another 7-year extension. We especially don't need this to happen 2 years earlier.

Let's allow this process to run its course and see what it produces. Then, if there is a compelling reason for a further extension, we could talk about it.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure why my friend from Maine just cited data from 2009 through 2018 to suggest there has been virtually no mortality. The numbers I gave are a little more relevant. From 2022 until now, we know that 31 North Atlantic right whales have either died or been seriously injured by the very type of entanglements we are talking about here--entanglements that would, if this legislation passes, somehow secure a total pass from the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act regulations for a period of 13 full years. That is not honoring these environmental protection laws. That is not upholding them. That is gutting them.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Dingell).

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

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

Mr. Speaker, the data--31 deaths or serious injuries from entanglements since 2022--comes from NOAA. It is available to Democrats and Republicans alike.

Mr. Speaker, I urge this body to reject H.R. 9436. This bill moves the goalposts and risks the extinction of an iconic whale that calls our Nation's Atlantic waters home.

Instead of taking the next 2 years to address the progress that has been made and additional policy levers that may be necessary to support a thriving lobster fishery and recover the right whale, this bill legislates blindly. It throws away momentum amongst the States, tech companies, and many fishery participants, kicking the can down the road. This is a shame.

I recognize that fishing communities around this country are facing extreme levels of uncertainty, and this administration is doing nothing to help. In the lobster fishery, families who have fished these waters for generations are asking questions about what comes next. H.R. 9436 presents a false choice between saving a native species and protecting their livelihoods.

This delay would undermine massive public investment. Since 2022, Congress has devoted an estimated $280 million to right whale recovery. We are beginning to see results from these investments. Advancing monitoring technologies have improved mapping of right whale patterns. Vessels are using trackers to avoid conflicts and, most importantly for this debate, ropeless gear now has a near-perfect retrieval success record and a critical safety feature. The man overboard system is now open source technology for ropeless gear developers.

By removing the 2029 regulatory backstop, this bill creates a permission structure that discourages fishery participants from engaging in cooperative research to obtain the answers they say are needed. Worse, it punishes the forward-thinking fishermen who have spent money and time transitioning their gear in good faith.

Lastly, the bill would extend that waiver without authorizing additional money. By delaying action until 2035 without any new funding, NOAA would need to write rules using obsolete data from the early 2020s.

Democrats offered improvements to this bill to ensure that lobstermen and their families would get the support needed to confidently transition to this

new gear, but Republicans rejected these improvements.

Our suggestions would have authorized additional Federal investments for on-demand ropeless fishing technology to ensure fishermen can keep working, while removing the deadly vertical lines that entangle, injure, and kill these endangered whales.

True leadership invests in modernizing our fisheries, not freezing our conservation laws in place while marine life pays the ultimate price. Allowing a species to go extinct on our watch is a moral failure that we cannot erase.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject this dangerous precedent, stand with science, and vote ``no'' on H.R. 9436. I yield back the balance of my time.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, the Medal of Honor is the highest military decoration awarded to brave individuals whose extraordinary acts of valor, selfless service, and sacrifice exceed the call of duty.

In 2021, Congress authorized the placement of a National Medal of Honor Monument in Washington, D.C., to honor all of the Medal of Honor recipients from the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Coast Guard.

As a next step, this bill we are considering will ensure the memorial is located next to the Lincoln Memorial in the shadow of a President who created the Medal of Honor during the first year of the Civil War.

It is a privilege to speak on this bill. Medal of Honor recipients deserve recognition in the heart of our Nation's Capital.

I do note, however, that this is not the first time legislation for this memorial has been considered by the House this Congress. We voted on the House companion from Mr. Moore of Utah back in January 2025. It was one of the first Natural Resources Committee bills to pass this Chamber in the Congress.

Unfortunately, instead of passing the House bill that we already sent over, the Senate is forcing us into a do-over. This is becoming an unsightly trend this Congress. The House Natural Resources Committee alone has sent 88 bipartisan bills over to the Senate that are still waiting for a vote. No wonder this has been such an unproductive Congress and one of the least productive on record.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage Republican leadership in both Houses of Congress to start working together and talking to each other to better coordinate so that we are not forced to vote on all of these noncontroversial bills over and over. There is simply not time left on the calendar to continue this.

Moving back to the bill that we are considering, I encourage my colleagues to support this important piece of legislation again. This is an excellent example of the amazing work that we can do when we reach across the aisle and work in a bipartisan way. But it is worth noting that this bill is also an example of how monuments in Washington, D.C., should happen and how they can be lawfully established through a transparent and explicit act of Congress.

