Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, today I wish to honor and thank a Boulder Colorado trailblazer: Frances Draper. It's hard to distill such a luminous human into a few short paragraphs. Frances is equal parts tough and kind; cooperative and indomitable; pragmatic and optimistic. ``There's a pony in here for everyone,'' is Frances's way of pointing out that by working together--by seeking to collaborate rather than divide--we can almost always get to win-win outcomes.

In her role at the University of Colorado-Boulder, Frances reimagined and transformed the way that the city and the University collaborate, and ushered in a spirit of teamwork in town-and-gown relations that serves as a model for our Nation. She has served as a beacon of opportunity and decency in our community, representing the university and the city with honor, integrity and humanity.

Prior to joining the university, Frances was Executive Director of the Boulder Economic Council, manager of the Sun Microsystems business and finance line for General Electric, and a legislative aide to Harrison Schmidt, U.S. Senator from New Mexico. Frances has lived in Boulder for close to 40 years, during which time she served on crucial local boards such as Foothills United Way, Naturally Boulder, I Have a Dream, and Boulder Rotary. She was also instrumental in establishing CO-Labs, a consortium of Colorado-based research laboratories.

Neither the city of Boulder, nor the University of Colorado-Boulder, would be what they are today without Frances' wisdom, generosity, and tireless advocacy. Frances is the kind of person who makes the world a better place as she goes, and in doing so, inspires those around her to rise similarly to that endeavor. Boulderites and CU Buffs will forever stand on Frances' shoulders, and on the shoulders of those she inspires. On behalf of Colorado CD-2, I thank and honor Frances Draper for her countless contributions to our community.

Madam Speaker, I rise with my colleagues from the State of Colorado to honor the 10 precious lives lost at the King Soopers grocery store in my congressional district in Boulder, Colorado, on March 22nd.

There are no words to express how the Boulder community is feeling in the wake of this tragedy. Our hearts are broken. The loss of life is truly heartbreaking and unimaginable. Ten lives taken too soon; daughters, sons, neighbors, spouses, coworkers, community members, each of whom left a profound impact on our community: Officer Eric Talley, Denny, Neven, Rikki, Tralona, Suzanne, Teri, Kevin, Lynn, and Jody. Today, may we remember them and honor them as we lift their names and express our deepest condolences to their families.

I hope everyone in the House will now join me for a moment of silence.

Mr. Speaker, I had prepared remarks, but I cannot let the minority leader's remarks go unanswered.

Some of my colleagues are aware of this. I was born in Minority Leader McCarthy's district, in Bakersfield, California. My parents came to this country 40 years ago as refugees. Because of the incredible freedoms and opportunities that our wonderful country has to offer, we have been able to live the American Dream. How dare he denigrate a majority that is working to ensure that that dream remains secure for thousands of Dreamers.

In his district, in my district, across the United States, young people who live in fear, young people who have known no other country but the United States as their home, that is what this bill is about.

Let's pass H.R. 6. Let's ensure that these Dreamers are treated the way they should be, as Americans.

Mr. Speaker, I stand before you as the son of refugees. My parents came to this country nearly 40 years ago in search of the American Dream. Their ability to offer my sister and I countless freedoms and opportunities and the fact that just one generation removed I can stand in this chamber as a member of Congress, is powerful proof that that dream still exists.

It is our duty to ensure that access to that dream remains attainable, for the 800,000 young Dreamers currently living in the shadows, for immigrants serving our communities on the frontlines of this pandemic--all while living in tremendous uncertainty and fear.

This bill will codify what we already know to be true, that their home is here.

We must pass H.R. 6. We must pursue the dream and the promise that is embedded in our great nation.

I urge all my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chair for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today for the more than 100,000 Americans who every year are impacted by gun violence, and I rise today to give voice to the overwhelming majority of the American people who support universal background checks.

Communities in Colorado have experienced the tragedy and the grief of gun violence far too many times--Columbine, Aurora, Highlands Ranch.

Mr. Speaker, enough is enough. We have lost too many parents, friends, neighbors, students, and children to gun violence.

This Congress must act, which is why I support H.R. 8. We must act on gun violence. We must pass H.R. 8, and we must send it to President Biden's desk.

Mr. Speaker, Pursuant to House Resolution 147, I offer amendments en bloc.

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

I rise in strong support of en bloc No. 1. These 18 amendments demonstrate the strong and bipartisan support for protecting our wilderness and our public lands.

The amendments in this package include bipartisan legislation from Representatives McKinley and Tonko to unify the way National Heritage Areas are established and managed around the country.

Other amendments would seek to improve the diversity and representation on our public lands, including the Great Dismal Swamp NHA, by Representative McEachin; ensuring all Americans have access to healthy outdoor recreation, especially in urban and low-income cities, such as the Outdoors for All Act by Representative Barragan; and promote outdoor recreation and wellness among servicemembers and veterans, which is pursued by the Brown amendment.

We clarify also our intention regarding wilderness and wildfire with the inclusion of the Panetta amendment, and we even add some small number of wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, and mineral withdrawals with the inclusion of amendments from Representatives Spanberger, Pingree, and DeFazio, respectively.

The inclusion of these amendments would not only improve the bill but improve protections for our public lands and environmental justice communities far beyond the places already covered in Colorado, California, Washington, and Arizona.

Simply put, this amendment reinforces that our public lands are for the benefit and enjoyment of all Americans. I urge support for this en bloc No. 1, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my distinguished colleague from the State of Colorado (Mr. Crow).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Keating).

