Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor and recognize Mr. Stewart Resnick as the recipient of the 2019 Bakersfield College Foundation Individual Philanthropist of the Year Award.

Stewart is the chairman and president of The Wonderful Company, a multi-billion dollar global company known for its iconic brands like Wonderful Pistachios, Wonderful Halos, POM Wonderful, and FIJI Water, to name a few.

The Wonderful Company empire began in 1978 when Stewart and his wife Lynda Resnick purchased a parcel of California Central Valley farmland. Since then, Stewart has overseen all financial, legal, real estate, strategy, human resources, and business operations for the company. Under his guidance, Wonderful has become so successful that every year, nearly half of all American households purchase their products.

The Wonderful Company has continuously given back to the communities where its employees live and work--contributing an average of $50 million annually to community development efforts, educational programs, and a comprehensive employee health and wellness program Stewart has long been passionate about free market sustainability, and has made significant investments in sustainability research, including implementing advanced irrigation technologies, extensive solar installations at Wonderful facilities, and utilizing fuel cells to generate electricity without combustion or air pollution. Additionally, Stewart founded the Resnick Sustainability Institute at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech), which focuses on innovative science and engineering research to develop solutions to global energy challenges.

Even outside of The Wonderful Company, Stewart's philanthropy is far- reaching. Among his generous contributions are The Milken Institute's Lynda and Stewart Resnick Center for Public Health, the Stewart and Lynda Resnick Neuropsychiatric Hospital at the UCLA School of Medicine, the Resnick Program for Food Law & Policy at the UCLA School of Law, and the Lynda and Stewart Resnick Exhibition Pavilion at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art.

Stewart's generous philanthropic efforts make him a well-deserving recipient for the Bakersfield College Foundation Silver Medal, and I want to thank him for his many selfless contributions to the communities and citizens of the Central Valley.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor and recognize Aera Energy, and President and CEO, Christina Sistrunk, as the recipient of the 2019 Bakersfield College Foundation Corporate Philanthropist of the Year Award.

Industry-leading oil and gas producer Aera Energy has displayed its commitment to California and the communities in which it operates for nearly 100 years. Jointly owned by Shell and ExxonMobil but operated as a stand-alone company with its own board and managers, Aera is proudly based in Bakersfield, California and in Kern County, one of the largest oil-producing regions in the entire country. Innovative approaches to engineering, lean processes, and data quality helped Aera become a titan of industry--Aera produces about 125,000 barrels of oil and 32 million cubic feet of natural gas each day, accounting for nearly one- quarter of California's oil production annually. However, its community involvement and philanthropy are what truly sets them apart.

Aera actively encourages their employees to participate in events and causes that strengthen communities, recognizing individual employees who go above and beyond in this regard. Through various programs like Partnership A.E.R.A. (Achieving Excellence, Rewarding Academics), the Community Reading Project, and multiple high school programs, Aera employees are heavily involved in the communities where they live and work. In addition to these volunteering and mentoring efforts, Aera donates to over 100 community organizations each year.

Bakersfield is fortunate to have a premier oil and gas producer like Aera so dedicated to the betterment of its people and community.

Under Mrs. Sistrunk's leadership, I am sure that this will not be the last time Aera Energy is honored for its corporate philanthropy, generosity, and community involvement. On behalf of California's 23rd Congressional District, I want to thank Aera Energy for its countless contributions to communities throughout the Central Valley.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor and recognize Mrs Jerry Ludeke as the recipient of the 2019 Bakersfield College Foundation Service Medal.

Jerry's passion for academia can be traced back over half a century to her days as an undergraduate at Indiana University After graduating, Jerry began teaching at a junior high school before returning to school to complete a Masters in Fine Arts at Tulane University in New Orleans, where she concurrently taught several undergraduate courses. Upon completion of her Masters, Jerry selflessly decided to serve as a missionary for the Presbyterian Church in Beirut, Lebanon, at the then- named Beirut College for Women. Increased hostilities in the Middle East cut the mission short, and Jerry returned to school once again-- this time as a graduate student at Stanford University There, she met fellow Stanford graduate and Army veteran, John Ludeke.