The Commemorative Works Act is the law, and it is very clear. Monuments and memorials in the area of Washington, D.C., may be built ``only as specifically authorized by law.''

If that weren't enough, Congress enacted a similar law prohibiting any building or structure being built on Federal public grounds in D.C. without express authority of Congress.

It is an insult to the American people that this administration is ignoring the law, that they are barreling ahead with an enormous arc de Trump in flagrant violation of these laws, an arch that would tower over the Lincoln Memorial and the sacred grounds of Arlington National Cemetery where we honor the very heroes that we have just been talking about here today.

Our constituents can't afford groceries right now due to Trump's trade wars. They can't afford gas due to his war of choice in Iran or electricity bills due to his war on clean energy. The last thing we need is another golden monument commemorating President Trump in the Capital, let alone one that circumvents Congress and flouts the law.

Mr. Speaker, my Republican colleagues should stand up to this administration's lawlessness. In the meantime, this is a good bill. This is how you are supposed to do monuments in compliance with the law. You bring it to Congress. You pass it through the process. Soon this bill will become law, and this monument will happen. That is the way it should work.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Linda Jacobs for her more than four decades of extraordinary public service as a nonprofit leader.

From an early age in Coral Gables, Florida, Linda's parents demonstrated the importance of community service, serving as volunteers for their Jewish congregation and youth sports. As a young adult, Linda herself was an outspoken advocate for the green party, the women's movement, and civil rights. She earned a Bachelor of Fine Arts from the University of South Florida and soon after moving to San Francisco in 1978, joined the Breakthrough Foundation, a nonprofit that won national acclaim for helping change the trajectory of at-risk youth. During her seven-year tenure at the organization, Linda established funding for scholarships to cover all participating youth. This was the start of a long career building and strengthening nonprofits in the Bay Area.

Linda's work in Marin County began in the early 1990s and includes a breadth and depth of professional roles, including as the development director for Marin Child Care Council; the development and public affairs director for Planned Parenthood of Marin, Sonoma, and Mendocino; and executive director of the Mill Valley Chamber of Commerce. In 2002, she joined the Volunteer Center of Marin as their chief executive officer. She went on to transform the organization first into the Center for

Volunteer and Nonprofit Leadership (CVNL) and later extended its reach into Sonoma County, Napa County, and Solano County.

For decades, Linda led CVNL with an unwavering belief in the power of the nonprofit system, expanding key programs such as the Heart of Marin Awards, strengthening volunteer engagement, and developing partnerships that elevated local nonprofits across the region. She supported communities during turbulent and uncertain times, from the pandemic and wildfires to funding cuts, and developed critical scholarships to allow nonprofits of all sizes and budgets to take advantage of the opportunities offered by CVNL.

A mentor to hundreds of nonprofit leaders, Linda is known as a fierce advocate, steady in the face of uncertainty and strategic in her long- term vision. She has served on the Board of Directors for the School to Career Partnership, Marin Economic Forum, and the Points of Light Assembly. She is also the former Board Chair of the California Association of Nonprofits, a former appointee to the Marin County Women's Commission, and past President of the Marin National Organization for Women. In recognition of her tireless work supporting nonprofits, Linda was inducted into the Marin Women's Hall of Fame in 2010, among other honors and awards acquired over the years.

Mr. Speaker, it was my privilege and honor to work with Linda over the course of her notable career. She is a smart, generous and impactful person and leaves an indelible positive impact on Northern California and all those nonprofits and volunteers she supported and inspired throughout her career. I respectfully ask that you join me in expressing heartfelt gratitude to Linda for her generosity of spirit, innumerable good deeds, and in sending her best wishes on her next endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Ellie Cohen on the occasion of her retirement from The Climate Center (The Center) and to honor her decades of visionary leadership.

Under her leadership as chief executive officer, The Climate Center helped catalyze California's status as a global leader in addressing the climate crisis. Ellie played an integral role in advancing policies to modernize our electric grid and prioritize nature-based climate solutions, broadening the organization's impact, deepening its policy engagement, and building coalitions across sectors to meet the scale of the climate crisis. The Center was helped in efforts to reform and extend California's signature climate program to further reduce greenhouse gas emissions. She also expanded The Center's public education role: convening their annual California Climate Policy Summit, hosting dozens of webinars, producing policy briefs, and engaging lawmakers at global climate meetings to elevate California's leadership. Her work and accomplishments at The Center will shape policy and environmental outcomes for generations to come.