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to take a moment to say that I have great respect for my colleague, the ranking member, and I know that he is well intentioned with respect to addressing wildfire issues. I would note, for my colleague, that we just recently created a Bipartisan Wildfire Caucus with Representative Curtis to address some of the issues that he describes.

But, look, with respect to the bill that is before the House today, there is

simply no question. This bill does not create any further risks from wildfire, far from it. As I said yesterday, the law as it stands today, section 4(d) provides for the flexibility, ultimately, for measures to be taken as may be necessary for the control of insects, disease, and fire, subject to such conditions as the Secretary of the Interior may deem desirable.

So, there is flexibility within existing law to address any potential issues that might arise. For that reason, I would hope that my colleague's concerns would be alleviated and that he would support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Brownley).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Brownley).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Virginia (Ms. Spanberger).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib), the newest member of our Natural Resources Committee.

Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining, if I might inquire?

Mr. Speaker, I will just simply say that these amendments are common sense. They have been vetted by the various stakeholders and constituents in the communities that support the respective amendments that have been proposed as part of this package, and my hope is that my colleagues could support them. Several of them are bipartisan, as we have mentioned, and they go to the heart of this bill, which is ultimately protecting the most scenic places in our country.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to say, first, I appreciate the gentleman's remarks on this amendment. My friend from Utah, I know from our work together last Congress and this Congress and from our bipartisan work on the Congressional Wildfire Caucus that the gentleman is sincere in his intent that he, too, wants to help address the climate crisis and the threat that it poses to our communities, and I thank him for that.

However, to that end, I would encourage the gentleman and his colleagues to continue to work with us across the aisle on opportunities to create clean, green, well-paying jobs for all Americans. Ultimately, I will be opposing the gentleman's amendment because I don't believe it is in the best interest of this particular legislation.

As we have heard over the course of the debate this morning and yesterday, of course, on the bill, the various areas that are protected in this bill were included at the request of local communities who want to see these lands protected for future generations.

One example, perhaps the most salient in my view, is the Thompson Divide region in my bill, the CORE Act, which has faced years of pressure to develop certain mineral interests that local stakeholders, including the ranching community, oppose.

The largest individual withdrawal area in this bill actually surrounds the Grand Canyon, a region with few identified critical mineral resources, but one that I believe we can all agree is of enormous importance to the American public. That importance, that value of the Grand Canyon, as well as every area included in this bill, is ultimately why we are here today.

It is why my colleagues have gone through years of painstaking work developing a consensus with those local communities to identify those lands of such exceptional value that they believe and the communities believe should be protected for future generations.

The bottom line is this: We believe that some places should be set aside permanently from extraction because some landscapes, like the Grand Canyon, are simply too special to be mined, drilled, or excavated.

Mr. Speaker, with that, I respectfully oppose the gentleman's amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if my colleague might engage in just a brief colloquy so I understand the scope of the amendment. What is the most common way to assess geothermal or other mineral resources? I yield to the gentleman from Utah.

The gentleman is correct, I do have an answer. The most common way is to drill. That is the most common way to assess geothermal and mineral resources.

With much respect to the gentleman, because, again, I know his intent is sincere, but this amendment is not simply a study amendment. This study amendment, ultimately, if it were to succeed, would have the Interior Department drilling countless wells throughout these wilderness areas to ultimately ascertain the information that the distinguished gentleman seeks, and I just don't think that is a prudent way forward.

I would say to the distinguished ranking member, with respect to the areas around the Grand Canyon, that the southwest United States, as I know some of my colleagues are certainly familiar, is littered with remnants of abandoned uranium mines and mill sites that poison the water and the air to this day, and those mines have hit Tribal nations the hardest.

So you can understand why the distinguished chairman of our committee, Chairman Grijalva, would feel so compelled by local communities in the State that he represents to move forward with the Grand Canyon protections that are a part of this important wilderness package.

Mr. Speaker, while I very much respect my colleague and look forward to working with him on future proposals, we respectfully oppose this amendment and would ask for a ``no'' vote.

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

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 147, I rise to offer amendments en bloc.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to en bloc No. 2.

The amendments in this bloc run the gauntlet of ideological opposition to wilderness, public lands protections, and our efforts that respond to the climate crisis. The amendments are not a good-faith effort to attempt to improve the bill or work with the Democratic sponsors of the committee. They simply seek to outright reverse or fundamentally weaken the various designations proposed in this bill.

In many cases, if these amendments were adopted and signed into law, the result would leave these areas with fewer protections than they currently have under the status quo.

Now, I heard a lot of wide-ranging arguments against this bill from the distinguished ranking member, but let me just begin by responding to two points specifically:

First, with respect to this notion of having local community support, I would simply say--and I welcome my colleague to come visit my district in the State of Colorado. I represent a district that is the size of New Jersey--far bigger than Delaware--10 counties, stretches all the way to the Wyoming border, Grand County, half of Eagle County, Summit County. I look forward to taking the ranking member to my district in Colorado and showing him these incredible places that we seek to protect, because I believe if he has a chance to visit them, I may be able to convince him of the same.

I also just say, secondly, with respect to the process complaints, as I said yesterday, every title of this bill was heard, was marked up, passed out of committee, and passed this Chamber, on this floor in the 116th Congress--not once, twice.

So I understand the gentleman's desire to have more amendments. I think it is a bit odd to be arguing that he is unable to amend the bill when he is literally debating the amendments that he is offering as they exist today, that we are proceeding to debate in this fashion.