Jerry and John married in 1959 and settled in Bakersfield, California, where they quickly

became involved in the community. Both educators, John taught at Bakersfield High School while Jerry held multiple positions at Bakersfield College before leaving to raise her two boys, Kevin and Scott. Although she did not formally return to teaching until the boys started high school, Jerry remained committed to her role as an educator, and founded the Volunteer Tutoring Program at Bakersfield College. In 1975 she returned full-time to the Bakersfield College Learning Center, where she worked until she and John retired together in 1994.

Jerry's commitment to community service is just as impressive as her academic history. Over the years she developed and served as the first secretary for the Holloway-Gonzales Library in Bakersfield, volunteered at the Friendship House pre-school, served as the president of the Kern County Historical Society, served on the board of both the Kern Memorial Society and Friendship Force, and directed the Bakersfield College Archives. Such extensive community involvement would overwhelm almost anyone, but for Jerry these are just the tip of the iceberg.

The Bakersfield College Foundation Sterling Silver Medal recognizes Jerry's lifelong commitment to hard work and the betterment of the Bakersfield community' through the power of education. Her input on various boards and councils, and her leadership at Bakersfield College, has had an immeasurable impact on the lives of countless people. On behalf of California's 23rd Congressional District, I want to thank Jerry for her leadership and philanthropy to the communities and citizens of the Central Valley.

Madam Speaker, I thank the ranking member for his work and his love of music.

This new Democrat socialist majority wants the Federal Government to interfere in our free and fair elections. This bill today, the majority's most important bill, is a massive Federal Government takeover that would undermine the integrity of our elections. But before I explain why, I want to highlight how the majority has gone to great steps to actually hide their prize legislation from the American people.

Madam Speaker, the American public need to understand, when you become the majority, you reserve 1 through 10 of the numbering of bills, and you want to make your number one bill the most important thing you do for America today.

Two years ago we were in the majority, Madam Chair, and we made the most important bill to make sure the people's money went back to them. We wanted to cut your taxes.

The most important bill that the Democrat socialist majority has is to take more of your money and give it to the politicians who want to vote for this bill. How ironic.

Now, because H.R. 1 has had such a broad spectrum of where to go, it was referred to 10 committees. Imagine that, 10 committees.

But 40 percent of this bill has not even been marked up because, what did they do? They only went to one committee.

What committee did they go to? They went to the very special committee, House Administration.

This House Administration, the Members who sit on House Administration, I am sure they are probably selected from the conference committee that goes forward to select individuals for it.

Oh, no, no, no. That is not the committee we went to. House Administration is selected just by two people: the Speaker and the leader. The Speaker and the leader.

And do you know what? It is one of the smallest committees we have. Because if H.R. 1 is so important to the American public, I am sure we would want everybody to see it. But, no, it is just nine people of this House.

And in their jurisdiction, they didn't get to mark up the whole bill. They only had about 60 percent of the bill to mark up.

But I want to thank our Republican colleagues on this committee: first of all, Ranking Member Rodney Davis, Mark Walker, and Barry Loudermilk. They were very thoughtful.

They realized, even though the chair of the House Administration, when asked during the markup, would the other committees mark up this bill, she promised--she promised--that the other nine committees would see it, that the other nine committees could mark up that other 40 percent that House Administration didn't get to mark up.

But lo and behold, that is not true. Just as this new Democrat socialist majority said there will be 72 hours before things come to the floor, no. Yesterday we learned that can mean an hour; those other 71 don't matter.

But what the Republicans on the other side of the aisle did, they wanted there to be a thoughtful approach on the issue. They provided 28 amendments to improve H.R. 1.

Do you know how many the Democrats on the other side that the Speaker selected, those six Members--they didn't vote for one of them. They could not find a way that, of those 28 amendments, one of them could be accepted.

I guess the Speaker selected the right people for the House Administration.

Now, they call this bill the For the People Act, but I want to explain why I actually think it is for the politicians, because everyone who votes for this bill today, they are all going to go home a little more excited. Do you know why? They just got the taxpayers to actually fund their elections, and they picked it in a manner where you don't even know, and the multiplying effect of the 6 to 1, who provided it.

So let's talk about ``For the Politicians Act.''

