Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, the past few months have witnessed one of the most devastating natural disasters ever endured by our country. They include hurricanes, voracious wildfires in my home State of California that have killed at least 23 people, required mass evacuations, and burned more than 170,000 acres and thousands of homes and businesses.

By acting quickly on this emergency supplemental, we are sending a strong message that we are here for disaster victims, including our fellow citizens in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. But this is just a downpayment. We still don't have the final damage estimates for many of the affected areas.

In the coming weeks and months, we will need to once again support FEMA's continued recovery efforts, including in Puerto Rico, despite the President's threats to abandon the people there. There will be more to do to address unmet needs through the Community Development Block Grant program and other disaster relief programs.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage support for this bill.

Mr. Chair, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 555.

Mr. Speaker, the President's decision to rescind DACA has brought fear to hundreds of thousands of DREAMers and their families.

They are DREAMers like Saul Jimenez, who teaches special needs students in Los Angeles, and is just one example of how DREAMers contribute and add value to our country and our communities.

DREAMers are American in every way except for their immigration status. To send DREAMers to a country they have never known would be tragic for them and our Nation, which will lose their valuable contributions.

The American people overwhelmingly oppose deporting our DREAMers, and our faith-based community and business leaders are imploring Congress to pass the Dream Act. Yet the Republican leadership is ignoring their wishes and refusing to allow us a vote on this bipartisan, bicameral bill.

To my Republican colleagues who say they want to protect our Nation's DREAMers: If that is true, this is your chance. Vote ``no'' on the previous question so we can vote on the Dream Act and put our DREAMers on the road to the security and future they have earned in the only country they know, the United States of America. The time to pass the Dream Act is now. Vote ``no'' on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to salute El Aviso Magazine, an award-winning Spanish-language weekly publication based in my 40th Congressional District, as it begins its 30th anniversary celebration.

Since its establishment in 1988, El Aviso Magazine has focused its reporting on local areas with the highest populations of Latinos. The publication offers a unique blend of topics ranging from social and political, to health and welfare, to family, culture, and entertainment.

At its inception, El Aviso Magazine shared an office with a travel agency in the City of Huntington Park, and only had two employees and five distributors. At that time, the magazine's weekly circulation reached an audience of 70,000, and its method of distribution was door- to-door. Today, an average issue reaches an audience of more than 600,000, and it can be found at over 10,000 points of distribution in 136 cities and neighborhoods in the greater Los Angeles area, Orange County, the San Fernando Valley, and the Inland Empire.

El Aviso Magazine has received countless awards from the National Association of Hispanic Publications, and has also received national recognition for its editorial content and covers. In 2004, it received an award for being the fastest-growing publication in the United States. At the 2014 National Association of Hispanic Publications Convention, El Aviso Magazine received the Gold Award for the Most Outstanding Newsprint Magazine.

Over the past 30 years, Jessica Maes Zepeda and Jose Ramiro Zepeda, along with their family, have operated this family-owned magazine. Mr. Zepeda was born in Mexico, and immigrated to the United States in the mid-1980s in search of the American Dream. As he was searching for the right business, he witnessed the passage and implementation of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. Mr. Zepeda saw the need to inform the Spanish-speaking community in a language they could read and understand. This led him to produce a Spanish publication that would serve the Latino community across Southern California--El Aviso Magazine. Mr. Zepeda has worked diligently for the past three decades and has made El Aviso Magazine a success story.

Mrs. Zepeda, the magazine's co-owner and its director of public relations and community affairs, was raised in Southeast Los Angeles, where she attended local parochial schools and decided to pursue a career in real estate. In the early 1980s, she joined the Downey Board of Realtors and served as vice president. She then became the president of the Women's Council of Realtors, and the director of the California Association of Realtors.

In 1994, Mrs. Zepeda became politically active and was elected to the Huntington Park City Council. Through her accomplishments, she became the first woman to hold the position of Mayor for the City of Huntington Park three years later.

Mrs. Zepeda has received numerous accolades for her community service from elected officials in the State of California and Congress, and from non-profit organizations. The California Chamber of Commerce recently recognized Mrs. Zepeda with the 2017 Pioneer Empresaria Award.

Mr. and Mrs. Zepeda believe in assisting the less fortunate and those in need. Their dedication to the community and their philanthropic activities are reflected through El Aviso Magazine's involvement with various non-profits, including the YMCA, Salvation Army, Boys & Girls Club of America, Human Services Association, Southeast Relay for Life, faith-based groups, and local schools.

For the past ten years, the magazine has published a special edition bilingual magazine dedicated to the fight against cancer, titled ``El Aviso Relay for Life.'' In addition, through hard work, perseverance, and dedication to the communities it serves, the magazine has raised more than $120,000 for the American Cancer Society's Southeast Cities Relay for Life over the past ten years.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to please join me in sending best wishes and congratulations to Jose Zepeda, Jessica Maes Zepeda, and their El Aviso Magazine team on the celebration of their 30th anniversary. They have played a vital role in informing Latino communities across Southern California over the past 30 years.