In any event, I will simply say that these amendments, as I said earlier, are not a good-faith attempt to improve this bill, and for that reason we would oppose them.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stanton).

Mr. Speaker, I would just note for the record with reference to ``Eastern colleagues,'' I represent the State of Colorado, my colleague, Representative DeGette, represents the State of Colorado, the vast majority of the sponsors of this bill represents Western States. My district is not all that far from the gentlewoman's district in New Mexico.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette), the dean of our delegation.

Mr. Speaker, I would just say to my colleague: One, I want to welcome him to the United States Congress, and I thank him for his thoughtful recitation with respect to the amendment he offered.

But I just want to assure him, for example, with respect to the CORE Act, my provision of this bill, it has the support of every county in which a part of the bill is designated. That is to say, in the areas where there are protections being made in the bill, the counties in those areas support this bill. And that is why this bill has attracted such bipartisan support back home in

Colorado and why it has passed the House twice.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to note one thing for the record because there is a reference from my colleague to amendments that she proceeded to make on this bill.

There has been a lot of talk about local control and the support of communities back home. We received communications from various town commissioners regarding the amendments that my colleague proposed, and I will just give you a couple of examples of their responses.

To simply classify this as a land grab is deeply

disrespectful to those who have worked long and hard to

gather the facts, negotiate, and compromise. The issues are

too important to let parties divide us.

That was a county commissioner from San Miguel.

A commissioner from Routt County:

The amendments were issued in a way that ignores our system

of local control. They reject the liberty and freedom of

local jurisdictions to express what is right and just within

those jurisdictions.

The communities impacted by the provisions in this bill support the protections that we are seeking to enact into law. That is why we are here. So with respect, I would again say we oppose the amendments that have been submitted in en bloc No. 2.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson).

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

Mr. Speaker, again, I have great respect for my colleague, the ranking member, but what he purports this bill will do is just simply not the case. I would think that trying to prevent uranium mining in the Grand Canyon would not be controversial. I would hope that my colleagues could come to a consensus on that.

As lawmakers, we all know that strong policy requires compromise. It requires years of input and vigorous debate. I am happy to participate in this debate, and I appreciate the gentleman's participation.

When we think of some of the most iconic, protected places in the United States--Yellowstone, Yosemite, the Grand Canyon--it is difficult to imagine a time when they were not protected, but even those most treasured places in America underwent criticism from Members of Congress. The arguments, actually, that we heard today are nearly identical to those that we were hearing on the floor 100 years ago.

In 1882, Benjamin Harrison, who was then a Senator from Indiana, introduced a bill to designate land lying on the Colorado River in the territory of Arizona as a public park. The bill was forwarded to Interior Secretary Henry Teller, who was a Coloradan, and he opposed conservation of the site. He told

the Senate that the bill was unnecessary and that the area ``does not require the creation of a public park to preserve it.''

Congress was unwilling to proceed in the face of opposition from the executive branch due to the interests of mining, westward territorial mining, and land use. Harrison pushed on. He reintroduced the bill in 1883, again in 1886.

And in 1903, the great conservationist Teddy Roosevelt visited the area he had advocated to protect. He declared that it is ``beyond comparison, beyond description,'' and ``unparalleled.'' ``Let this great wonder of nature remain as it is now. Do nothing to mar its grandeur. . . . You cannot improve upon it. But what you can do is keep it for your children, your children's children, and all who come after you.''

On February 26--on this very day--in 1919, President Wilson signed into law the Grand Canyon National Park Act, 101 years ago today.

Mr. Speaker, let's make that choice again. We passed this bill with bipartisan support. I ask my colleagues to do it again, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 147, I call up the bill (H.R. 803) to designate certain lands in the State of Colorado as components of the National Wilderness Preservation System, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to insert extraneous material on H.R. 803.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 803, the Protecting America's Wilderness and Public Lands Act.

I first want to thank Chairman Grijalva for his incredible leadership of the House Natural Resources Committee, and for bringing his Grand Canyon Protection Act to the floor today as part of the bill that we will be considering.

I have been honored to work alongside Chair Grijalva on the Natural Resources Committee and I am looking forward to continuing that work as the chair of the National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands Subcommittee this Congress.

The bill that we are considering today unifies eight standalone proposals as H.R. 803, the Protecting America's Wilderness and Public Lands Act. Representative DeGette, who is the primary sponsor, Representative Huffman, Representative Chu, Representative Carbajal, Representative Schiff, and Representative Kilmer, have all worked tirelessly to advocate for the places in this bill, and I am looking forward to hearing more from them during today's debate.

Now, before I get carried away with the beauty of Colorado, I would like to acknowledge the product of our combined efforts: 1.5 million acres of wilderness; 1,200 miles of protected wild and scenic rivers; permanent mineral withdrawals for the Grand Canyon and Colorado's Thompson Divide.

Each title of this bill considers how best to protect public lands and provide for local considerations. Together, they will improve access to clean water, clean air, outdoor recreation and, yes, they will even support jobs and our economy.

Protecting public lands is a key part of the climate solution, and I am proud to say that we continue those protections here today with the formal support of the Biden administration.

My contribution to this bill is the Colorado Outdoor Recreation and Economy Act, or the CORE Act. Through collaboration, consultation, negotiation, local elected officials, community members, businesses, outdoor recreation and conservation groups, ranchers, sportsmen, they have all come together to protect the outdoor areas in Colorado that we love.

In many cases, Coloradans have been asking Congress to protect these areas for a decade or longer. In total, the CORE Act would conserve more than 400,000 acres of public land, and each the CORE Act's four sections were separately crafted by Coloradans.