First, H.R. 1 wants to give American taxpayer dollars to political candidates and campaigns, regardless of whether you support it. We are not talking just Republicans or Democrats running. Any view they want with any impression they want to say.

We just had a bill on the floor yesterday about hate. I imagine there are going to be quite a few people who run for office who get taxpayers' money who talk a lot of hate. I don't think America wants their money spent on that.

This bill will give candidates a government match of 6 to 1, not a dollar for dollar. No, no, no, no. The ``For the Politicians Act'' multiplies it. So, if a citizen gives $200, the government gives $1,200.

That is why the new Democrat socialist party is so excited by this bill. That is why they made it their number one priority. Hard-earned taxpayer money should go toward building roads, bridges, or giving a boost to struggling Americans, not just to political campaigns.

I am not sure about these other districts, but when I campaigned, no one came to me and said: ``Let's make sure you take more of my taxpayer money to give to you to run.'' I can't remember one time anybody on any side of the aisle asked for that.

Worse, this bill would allow political candidates to profit off actually running for office on the American taxpayers' dime. The bill expands the use of taxpayer funds to include the childcare, the rent, the mortgage, or even professional development.

We have now just created a new industry. Think of the individual who just wants to run for office, who wants to spew hate, and says: ``The taxpayers are going to pay for it. I am just going to keep doing it.''

Second, H.R. 1 legalizes the vote for convicted felons, even if that person was convicted of election fraud. Can you imagine that? We are going to vote on a bill today that provides more taxpayer money to politicians, that is going to allow felons to vote, because we don't care what States say. But even if you are convicted of election fraud, come on down; we have got something special for you.

And this wasn't created by one new member of this Democrat socialist party. It is the most important bill that they selected. It is H.R. 1. No other bill matters to them but this. It just doesn't make sense to me.

Third, H.R. 1 would weaken the security of our elections and make it harder to protect against voter fraud. It automatically registers voters from the DMV.

Voting is a right. It is not a mandate.

This legislation would also prevent officials from ever removing ineligible voters from the rolls or even verifying the accuracy of voter information.

To that point, H.R. 1 exposes our election system to widespread fraud. Take ballot harvesting, for example. We have one less Member in this body because of the harvesting of ballots, a practice where a third-party activist can collect your absentee ballot from other voters and turn them in for you, or potentially not even turn them in at all.

Can you imagine putting the trust of your vote in the hand of a stranger? If that doesn't scare you, it should.

Sadly, this practice was weaponized in California and North Carolina not so long ago, but now we want to make it everywhere.

You know, The Washington Post highlighted the peril of this practice. Let me read you the headline: ``Don't Be Shocked by the North Carolina Fraud Allegations. Absentee Ballots Are Much Less Secure Than Polling Places.''

Absentee ballots are less secure than polling places.

The piece goes on to say: ``No one oversees voters filling out absentee ballots to ensure that they fill out the ballot and return it without tampering.

``Campaigns and parties have taken advantage of this by turning to campaign and party workers to deliver and return absentee ballot materials for voters--on the honor system.''

And, finally, this bill wants to stack the deck in favor of the party in power at the Federal Election Commission.

We talk a lot about bipartisanship. We have talked a lot about it in different ways. The committee that could only mark up 60 percent of this bill, you might say it is bipartisan. But it is not level. It is six to three. That is why not one of the 28 amendments got adopted.

But the Federal Election Commission is an even six Commissioners, a panel of three on one side and three on the other.

So what does this bill do that the new Democrat socialist majority cares most about? Let's stack the deck. Let's stack the deck a little further. Let's not make it three and three. Let's put the party in power to get that one more, to put the thumb on the scale a little further. So they want to make it a five-member panel.

This week, The New York Times wrote:

Republicans, arguably, have spent more time trying to

define this bill than Democrat socialists have spent trying

to promote it.

I wonder why. If it is your most important bill, the bill that is going to define your Congress, let's look at what it is. They want to take more taxpayer money. They want to give you less freedom.

Those who vote for it today, I guess they walk away with a raise in their campaign. They are asking the taxpayer to give them 6 to 1. Pretty good return, I would say. But it doesn't even matter if the taxpayer supports you or not because you are just going to make government larger and take the money away.