Prior to joining The Climate Center, Ellie spent nearly two decades as President and

CEO of Point Blue Conservation Science. There, she led the growing organization to significant accomplishments, including attaining official Observer NGO status at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change as well as helping to direct nearly $100 million of conservation investments across more than two million acres of public and agricultural land. Her leadership helped coastal communities plan for sea level rise, guided climate small restoration on working lands, and strengthened partnerships among agencies, non-profit organizations, land trusts, ranchers, farmers, and educators throughout California.

Ellie's leadership has been recognized with numerous accolades over the years both by her peers and partners including the Beyond Duke Alumni Award for Service and Leadership, the National Park Service Pacific West Region Partnership Award, and the Bay Nature Environmental Hero Award. She has also been designated one of the ``100 Women Taking the Lead to Save Our Planet.'' Ellie's professional achievements are matched only by her academic accomplishments. She earned her undergraduate degree with honors in botany from Duke University and a Master of Public Policy from Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government.

Mr. Speaker, Ellie Cohen is a model of climate leadership. She has worked tirelessly to translate climate research into real world progress. I have enjoyed the benefit of working with Ellie on many critical initiatives over the years. Her bright mind and enduring commitment to science-based climate action is worthy of highest commendation. On behalf of California's communities and those across our Nation who benefit from her efforts, I ask my colleagues to join me in expressing our deep appreciation for Ellie Cohen's decades of service and in extending our best wishes as she embarks on her next endeavor.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor San Domenico School in San Anselmo, California, as it celebrates its 175th Anniversary, marking an extraordinary milestone for one of California's oldest independent schools and one of the longest standing educational institutions in the West.

Founded in 1850 by the Dominican Sisters, San Domenico began as a small girls' day school in Monterey before relocating to Benicia and ultimately establishing its permanent home in San Anselmo. Through every chapter of California's history, from statehood to the present day, San Domenico has demonstrated a commitment to academically rigorous education grounded in service, community, and character development.

Today, San Domenico serves students from kindergarten through 12th grade, offering both day and boarding programs. The school is nationally recognized for its forward-looking academics, robust arts and athletics programs, award winning music and debate teams, environmental stewardship initiatives, and a longstanding dedication to fostering global citizenship. Generations of alumni have gone on to become leaders, innovators, and changemakers.

Mr. Speaker, throughout its history, San Domenico has remained steadfast in its mission to prepare young people for lives of purpose and compassion. I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating San Domenico School on its remarkable 175 years of educational leadership, and in extending our best wishes for its continued success in nurturing generations of thoughtful, courageous, and community minded young people.

Mr. Speaker, I regret that I was unable to make the following vote. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 181.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Rick Lafranchi, who passed away on April 13, 2026. A beloved cheesemaker, coach, and community leader, Rick was a positive force for many.

Rick was the second oldest of six siblings in the Lafranchi family of Nicasio, a multigenerational ranching family whose roots date to his grandfather's immigration from Maggia, Switzerland and the founding the Lafranchi Dairy in 1919. He helped establish and serve as the public face of the award winning Nicasio Valley Cheese Company, a farmstead creamery cofounded with his brother Scott in 2010 and renowned for its production of organic cheeses.

Rick often spoke about the importance of protecting West Marin's working landscapes, and he matched those words with action through his service on the board of the Marin Agricultural Land Trust (MALT), including as chair from 2012 to 2014. He credited MALT's conservation tools with helping his family expand its pasture and build the family's creamery.

Long before cheesemaking, Rick invested in the development of future generations as a high school baseball coach at his alma mater, Archie Williams High School. He also owned

and operated a local video rental store franchise, Silver Screen Videos, which became neighborhood fixtures in the North Bay.

Mr. Speaker, Rick Lafranchi is survived by his wife Debby, his children, Christie and Rick, as well as his grandchildren. I respectfully ask that you join me in honoring his extraordinary life and in extending our deepest condolences to his family, friends, colleagues, and customers who remember him for his character and kindness.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Paul Heavenridge who passed away on December 10, 2025. Paul devoted his career to improving the quality of life for the community of Petaluma and the extended North Bay.

Paul founded and led Literacyworks, a Petaluma-based nonprofit established to expand literacy for adults and families to provide dynamic resources and pathways for lifelong learning. Under his stewardship, Literacyworks supported adult learners with practical, research-based tools and partnerships that improved educational access, workforce readiness, and family wellbeing. In 2015, Paul helped launch the Literacyworks Center at Santa Rosa Junior College--a model program providing scholarships and wraparound support for nontraditional and economically disadvantaged students.