Camp Hale is one of the special places protected by the CORE Act. High on Colorado's Continental Divide, surrounded by the White River National Forest, the CORE Act would designate the first-ever National Historic Landscape at Camp Hale to honor the storied legacy of the Army's 10th Mountain Division.

The soldiers that trained at Camp Hale led our Nation to victory in World War II, then went on to create the modern outdoor industry, which today contributes billions to Colorado's growing outdoor recreation economy.

To similar ends, the CORE Act formally establishes numerous boundaries, also a handful of National Park Service units without a formal designation by Congress, which would be in this bill. This long overdue designation will provide new fishing access, for example, for sportsmen in the Gunnison River basin.

And in yet another win for Colorado sportsmen, the CORE Act protects Colorado's only migration corridor over Interstate 70 for elk, mule deer, and other wildlife.

These areas are just a small sampling, Mr. Speaker, of the many non- wilderness and locally supported protections included in this bill today.

Additionally, the CORE Act makes a contribution of 73,000 acres to our National Wilderness Preservation System. The CORE Act wilderness protects some of Colorado's most iconic peaks, including two fourteeners: Wilson Peak and Mount Sneffels.

And of the 400,000 acres of public lands covered by the CORE Act, about half is for the withdrawal and protection of the Thompson Divide.

The Thompson Divide, through ranching and outdoor recreation, contributes $30 million a year to Colorado's statewide economy. It is one of

our most treasured landscapes and an area that is simply too valuable to drill for oil and gas.

The thoughtful input and collaboration put into the CORE Act is apparent in each title of the Protecting America's Wilderness and Public Lands Act.

Now, my colleagues may have ideological differences when it comes to protecting our public lands, but what we can all agree on is that the United States is blessed with some of the most beautiful landscapes in the world. And it is thanks to the careful consideration of the legislators that came before us and the legislators that are gathered here today on the floor that we are able to enjoy them today, and that our children will be able to enjoy them tomorrow.

So I urge my colleagues to consider the decades of work that have gone into the bill that is before us and to recognize the chance that we all have to vote to protect these places.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, before I yield, I would be remiss if I didn't say with respect to Colorado in particular, and with much respect to the ranking member, the Outdoor Alliance sent a letter to Chairman Grijalva just a few days ago in support of this bill. It was signed by the CEO of the International Mountain Bicycling Association, so I think they would have much to disagree with, with respect to some of the statements that were made.

Finally, I will also say, every bill that is a component of this measure was marked up in the last Congress, heard in the last Congress, and passed the last Congress twice.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Huffman), the distinguished chairman of the Water, Oceans, and Wildlife Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Washington (Mr. Kilmer).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Carbajal).

Mr. Speaker, with much respect to my colleague from

Louisiana--and I enjoy working with him--I just want to assure him, because he spent a great deal of time in Colorado, that he is still going to be able to enjoy the wonderful outdoor recreation that our State has under this bill.

If anything, his ability to do so will only increase. And that is why the American Whitewater Association, the American Canoe Association, the International Mountain Bicycling Association, The American Alpine Club, and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers all support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Chu).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff), the chairman.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time each side has remaining?

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Arizona (Mr. O'Halleran).

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, there is quite a lot to respond to. I will just respond to a couple of quick points.

Virtually all the BLM wilderness land that was referenced with respect to title I has been managed as wilderness essentially for the better part of the last 40 years.

With respect to wildfires, I would encourage my colleague to read the Wilderness Act because section 4(d) of the Wilderness Act says: ``Such measures may be taken as may be necessary in the control of fire, insects, and diseases.'' That is the law.

Finally, I have to say, with respect to the reference to constituent support, with respect to the CORE Act, the bill that we introduced as part of this component bill, Gunnison County, Pitkin County, San Juan County, Ouray County, San Miguel County, Eagle County, they all support the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I would encourage my colleagues again to follow the lead of the folks and the voices at the local level who are imploring us to pass this bill. I reserve the balance of my time.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to say thank you again to Chairman Grijalva, and to each of my colleagues, Representative DeGette, Representative Schiff, Representative Huffman, and all of my fellow Members who we heard from today who worked so hard on this important legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I have to repeat this because it is important. Every title of this bill was heard in the 116th Congress, I was at those hearings. Every title was marked up. I attended those mark-ups with the ranking member. Every single title of this bill passed in committee, passed on the floor twice, many of them in bipartisan fashion.

I agree with the ranking member. At the end of the day we have an obligation to leave our environment better than when we found it. That is what this bill is all about. Protecting the most iconic and beautiful places in the United States of America so that my children, your children, Mr. Speaker, and the ranking member's children can continue to enjoy these incredible places in our country.

Mr. Speaker, I hope that my colleagues will vote ``yes'' on this important legislation and join us in this effort.

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

Mr. President, distinguished Senators, counsel, like several of you, I am a child of immigrants. And as a son of immigrants, I believe firmly in my heart that the United States is the greatest Republic that this world has ever known.

A hallmark of our Republic since the days of George Washington has been the peaceful transfer of power. For centuries, we have accepted it as fact.

Unfortunately, sadly, we know now that we can no longer take that for granted because, as Lead Manager Raskin explained, on January 6, the peaceful transition of power was violently interrupted when a mob stormed this Capitol and desecrated this Chamber.

As you will see during the course of this trial, that mob was summoned, assembled, and incited by the former President of the United States, Donald Trump, and he did that because he wanted to stop the transfer of power so that he could retain power, even though he had lost the election. And when the violence erupted, when they were here in our building, with weapons, he did nothing to stop it.