It is going to let people who are convicted felons open the door. Come on and vote, even if you are convicted of election fraud.

It is kind of interesting to me that you would make it your number one priority. It is kind of interesting to me, a structure of Congress, if you referred to a committee, that you wouldn't have it all marked up. It is kind of interesting to me the only committee you would pick to mark it up is the one chosen by the Speaker. It is interesting to me that this is where you spend your time.

We can do better, and I hope today we have a big voice to say taxpayers should not pay for our elections, that politicians should not vote to take more of taxpayers' hard-earned money so they could say things that people disagree with.

Mr. Speaker, I want to start by thanking a Member from the other side of the aisle, Chairman Eliot Engel. I thank the gentleman, for when he heard the language, he stood up. I thank the gentleman for his work.

To all the Members who are here, this shouldn't be this hard. We should not have to go through the number of versions that we had to. We shouldn't have to be on this floor even speaking about this. I hope we won't be back.

Of all the things that have happened this Congress, this is what we have talked about the most. This is the action that this Congress has taken the most. Twice we have to make a statement that we are opposed to anti-Semitism.

The first time it took the minority. It doesn't have very many abilities to bring something to the floor, but we did, and we spoke with one voice. But now we are back in a few weeks stating the same thing, but without apologies, without apologies from that voice.

It did not have to be this hard. Mr. Speaker, we didn't have to break the 72-hour rule that you put in this year to make it less than an hour because of fear of what would happen tomorrow on a motion to recommit.

I will pledge to you this from this side of the aisle, and I hope you understand this clearly: Any hatred, we take action.

I hope you have seen from the action on this side of the aisle where we stand, Mr. Speaker. We didn't have to have a resolution, but when it came to the floor, we voted for it. We took action before it came to the floor, and it wasn't simply: Please apologize.

It didn't have to be this hard.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, our Madam Speaker was right. America is better than this. But to my Members, Congress is better than this.

Please do not make history write about our time with these 2 years that the most we have ever done is that we had to keep bringing resolutions to the floor to tell people that anti-Semitism is wrong if that is the only action we are going to take. I know we are better than this.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Speaker for yielding.

I too rise to congratulate Representative Don Young, the dean of the House, who today, as stated, becomes the longest-serving Republican in the history of Congress and, as the Speaker noted, has surpassed Joe Cannon.

Don Young doesn't quote Joe Cannon, but he reminds me they named a building after him.

Now, like me, Don was born in California. He got to know Alaska the way many of us did, he read Jack London's ``The Call of the Wild,'' and he moved there right when it became a State.

As of today, Don has represented Alaska for 46 years, over 75 percent of the entire time it has been a State.

His career is an important reminder of how young this wonderful experience we call America truly is.

They lied to me during freshman orientation. They told me nobody had an assigned seat in this House. That is how I got to know Don Young. I made the mistake of coming in and sitting down right over by that door.

I also learned another valuable lesson: Don keeps a knife.

Now, Don has been a very effective Member. He has been chair of the Committee on Natural Resources, chair of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, he has worked with nine Presidents, nine Speakers, he has numerous bills on his wall in between all the animals, but Don was prepared for this job.

You see, when he was in Alaska, he was a riverboat captain, he was a mayor, but he told me the job that prepared him the most to be a Member of Congress, he taught the fifth grade. I don't know how good of a teacher you were, but I imagine it was good.

But Don has been a mentor to many of us. You see, you can watch him, how he carries himself in conference, how he carries himself on the floor, but the way that he can mentor all of us is by the love and respect that he always had for his spouse. Lula was always next to him, and Anne is there now.

He has been a Member of Congress, but he has been a father, and he has been a very, very great husband.

Mr. Speaker, we all travel far and wide to be here to represent our constituents, but no one travels further, no one has the challenge to match Don. There are times, if the weather requires, he takes a dogsled, and it is no joking matter. That is his dedication.

Don also makes sure this institution stays running on time. I noticed that last vote went a little long. I do like to monitor the difference when we are in the minority. On average, the votes lasted 5 to 10 minutes less when we were in the majority, not by anything I did, but by the calls of Don Young.