Paul's commitment to improving literacy extended beyond Literacyworks. He served as a Sonoma County Library Commissioner to support public libraries and equitable access to reading, learning, and information, characteristics he deemed essential for community health. Through Literacyworks AmeriCorps, Paul also championed statewide library-led literacy initiatives, partnering with the California State Library's California Library Literacy Services to strengthen capacity at libraries throughout the state. These initiatives helped coordinate programming, training, and day-to-day support so local literacy programs could thrive.

Beyond classrooms and computer labs, Paul served his community on the Friends of the Petaluma River board, helping steward a treasured local waterway through conservation, education, and public events.

Mr. Speaker, Paul Heavenridge believed that literacy is a gateway to work, independence, and a fuller life, and he dedicated his career to making that gateway wider for everyone. I respectfully ask that you join me in honoring his extraordinary life and in extending our deepest condolences to his family, friends, colleagues, and the many learners whose futures were brightened by his work.

Mr. Speaker, in the spirit of geothermal energy, we are sure hearing a lot of hot air from the other side with this fantastical narrative that Republicans, I guess, are now lowering costs and saving healthcare.

The American people can decide whether they want to believe those whoppers, but today it is at least refreshing to see our colleagues across the aisle tiptoeing back in the direction of this all-of-the- above energy policy that they always swore they supported. Yet, for the past year-plus they have been cheerleaders for Donald Trump's insane war on clean energy that is trying to destroy an entire sector, to surrender American leadership to China and others, and drive up utility bills for the American people.

Nevertheless, I welcome the fact that we are talking today about geothermal energy. Like the gentlewoman from Arizona, the ranking member, I like geothermal energy a lot. This is something that we should be working on together in a bipartisan way. I represent the largest geothermal energy plant in America in my district, and I am proud of it. I want to see more of it.

Good geothermal energy projects can move forward with bipartisan support and with very expeditious permitting, but good geothermal energy projects don't need the kind of sweeping waiver that is proposed in this legislation, which simply misses the mark.

Let's talk about that. Under this bill, a geothermal project would no longer require a Federal drilling permit if it is on land where the surface is not federally owned, but the subsurface is significantly, up to 50 percent of the acreage.

While this may sound innocuous--oh, it is just subsurface; it is below what we can see with our eyes--without a Federal permit, the core safeguards for development affecting Federal resources would totally disappear. That includes protections under the National Environmental Policy Act, the National Historic Preservation Act, and the Endangered Species Act.

All of it would be waived for geothermal exploration, development, and the production activities that would be covered under this bill. That goes entirely too far. It is bad news for Tribes, communities, and property owners on the ground. Again, good projects don't need this kind of sweeping free pass from environmental review.

Under the circumstances laid out in this bill, all Federal oversight goes away, along with public input and consultation requirements, and that includes Tribal consultation. It takes away opportunities for public involvement that can make projects better. It takes away the convening process that brings Federal, Tribal, State, and local entities to the table so they can identify basic health and safety risks, flag concerns, and work through conflicts and impacts to protect the resources that are owned by the American people, even if they are below the ground, even if they are not something you can see with the naked eye.

This public input and compliance with Federal laws, like NEPA and others, is essential to building a solid foundation for our clean energy future.

We need these types of energy projects, but we need to do them right because, let's be clear, underground drilling can still have impacts above the ground, like sinking, subsidence, settlement of lands, earthquakes, and on other resources like groundwater.

Geothermal development is a lot safer than oil and gas, but there still are some risks--it is not zero--and the public deserves the opportunity to engage.

I will say that this bill is also playing games with percentages. The threshold is set at 50 percent Federal subsurface ownership, and that may sound trivial. It may sound reasonable, but even my rudimentary math skills tell me that 50 percent of a project that might be 2,000 acres is 1,000 acres. That is a lot of land. That is a lot of potential impacts. It is not insignificant.

Another alarming point about this bill, without a Federal drilling permit, it creates a gray area for underground injection control permits, which allow for the assessment of potential seismic activity. How could we not look at that?

These injection control permits aren't in our Natural Resources Committee's jurisdiction. This is something that I brought up in the markup. I urged the majority to consider working with the Energy and Commerce Committee to add clarifying language to make sure those permits would still be required. Unfortunately, the majority failed to address that concern.

There is no clear opportunity to require bonds if this legislation passes that would otherwise need to happen because we are talking about Federal resources. What happens if there is a subsidence event within the Federal resource? States and property owners would be on the hook.

We are talking about publicly owned resources here, even if you can't see them, and the Federal Government has an obligation to steward them responsibly.