If we are to protect our Republic and prevent something like this from ever happening again, he must be convicted.

Now, I want to be very clear about what we will show you during the course of this trial. As my fellow managers present our case to you today, tonight, and tomorrow, it will be helpful to think about President Trump's incitement of insurrection in three distinct parts: provocation, the attack, and the harm.

Let's start with the provocation. We will show, during the course of this trial, that this attack was provoked by the President, incited by the President, and, as a result, it was predictable, and it was foreseeable. And, of course, that makes sense.

This mob was well orchestrated. Their conduct was intentional. They did it all in plain sight--proudly, openly, and loudly--because they believed, they truly believed that they were doing this for him; that this was their patriotic duty.

They even predicted that he would protect them. And for the most part, they were right. In his unique role as Commander in Chief of our country and as the one person whom the mob was listening to and following orders from, he had the power to stop it, and he didn't.

Now, some have said that President Trump's remarks, his speech on January 6, was just a speech. Well, let me ask you this: When in our history has a speech led thousands of people to storm our Nation's Capitol with weapons, to scale the walls, break windows, kill a Capitol Police officer?

This was not just a speech. It didn't just happen. And as you evaluate the facts that we present to you, it will become clear exactly where that mob came from, because here is the thing: President Trump's words, as you will see, on January 6 in that speech, just like the mob's actions, were carefully chosen. Those words had a very specific meaning to that crowd. And how do we know this? Because in the weeks prior to, during, and after the election, he used the same words over and over and over again. You will hear over and over three things--you can see them on the screens--first, what Lead Manager Raskin referred to as the ``big lie,'' that the ``election was stolen, full of fraud, rigged.'' You will hear over and over him using that lie to urge his supporters to ``never concede'' and ``stop the steal.'' Finally, you will hear the call to arms, that it was his supporters' patriotic duty to fight like hell. To do what? To stop the steal. To stop the election from being stolen by showing up in this very Chamber. To stop you. To stop us.

I respectfully ask that you remember those three phrases as you consider the evidence today--``The election was stolen,'' ``Stop the Steal,'' and ``Fight like hell''--because they did not just appear on January 6. Let me show you what I mean. Let's start with the ``big lie.''

You will see during this trial that the President realized, really by last spring, that he could lose, he might lose the election. So what did he do? He started planting the seeds to get some of his supporters ready by saying that he could only lose the election if it was stolen.

In other words, really what he did was create a no-lose scenario: either he won the election or he would have some angry supporters--not all but some--who believed that if he lost, the election had to be rigged, and they would be angry because he was telling Americans that their vote had been stolen. And in America, our vote is our voice. So his false claims about election fraud, that was the drumbeat being used to inspire, instigate, and ignite them, to anger them.

Watch this clip.

(Text of video presentation.)

President TRUMP. Because we are not going to let this

election be taken away from us. That's the only way they are

going to win this. We are not going to let it happen.

(Applause.)

It is the only way we can be--it is the only way we can

lose, in my opinion, is massive fraud.

We all know what happened after that. He lost. He lost the election. But remember, he had that no-lose scenario that I referenced earlier. He told his base that the election was stolen, as he had forecasted, and then he told them: Your election has been stolen, but you cannot concede. You must stop the steal.

(Text of video presentation.)

President TRUMP: You can't let another person steal that

election from you. All over the country, people are together

in holding up signs: `Stop the Steal.'

The Democrats are trying to steal the White House. You

cannot let them. You just can't let them.

Now, while he is inciting his supporters, he is also simultaneously doing everything he possibly can to overturn the election.

First, he begins with the courts--a legitimate avenue, legitimate avenue--to challenge the election, but he ignores all of their adverse rulings when all of his claims are thrown out.

Then he moves on to try to pressure State election officials to block the election results for his opponent even though he had lost in their States. You will hear my fellow managers discuss that in detail.

Then he tries to threaten State election officials to actually change the votes to make him the winner, even threatening criminal penalties if they refused.

He had the Justice Department investigate his claims, and even they found no support for those claims. So he tried to persuade some Members of his party in Congress to block the certification of his vote with attacks in public forums.

When that failed, he tried to intimidate the Vice President of the United States of America to refuse to certify the vote and send it back to the States.

None of it worked. So what does he do, with his back against the wall, when all else has failed? He turned back to his supporters. He had already spent months telling them that the election was stolen, and he amplified it further. He turned it up a notch. He told them that they had to be ready not just to stop the steal but to fight like hell.

(Text of video presentation.)

President TRUMP. We are going to fight for the survival of

our nation. And we are going to keep on fighting.

We will never surrender, we will only win.

Now is not the time to retreat. Now is the time to fight

harder than ever before.

We have to go all the way. We are going to fight like hell,

I will tell you right now.

We will not bend, we will not break, we will not yield. We

will never give in. We will never give up. We will never back

down. We will never, ever surrender.

You will see that in the months the President made thes statements, people listened. Armed supporters surrounded election officials' homes. The secretary of state for Georgia got death threats. Officials warned the President that his rhetoric was dangerous, and it was going to result in deadly violence. And that is what makes this so different, because when he saw firsthand the violence that his conduct was creating, he didn't stop it. He didn't condemn the violence. He incited it further, and he got more specific. He didn't just tell them to fight like hell; he told them how, where, and when. He made sure they had advance notice, 18 days' advance notice. He sent this ``save the date'' for January 6. He told them to march to the Capitol and fight like hell on January 6, as Lead Manager Raskin said, the exact same day we were certifying the election results. What time was that rally scheduled for? The exact same time that this Chamber was certifying the election results in joint session. When did he conclude his speech? Literally moments before Speaker Pelosi had gaveled us into session.