But on a serious note, Madam Speaker, I have always heard that if you find a job you love, you will not work a day in your life. It is clear that Don Young loves what he does, because he loves this institution and he loves the people's House.

So to Don, we say congratulations on this incredible accomplishment, something nobody probably sitting here today will ever be able to achieve, but you did it for your passion, you did it for the love, but more importantly, you did it for your country.

I thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding, and I rise to congratulate Karen Haas, who after five terms as Clerk of the House, is retiring.

I would like to remind all Members in this body that fewer than 11,000 people have ever had the privilege to serve in this House. It is even fewer for a Clerk.

Karen was our 34th Clerk and only the second woman to hold that position. We thank you for that leadership. When we think about the role of the House Clerk, you think of roll calls and recorded votes. But the Office of the Clerk is really about continuity. Without the Clerk, Congress could not fulfill its obligation to the American people and move in a smooth manner, which many people don't see the challenge.

Few individuals are more committed to preserving the continuity than Karen. She has done that as Clerk and as a trusted staff member and floor assistant. Always, she has been a friend and counselor to Members, regardless of what side of the aisle you sat on.

Karen Haas also equipped and modernized this House for the 21st century. Oftentimes, you won't see that because it is behind the scenes, but it makes the legislative process more accessible to the people it serves.

Mr. Speaker, we are grateful to Karen for her dedication, her team's professionalism, and her steady hand on the tiller. Her service reminds us of an important fact: The people's House is only as good as its people.

You rose to the occasion. On behalf of a very grateful House, and a grateful Nation, we say thank you, Karen.

And to Cheryl, we wish you the best.

Mr. Chair, I also rise to commemorate the incredible life and career of John Dingell, the former dean of this House.

Few individuals have amassed a record of public service that could rival John's, and I will bet no one will ever match it--59 years as an elected Representative.

In fact, his interest in politics began during his time as a congressional page, where he personally witnessed FDR's ``a day that will live in infamy'' speech from this very podium.

Take one moment to think of the life that this man has witnessed on this floor.

John taught us that public service is not a sprint, but a marathon. There are many lessons in his life that we can learn from, but I hope we take that lesson every day when we come to work here.

Another lesson I hope we learn is the one how I first met John. He was an icon before I got here. But I watched the respect, not from his own colleagues in his own party, but the respect from across the aisle.

They went to John for advice. When he walked on the floor, there were many on our side who stood around him to question him where he thought we could go.

He believed in this House; he believed in this country.

He had great passions: passion for his constituents; passion for his committee, Energy and Commerce. He loved that committee so much, he thought there needed to be no other committee in this House. It wasn't until his retirement that we got jurisdiction back in other places.

But he understood an ever-changing world, if you can only imagine serving that long. He was able to adapt, which we should learn from him, too.

Yes, the new world of social media many would think would pass him by because of his age. He was one of the first I would follow on Twitter.

And this is a lesson that this House, in a bipartisan manner, should take. It is one of my favorite tweets from John. It came in July of 2017. He wrote: ``I've been trying to repeal and replace the United States Senate since 1955. No luck.''

Yes, we are sad today, but he lived a life we could admire. I may have differences of opinion and philosophy with him, but I admired his will to fight for what he believed in. I admired the way he treated people who had different beliefs, and I admired the way he believed all sides should be heard.

I speak for everyone on this side of the aisle to convey our deepest sympathies, and to Debbie, and I ask that we lift him up in our prayers to God for his soul to rest peacefully, and to remember what he truly believed: public service matters; this country matters; and the ability to work together so all Americans will have a better tomorrow matters.

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for the promotion.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 962, the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Madam Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

Madam Speaker, I can assure you there are no objections on the Republican side. Is the Chair saying that the Democrat leadership has not cleared this important legislation to protect children who have been born alive?

Madam Speaker, further parliamentary inquiry.

Madam Speaker, as I said, there is no objection on the Republican side, and it is just 2 p.m. on a Wednesday. Is the Chair saying there is not enough time left today to consider this bill that would save the life of a child who is born alive?

Madam Speaker, no further inquiries.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H. Res. 79, a glorified press release that the majority is having this Chamber spend time on during another yet underwhelming legislative week.