The last thing I will emphasize is that this bill is clearly not just about geothermal energy. This is the proverbial camel's nose under the tent. The oil and gas industry has been trying to get this same policy, this same broad waiver, for subsurface Federal lands for years.

This is a precedent we should not set. Mark my words: If this legislation advances before this sputtering Congress comes to an end later this year, you will see another bill where the oil and gas industry is seeking the same treatment.

To deploy clean energy, we don't need to create shortcuts and exemptions from oversight. What we need is to fully fund our agencies so that they can have the capacity for thorough, efficient, and timely reviews. I would be happy to work with my colleagues across the aisle to advance responsible and well-balanced geothermal and other renewable energy development on Federal lands, but I have to urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this poorly drafted legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Trisha Garlock, who passed away on January 15, 2026. Trisha was a visionary leader and tireless champion for equitable access to high-quality public education.

Born in Bakersfield, California, Trisha's parents instilled in her a deep respect for education and public service. She earned a Bachelor of Arts from Stanford University and a master's degree from the University of Michigan, where she met her husband, Jim.

In 1982, Trisha and her neighbor Penny Weiss founded the Mill Valley Schools Community Foundation, later renamed ``Kiddo!,'' to preserve arts and music in the school district. What began as an urgent stopgap to backfill state cuts to public education became a community institution focused on supplemental funding for Mill Valley public schools. She served as the foundation's executive director for 32 years. helping it evolve from a grassroots effort into a nationally recognized model that raised millions annually to support enrichment for our schools.

In response to disparities in school funding in Marin County, Trisha then helped co-found and lead SchoolsRule, a countywide collaboration of public-school foundations focused on equitable funding for every student. Under her leadership, SchoolsRule brought together community partners and donors to invest in arts, literacy, technology, and student wellness, distributing support so that each student in Marin could benefit.

Trisha's leadership and legacy have been widely recognized. She was inducted into the Marin Women's Hall of Fame in 2018 for her decades of work strengthening public education countywide.

Mr. Speaker, Trisha Garlock believed that every child deserves a full and rich education, and she spent more than four decades working toward that goal. I respectfully ask that you join me in honoring Trisha's extraordinary life and extending our deepest condolences to her family, friends, colleagues, and the many students whose lives were enriched by her work.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the College of Marin on the momentous occasion of its centennial anniversary and in appreciation for a century of quality education provided to the communities of Marin County and the Bay Area.

Over the last 100 years, College of Marin has served as a cornerstone of higher education in Marin County, providing accessible opportunities to students of diverse social and economic backgrounds. Founded in 1926 as the Marin Junior College, the school was the product of a Tamalpais Union High School District college initiative supported by the San Rafael High School District and established by popular vote. The Tamalpais Union High School District leased the 13-acre Butler tract in Kentfield, establishing the campus, which would grow into more than 400 acres across multiple campuses.

The Marin Junior College's first class of 87 students began with six faculty members in 1926 under the leadership of president A.C. Olney. Throughout the 1930s, the campus grew, acquiring more property and continuing to expand its arts and athletics programs. During World War II, Marin Junior College offered military support and training, including courses at the Hamilton Army Airfield. In 1948 it was renamed the College of Marin. Responding to growing national interest in more comprehensive, personalized education, the College began a new expansion initiative in the 1960s. By 1962, enrollment had grown to 2,500 students and in 1971, the school established its Indian Valley campus in Novato.

Today, the College of Marin offers 469 degrees and certificates. This includes their workforce development programs that support employment in critical, high-demand fields like healthcare and skilled trades. The school continues to adapt and innovate to provide programs best tailored to support a diversity of students, including undocumented, first generation, and older adult students. College of Marin also boasts the highest transfer acceptance rate for the University of California Berkeley with approximately 40 percent of applicants admitted in the past two years. Beyond its students, the school's impact on California's economy is undeniable, including providing nearly 800 jobs and $9 million in tax revenue.

The College of Marin has been a pioneering institution in our region, renowned for its strong dedication to student success and equity for decades. The College of Marin Foundation offers over 150 scholarships annually and last year announced the establishment of the Jay Pritzker Foundation Centennial Endowment Fund, a $20 million fund to support students' critical non-tuition related expenses,

including healthcare, childcare, computers, and food.

A vital institution of higher learning for the Bay Area, the College of Marin is worthy of the highest commendation. Mr. Speaker, please join us in recognizing the College of Marin on the occasion of its 100th anniversary and offering the College our best wishes for another century of success.