Many of us were in the House during that joint session of Congress. I was sitting two rows behind Leader Schumer and Leader McConnell. I remember it vividly. And as we were standing there fulfilling our solemn oath to the Constitution, the President was finishing his speech just a couple of miles away. How did he conclude that infamous speech? With a final call to action. He told them to march down Pennsylvania Avenue, to come here; that it was their patriotic duty because the election had been stolen. And when they heard his speech, they understood his words and what they meant because they had heard it before.

Let's take just a minute and really look at his words on January 6 as he spoke at the Save America rally. Remember, I told you you would hear three phrases: ``The election was stolen,'' ``Stop the Steal,'' and ``Fight like hell.'' Let's start with that first phrase.

(Text of video presentation of 1-6-2021.)

President TRUMP. All of us here today do not want to see

our election victory stolen.

There has never been anything like this. It is a pure theft

in American history. Everybody knows it. Make no mistake,

this election was stolen from you, from me, and from the

country.

Now, of course, each of you heard those words before. So had the crowd. The President had spent months telling his supporters that the election had been stolen, and he used this speech to incite them further, to inflame them, to stop the steal, to stop the certification of the election results.

(Text of video presentation of 1-6-2021.)

President TRUMP. We will never give up, we will never

concede. It doesn't happen. You don't concede when there's

theft involved. And to use a favorite term that all of you

people really came up with: We will stop the steal.

We must stop the steal.

Finally, the President used the speech as a call to arms. It was not rhetorical. Some of his supporters had been primed for this over many months. As you will learn, days before this speech, as Lead Manager Raskin noted, there were vast reports across all major media outlets that thousands of people would be armed, that they would be violent. You will learn that Capitol Police and the FBI reported in the days leading up to the attack that thousands in the crowd would be targeting the Capitol specifically, that they had arrested people with guns the night before the attack on weapons charges.

And this is what our Commander in Chief said to the crowd in the face of those warnings, right before they came here.

(Text of video presentation of 1-6-2021.)

President TRUMP. We will not let them silence your voices.

We're not going to let it happen. Not going let it happen.

(People chanting: ``Fight for Trump.'')

President TRUMP. Thank you. And you have to get your people

to fight because you'll never take back our country with

weakness. You have to show strength, and you have to be

strong. And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don't

fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore.

``You have to get your people to fight,'' he told them.

Senators, this clearly was not just one speech. It didn't just happen. It was part of a carefully planned, months-long effort with a very specific instruction: Show up on January 6, and get your people to fight the certification.

He incited it. It was foreseeable. And again, you don't have to take my word for it. The President's former Chief of Staff--he is a retired marine, four-star general, was confirmed by this body to be the Secretary of Homeland Security, overwhelming vote--that man was John Kelly. On the day after the insurrection, he said this:

(Text of video presentation.)

Mr. KELLY. You know, the president knows who he's talking

to when he tweets or when he makes statements. He knows who

he is talking to. He knows what he wants them to do. And the

fact that he said the things, he has been saying the things

he has been saying since the election, and encouraging

people, there is no surprise, again, at what happened

yesterday.

No surprise. Think about that. No surprise. The President had every reason to know that this would happen because he assembled the mob, he summoned the mob, and he incited the mob. He knew when he took that podium on that fateful morning that those in attendance had heeded the words and they were waiting for his orders to begin fighting.

And that, of course, brings me, my fellow managers, to what happened here in this building. As Lead Manager Raskin stated, my colleagues are going to walk through the events of January 6 and the evidence in very great detail. They are painful to watch and to recount, and I am not going to repeat the evidence now.

But I do want to be clear about what also happened during that terrible attack, and that is this: that President Trump, once again, failed us because when the violence erupted, when we and the law enforcement officials protecting you were under attack, as each of you were being evacuated from this Chamber from a violent mob, as we were being evacuated from the House, he could have immediately and forcefully intervened to stop the violence. It was his duty as Commander in Chief to stop the violence, and he alone had that power, not just because of his unique role as Commander in Chief but because they believed that they were following his orders. They said so.

(Text of videotape presentation.)

President Trump!

President Trump!

Fight for Trump!

Fight for Trump!

Fight for Trump!

We were invited by the President of the United States!

I thought I was following my President. I thought I was

following what we were called to do. President Trump

requested that we be in DC on the 6th.

You heard it from them. They were doing what he wanted them to do. They wouldn't have listened to you, to me, to the Vice President of the United States who they were attacking. They didn't stop in the face of law enforcement, police officers fighting for their lives to stop them. They were following the President. He alone, our Commander in Chief, had the power to stop them and he didn't.

You will hear evidence tonight, tomorrow, throughout the trial, about his refusal as Commander in Chief to respond to numerous desperate pleas on the phone, across social media, begging him to stop the attack. And you will see his relentless attack on Vice President Pence, who was at that very moment hiding with his family as armed extremists were chanting, ``Hang Mike Pence,'' calling him a traitor.

You will see that even when he did finally, 3\1/2\ hours into the attack, tell these people to go home in peace, he added, as Lead Manager Raskin said, I will quote:

You're very special. We love you.