At a time when the country expects its leaders in Washington to look forward, this House majority is looking backwards. When our country expects solutions, they are using this Chamber to settle political scores.

As hundreds of thousands of Americans painfully experienced, portions of our Federal Government were shut down for 35 days, a shameful record under this majority's watch. It was a shutdown that never had to happen.

Let's recall last December when this House passed an appropriations bill that would have funded the government, secured the border, and provided disaster assistance to the millions affected by hurricanes and fires. Most importantly, it was a bill that would have been signed into law. This occurred after then-Leader Pelosi declared in the Oval Office earlier that month that a House majority couldn't pass such a bill.

That legislation went to the Senate and, alas, Senator Schumer stopped it. And in doing so, once again, Senator Schumer shut this government down.

From the moment Senator Schumer blocked consideration of that appropriation bill, President Trump and congressional Republicans offered solution after solution after solution after solution to solve the challenge. In all, the President offered four reasonable solutions to end the shutdown and secure the border.

The Democrats never offered one. In fact, they went on vacation and political fundraisers to Puerto Rico. They littered this Chamber with messaging bills that didn't come close to solving the problem and would never be signed into law.

Mr. Speaker, I want to focus on the very last solution the President offered. I want to focus on it because it met the Democrats halfway. It was the truest form of compromise this town has seen in quite some time. It would have secured portions of the border with barriers, and it would have provided certainty to the very communities that my friends on the other side of the aisle have stood on this floor for countless hours to claim they want to help.

Instead, Mr. Speaker, the actions of this majority when presented with that opportunity and following the shutdown tell you all you need to know about who they truly want to help.

Do you know who they want to help? Themselves.

After the President signed a 3-week continuing resolution, the Speaker gloated with a Presidential-style enrollment ceremony. Democrats marveled at her exercise of raw political motivation. Many in the media responded like they were beat reporters from their hometown team. This all sounds like a historic event.

What exactly was everyone celebrating? They were celebrating nothing. They were celebrating achieving nothing. They were celebrating the status quo that suits their political interest and personal pursuits of self-righteousness, a status quo that causes pain and suffering for Americans across this country.

Here are just a few examples:

There have been 266,000 criminal aliens arrested in the last 2 years. This includes charges and convictions of 100,000 assaults, nearly 30,000 sex crimes, and 4,000 violent killings.

Three hundred Americans die every week from heroin, and more than 90 percent of heroin comes from across the southern border.

Roughly 10,000 children are being smuggled into the U.S. every year to be sold for human trafficking.

They are celebrating a status quo that leaves 700,000 DACA-designated individuals unsure about their future.

It was the best display of politics that this country is sick and tired of seeing: zero-sum politics and nothing ever changes.

I would like to spend some time and reflect on Americans and their families who may not have been celebrating the status quo preserved by this majority:

Jerry David;

Sherri David;

Deputy Josie Greathouse Fox;

Pierce Corcoran;

Officer Ronil Singh;

Clinton Howell;

Robert Page;

Justin Lee;

Ellie Bryant;

Grayson Hacking;

Dominic Durden;

Edwin Jackson;

Grant Ronnebeck;

Kenneth Scott Mahr;

Officer Kevin Will;

Sergeant Brandon Mendoza;

Sergeant Cory Wride;

Josh Wilkerson;

Spencer Golvach;

Kate Steinle;

Detective Michael Davis;

Deputy Danny Oliver;

Bob Barry;

Parker Moore;

Officer Andy Chavez;

Lauren Bump;

Louise Sollowin;

Serenity Reedy;

Vanessa Pham;

Kathleen Byham;

Agent Brian Terry;

Officer Henry Canales;

Donald Mayle;

Breanna Schneller;

Jennifer Lee Hampton;

Officer Andrew Widman;

Officer Rodney Johnson;

Buddy Mason;

Adrienne Shelly;

Mollie Tibbetts;

Ronald da Silva;

Sarah Root;

Drew Rosenberg;

Kara Willingham;

Oscar Navarro;

Margaret Kostelnik;

Andres Duran;

Rocky Jones; and

Michael Grubbs.

These are just 50 names of Americans whose lives have been lost to illegal immigration. They no longer have their voice, but we can and must be their voice today. And if these names sound familiar, it is because we heard them on the news.