Think for a moment--just a moment--of the lives lost that day, of the more than 140 wounded police officers, and ask yourself if, as soon as this had started, President Trump had simply gone onto TV, just logged onto Twitter and said ``Stop the attack.'' If he had done so with even half as much force as he said ``Stop the steal,'' how many lives would we have saved? Sadly, he didn't do that.

At the end of the day, the President was not successful in stopping the certification. That we know, thanks to the bravery of our law enforcement and to the bravery of the Senators in this

room, each of you who still fulfilled your constitutional duty even under the threat of mortal peril. But there can be no doubt of the grave harm that he caused to our elected leaders; to us, our families; to all who work at the Capitol, our staff, your staff; to our brave Capitol police, who defend us tirelessly with little thanks, who believed that they had a Commander in Chief who would defend and protect them, instead put them in harm's way; to those killed for heeding his command; to our democracy and the system, which ensures that we have a President elected by the people; to our national security and our standing in the world. The harm was real. The damage was real.

Five people lost their lives on that terrible, tragic day. A woman was shot dead 50 feet from where we later certified the election results. And for those who question just how bad it was, criminal complaints recently unsealed by the Department of Justice are more than revealing. You all see one of these documents on the screen. In the charging affidavit of one of the leaders of the Proud Boys, we learned that members of this group ``said that they would have killed . . . Mike Pence if given the chance.''

In another, we learned of the tweet in realtime while they were in the building stating:

We broke into the Capitol . . . we got inside, we did our

part. . . . We were looking for Nancy [Pelosi] to shoot her

in the friggin' brain but we didn't find her.

And for anyone who suggests otherwise, these defendants themselves have told you exactly why they were here. You will se this in the trial, that in the halls of the Capitol, on social media, in news interviews, and in charging documents, they confirmed they were following the President's orders. You can see some of the statements on that screen, one who said:

Trump wants all able-bodied patriots.

Another:

President Trump is calling us to FIGHT! . . . This isn't a

joke.

Another:

I thought I was following my President. I thought I was

following what we were called to do.

Our President wants us here.

We wait and take orders from [the] president.

He made them believe, over many weeks, that the election was stolen and they were following his command to take back their country.

As I prepared for today--yesterday, this trial--one memory that I couldn't shake: It was on the night of January 6 and the feeling of walking back onto the House floor and seeing many of you there. I remember us finishing our task at 4 in the morning, and as I walked off the floor, I was so grateful--so grateful--for the opportunity to thank the Vice President of the United States, Mike Pence, for his actions, for standing before us and asking us to follow our oath and our faith and our duty.

We only got a couple of hours of sleep that morning. Early the next day, I called my dad, who came to this country, as I mentioned, as an immigrant 40 years ago, and I told him that the proudest moment, by far, of serving in Congress, for me, was going back on to the floor with each of you to finish the work that we had started.

I am humbled to be back with you today. And just as on January 6, when we overcame that attack on our Capitol, on our country, I am hopeful that at this trial, we can use our resolve and our resilience to, again, uphold our democracy by faithfully applying the law, vindicating the Constitution, and holding President Trump accountable for his actions.

Madam Speaker, so often the safety of our communities falls to the responsibility of just a few. Today, I rise to honor one of those few: Chief Tom DeMint of the northern Colorado's Poudre Fire Authority.

In addition to his nearly 33 years with the Fire Authority, Chief DeMint served for 11 years as E.M.S. personnel, culminating in 44 years of dedicated service to our community. Now, he is heading into a very well-earned retirement.

A leader with a steadfast work ethic, caring demeanor, and a great sense of humor, Chief DeMint's service is concluding after assisting the Fire Authority in adapting to the pandemic while also battling one of the most long-lasting and devastating wildfire seasons in our state's history. The chief partnered with Poudre's 220 Fire Authority personnel to combat these fires and ensure the safety of our civilians. His leadership and expertise were irreplaceable during these trying times and will be sorely missed by all those who served alongside him.

Let us remember today and all days that our communities are able, not only to survive, but also thrive, because of those who run into the fire for us.

I share my endearing gratitude to Chief DeMint for his tireless service and wish him a happy and relaxing retirement.

Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding.

President Trump's actions--encouraging, inciting a mob that stormed the United States Capitol for the sole purpose of stopping the constitutionally mandated counting of electoral votes--cannot go unanswered by this body. He must be impeached.

If Congress does not act, if we shrink from our constitutional responsibilities to defend our Republic, it will undoubtedly undermine the vision of America as ``the last best hope of earth,'' as Abraham Lincoln so eloquently said so many years ago.

To the millions of Americans watching today: I hope that you understand that we are proceeding on this path out of love for our country.

I will honor my oath today. I will vote for impeachment, and I pray that my colleagues will muster the courage to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, I had planned remarks here, but I have to respond to my colleague. His words are simply too much to bear.

The gentleman talks a lot about the mob and culpability. Who summoned the mob? Who encouraged the mob? Who incited the mob? You know as well as I do that the President did. I stood here 6 days ago in this exact same spot, and I quoted Lincoln's admonition that ``we shall nobly save, or meanly lose, the last best hope of Earth.''

Less than 10 minutes later, a violent mob breached the Capitol, the first breach of this hallowed building, the citadel of liberty, since the War of 1812.

Congress must respond. Our undertaking here is not about politics. It is a matter of conscience. I support the distinguished gentleman from Maryland's resolution. I pray the Vice President will honor his oath and reconsider and invoke the provisions of the 25th Amendment.

Madam Speaker, today I seek to highlight the career of an exemplary public servant from Colorado's Second Congressional District. For fourteen years, Summit County Commissioner Thomas Davidson tirelessly devoted himself to the betterment of his community.

Thomas has never strayed during his public service from his commitment to health, safety, and equity. As the Chairman of the Combined Housing Authority, he advocated for affordable housing for all. He spent 13 years on the board of Early Childhood Options which started the County's Head Start program--providing critical resources to low-income families in this mountain county. In 2013, he was appointed by the Governor of Colorado to the State's Early Childhood Leadership Commission, and in 2015, was called on by the Governor once more to serve on the State Board of Human Services--a testament to his leadership and tenacity.

As Summit County's first openly gay County Commissioner and a vocal advocate for LGBTQ rights, Commissioner Davidson has broken barriers for the next generations and set an excellent example for his community. I am so proud to represent such a dedicated public servant and member of his community.

I am grateful for all the work Commissioner Davidson has done as a Summit County Commissioner and am glad that he will continue his involvement in his community even after his time as a County Commissioner is over. I wish him a restful and well-deserved retirement from public service.

Madam Speaker, today I wish to recognize the incredible work and achievements of Larimer County Commissioner Steve Johnson. For 24 years, Steve has devoted himself to serving his community and the State of Colorado, including spending 12 years serving in the Colorado Legislature and 12 years serving as a Larimer County Commissioner.

Prior to becoming a Larimer County Commissioner, Mr. Johnson served in the Colorado House of Representatives for 6 years, during which time he served as the Majority Caucus Chairman. He followed that service with an equally long 6-year stint in the Colorado Senate, serving on the Joint Budget Committee and Senate Appropriations Committee.

While serving as Larimer County Commissioner, he helped the county's recovery efforts as Larimer County faced some of the largest natural disasters in the county's history. The High Park Fire in 2012, the One Hundred Year Flood in 2013, and the Cameron Peak Fire and COVID-19 in 2020 have caused extensive damage and posed great challenges to the county's leadership. Commissioner Johnson helped steer the community through these disasters with level-headed determination and a commitment to the people of Larimer County.

He was also instrumental in helping to pass the Behavioral Health Initiative, a measure which led to Larimer County being a leader in Colorado for providing mental health services and substance abuse care and increased available resources for his community.

After 24 years of public service, Commissioner Johnson certainly deserves a happy and restful retirement. On behalf of the people of Colorado's 2nd Congressional district, thank you Commissioner Johnson for your outstanding dedication to public service.

Madam Speaker, today I wish to recognize and honor the work of retiring Summit County Commissioner Karn Stiegelmeier. Karn has continuously devoted much of her time and energy to maintaining our beautiful public lands and environment in Summit County, Colorado--a community I am so proud to represent. Prior to serving as a County Commissioner, she worked for the National Forest Service and National Park Service, where she served in the crucial roles of wildland firefighter and park ranger, and also taught students in Summit County.

During her time as a Summit County Commissioner, Karn continued to advocate for the protection of our environment and was fiercely determined to preserve the precious quality of life we enjoy in Colorado. She also continuously advocated for forest health and wildfire prevention, both of which have helped Colorado's Second Congressional District in incalculable ways.

She has truly shown an incredible determination to better her community, and I thank her for her many years of service as County Commissioner. I am grateful for all the work Karn has done during her time as a Summit County Commissioner and wish her a restful and well- deserved retirement from public service.

Madam Speaker, today I want to honor an extraordinary leader and colleague of mine who has worked tirelessly for his constituents, Colorado State Senator Mike Foote. After serving 5 years in the Colorado House of Representatives, Senator Foote then served an additional two years as State Senator for District 17 in the Colorado Senate.

The time and effort Senator Foote put into representing his community is a testament to his ability and dedication to his constituency. Senator Foote worked hard to generate bipartisan agreements on legislation, putting his constituents above politics. He worked tirelessly to represent the values of his constituents, especially as a leader in critical efforts to fight climate change and preserve our environment for generations to come.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, he authored legislation that was signed into law to protect consumers from price gouging and other deceptive business practices, and he has long worked to protect consumers all across Colorado.

Senator Foote has been a dedicated public servant to the people of Boulder County for many years, and he has made a tremendous impact on his community. I am grateful for his work, and I am sure that he will leave a lasting legacy in our great state. I thank him for his service and contributions to the state of Colorado and wish him a restful and well-deserved retirement from public service.

Madam Speaker, today I wish to recognize Ms. Deb Gardner, who has served the people of Boulder County for over a decade, and since 2012, has tirelessly devoted herself to serving her community as a Boulder County Commissioner. Over the past eight years, Deb has worked hard to make Boulder County a better place. In light of Deb's retirement, I want to take the opportunity to commend her distinguished career in public service.

Deb has never been afraid to stand up for what she believes in. Her work in Boulder is a reflection of her passion for equity, education, and the environment. A truly indispensable community member, she has fought to maintain Boulder County's natural beauty and ensure that everyone feels welcome in the community.

Prior to becoming a County Commissioner, she represented Colorado's 11th district, and the people of Boulder County, in the Colorado State Legislature as a State Representative, where she served on the House Transportation, Legislative Audit, Business and Economic Development, and Health Benefit Exchange Review committees. She has helped her community through countless disasters, including the 2013 flooding, historic wildfires, and the immense challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic this year, and I am grateful for her leadership.

For the entirety of her career, Deb has led by example and inspired countless others along the way. I am grateful for her distinguished record of service, and I thank Commissioner Gardner for her service to her community. I wish her a restful and well-deserved retirement.