I would like to reflect on others who certainly weren't celebrating the status quo.

The names may sound familiar because these are the same individuals who then-Leader Pelosi set a record on this floor just a year ago in February for more than 8 hours defending the passion of DACA and shutting the government down: Vanessa Rodriguez; Ana Sanchez; Juan Escalante; Cesar Vargas; Nicole Robles; Jacqueline Romo; Andrea Sibra; Cesar Espinoza; Denise Rojas; Ray Pineta; Kelly; Crystal; Carlos; Marian; Brittany; Hugo; Fernando; Javier Noras; Marco Dorado; Mayra; Fernanda Herrera; Emily; Claudia; Bruna; Cynthia Sanchez; Jose Castillo; Hugo Alexander Acosta; Denia Candela; Luis Galvin; Hector Rivera Suarez; Dalia Medina; Juan Carlos Navarro; Patricia Yulowa; Maria Praley; Jose Manuel Santobo; Carlos Emilio Diaz; Luis Roberto Ucerra; Sofia De La Varga; Novella Vladimar; Gloria Riconni; Alonzo Rivarola; Yuri Hernandez; Oscar Canajoe, Jr.; Ashley Lamadrid; Gladys Clompka; Denaya Joseph; Miriam Ochoa Garbay; Han Yoon Li.

Mr. Speaker, as this House adjourns for the week today--after just one rule bill--I implore my colleagues to take some time and think deeply about these individuals, their families, and what our country stands for. It certainly isn't this political stunt by this majority, and it certainly isn't the status quo they are so proud to protect.

As Members of the U.S. House of Representatives, we are a very small group with a very large responsibility. The burden on us 435 Americans is to represent 325 million Americans faithfully and to work together so tomorrow is better than today. Let us not let these political distractions get in the way of our duty. Instead, let's actually work together to give a voice to the voiceless.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 1, rule I, I demand a vote on agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the Journal.

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during further proceedings today in the House, the Chair be authorized to reduce to 2 minutes the minimum time for electronic voting on any question that otherwise could be subjected to 5-minute voting under clause 8 or 9 of rule XX.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding.

Let me bring clarification. I know there is frustration. I am frustrated as well. I know we would like to be home with our family, but there is work still to be done.

Wait. There is still good news. Because the flood bill went down on suspension, we do not want to leave and have that lying out there.

So, after the colloquy is done, we will debate the Senate bill on flood. It will take about 30 minutes, and we will come back for another vote series. I don't want to say anything, but if the bill passed, we would not be back.

After that, tomorrow, there are no votes scheduled. We are waiting on action in the Senate. When the Senate has action, I will notify everybody, giving them ample time to come for that vote.

For today, yes. I don't foresee more votes until the Senate acts, if that helps clarify for everyone.

The Senate vote is still open. There is talk. We have our bill over there. I hope they take action. I hope they find that we can find compromise, and then we would all come back together and solve this problem.

The gentleman is correct. The only votes further will be on flood, and, after that, the only vote I see coming forward would be on funding of the government.

When the Senate acts, I will give ample time for Members to be able to have that vote.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Greg Gallion on his retirement after a long, fruitful career as CEO of Houchin Community Blood Bank.

Greg was born and raised in Bakersfield, completing his education at Marymount College in Salina, Kansas. Greg's future in bettering the lives of others was foreshadowed when he moved to Albany, New York, to work with delinquent children at the St. Francis Homes for Boys and Girls. He would make his return home to Bakersfield in 1975, working for two years at Three-Way Chevrolet and then an impressive 24 years in the title insurance industry. For all of Greg's successes, his greatest impact came with his hiring as Houchin Community Blood Bank's Chief Executive Officer. As CEO, Greg worked tirelessly for 17 years to help local healthcare providers meet the needs of the Kern County community.

Greg saw nothing but potential in Houchin Community Blood Bank and quickly worked to build the company infrastructure and increase the scope of Houchin's presence across Kern County. Greg oversaw the construction of a new headquarters for Houchin in Bakersfield, doubled the number of employees and introduced the use of six-bed buses during blood drives. These actions not only helped put more Kern County citizens to work, but also increased the accessibility of the blood bank as well as better supplied local hospitals. Not content to rest on Houchin's laurels, Greg expanded the company's life-saving services, collecting and providing blood, plasma, platelets, and other blood derivatives. Where some CEOs would be content maintaining a status quo, Greg always strove to innovate for the sake of his employees, customers, and the community he served.

More than anything else, Greg will be remembered as a leader who put his community first, factoring the wellbeing of his patients and clients in every decision he made as CEO. As CEO, he established Houchin's slogan, ``people live when people give,'' words that continue to inspire thousands across Kern County to donate blood each year. Greg's community involvement did not end at his desk, as he maintained an impressive community presence, having led as President of Bakersfield Downtown Rotary and Director of the Kern County Fair Board, as well as active involvement with the Executives Association of Kern County and the Kern Advisory Council for Valley Public Radio.

Greg Gallion departs Houchin Community Blood Bank a stronger and more impactful institution than when he joined it. Through his work, Greg left an unmistakable impression on our community that I know will be felt for years to come. It has been a pleasure getting to know Greg over the years both in his official capacity with Houchin and as a fellow member of Bakersfield Downtown Rotary. While it is the community's loss to see Greg leave Houchin, I know that that he will now have the time to enjoy the things he loves most, such as traveling with his beloved wife of 38 years, Sheryl. I wish Greg all the best as he and his family begins this new chapter of his life.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Mark V. Bozigian on his retirement after a long distinguished career in public service, serving most recently as City Manager for the City of Lancaster, California.

While he is best known for his extensive career in public service, Mark cultivated his business and managerial acumen in the private sector after graduating from Loyola Marymount University with a Bachelor's and Master's Degree in Business Administration. It was during his time in the private sector that Mark developed the tireless work ethic that would define his tenure at the City of Lancaster. For ten years, Mark worked for Hughes Aircraft, where he held a variety of management positions, most notably as Business Manager for two of Hughes Aircraft's laser production programs. Mark also gained experience as a realtor and as a small business partner, forging pivotal personal and business relationships that he carried with him into his career in the public sector.

Mark has served the City of Lancaster for 24 years, building a portfolio of accomplishments across his roles as Lancaster's Transportation Programs Coordinator, Redevelopment Director, Assistant City Manager, and City Manager. During his eleven years as Lancaster's City Manager, Mark has dedicated his time and energy to bolstering public safety, economic development, transportation, neighborhood revitalization, and obtaining Federal and state grant funding for city projects. Most notably, Mark has overseen Lancaster's impressive development in renewable energies, working to make the city the solar capital of California and courting companies to bring jobs and clean energy technology to our community. Mark's efforts have been a great success--Lancaster's economy has grown under his guidance, and the city now produces more solar power per capita than any other city in California. Mark also worked to revitalize Lancaster's downtown BLVD district and has been a key player in the recent, rapid growth of Lancaster's booming aerospace industry.

More than anything else, Mark routinely demonstrates a love for his city and the people he represents, working around the clock to better Lancaster without ever seeking credit or commendation for his service. Once, following heavy rains that caused flooding on Lancaster's east side, Mark was among the first on the scene. Knee-deep in water in his suit, he walked door-to-door informing and reassuring citizens that help was on the way. During a Fourth of July celebration, city traffic was so heavy that it reached a standstill, but Mark was there acting as a traffic guide, doing his best to ensure that Lancaster's citizens could get home a little more easily. Mark always took responsibility, and always put the interests of the people of Lancaster first.

I have known Mark as a tireless advocate for the needs of his city. Over the years, it has been an honor to work with him to improve the

lives of every resident of Lancaster. I have always been impressed by his tenacity to ensure that the people and businesses he represents have their voices heard at the highest levels of government and the successes he has achieved over the course of his public service. Over the past ten years, Lancaster has undergone a period of unprecedented economic growth, and this is undoubtedly in no small part because of Mark's steady hand and dedication to his community. While it is Lancaster's loss to see Mark leave city government, I am confident that he has laid a foundation that will contribute to the city's success for years to come. As Mark begins this new chapter of his life, I wish him, his wife, Karen, and their family all the best.