Mr. Speaker, on September 14, I was unavoidably detained off the House floor and was not present for Roll Call 528, the vote on final passage of H.R. 3354. Had I been present, I would have voted ``No.'' As our nation comes together to help those affected by Hurricanes Harvey and Irma, I am saddened that members of Congress were not given the opportunity to come together to provide all of the people of our country the support they need to meet the many challenges they face and to invest in their future. This eight bill spending package was considered under a restrictive process that severely limited the ability of members to influence the bill. I could not in good conscience vote for this bill because it is based on the devastating House Republican budget, meaning that it underfunds and makes significant cuts to many of my constituents' key priorities such as job training, education, fixing our crumbling infrastructure, economic development, Pell Grants, housing affordability, after-school programs, and law enforcement. It attacks women's health by cutting family planning and Teen Pregnancy Prevention Grants and defunding Planned Parenthood, and it includes many poison pill policy riders that will undermine the Affordable Care Act, undo many important Dodd-Frank Wall Street reforms, and prevent the EPA from keeping our air and water clean. As the Ranking Member of the Homeland Security Subcommittee, I find it inexplicable that as we work to recover from Hurricanes Harvey and Irma and see new storms on the horizon, the bill slashes funding for programs that build resilience and can be used for prevention and recovery and it weakens efforts to understand and address climate change, a driving factor of more frequent and severe storms. I repeatedly tried to shift funding in the bill for immigration enforcement activities to more pressing homeland security needs, but I was rebuffed on party line votes. Instead of this short-sighted bill that would be disastrous for all Americans, I call on Republicans to join Democrats to enact spending bills that grow the economy, create jobs, and truly keep our nation secure.

Mr. Speaker, there is no question that this supplemental funding is needed, and needed quickly. When the response to Harvey began in late August, the major disaster account of the disaster relief fund had approximately $2 billion available. The response to this catastrophe, however, is costing close to $200 million per day. This means that despite the recent $1 billion increase into this account, FEMA could run out of money at any time.

Therefore, the enactment of the additional $7.4 billion for the disaster relief fund in this supplemental is critical to help meet FEMA's immediate operational needs for Hurricane Harvey, and to allow for the resumption of recovery payments for prior disasters such as Sandy.

The supplemental would also provide a small reserve to ensure that FEMA can begin responding to Hurricane Irma, or any other new disaster that occurs between now and September 30, 2017.

It is important to note, however, that if there is significant damage from Irma, FEMA will quickly need either an additional reprogramming of money, a second supplemental appropriation, or both.

I applaud the majority for quickly bringing the supplemental package to the floor with the emergency designations.

Mr. Speaker, the President's decision to rescind DACA brings heartbreak and fear to hundreds of thousands of young DREAMers who, regardless of their immigration status, are American in every way.

The President's senseless and cruel action is upending their lives and the lives of their families, and it is sending a chilling message to our immigrant communities.

It is unbelievable that we first introduced legislation to help DREAMers in 2001. That is 16 years ago. The fight to protect DREAMers has gone on for far too long. Defeating the previous question will enable us, today, to vote on the DREAM Act of 2017, which is a bipartisan, bicameral bill that will protect our Nation's DREAMers once and for all.

The fact is this is our chance, as Members of Congress, to fulfill our responsibility on this serious issue. For those of my colleagues who say they support the DREAMers but that they believe that DACA is unconstitutional, this is your opportunity to help the DREAMers through the legislative process.

The DREAMers did not choose to circumvent American immigration laws, and they should not be punished for something they are not responsible for. Today, my Republican colleagues can provide relief to these young people by voting to bring the DREAM Act for a vote.

Protecting DREAMers is not only a moral issue, it is also an economic issue. The President's decision to end DACA strikes a vicious blow to our economy. Forcing hundreds of thousands of young people out of the workforce will disrupt businesses across our Nation. California, alone, stands to lose $11.6 billion annually, and the U.S. stands to lose a cumulative $460 billion in GDP over the next decade if DREAMers are removed from our economy.

As Members of Congress, we represent the American people, and the vast majority of Americans, regardless of their political affiliation, support our Nation's DREAMers.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question so we can pass the bipartisan, bicameral DREAM Act today to enable our DREAMers to continue contributing to our Nation without fear of deportation from the only country they know as home.

Mr. Chairman, the FY 2018 Department of Homeland Security funding bill addresses many bipartisan priorities, including maintaining funding for first responder and antiterrorism grants and the Emergency Food and Shelter Program. It provides increases above the request for the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Nonprofit Security grants, new Coast Guard assets, and ICE child exploitation investigations. It also restores funding for Science and Technology Centers of Excellence.

The bill restores funding for flood mapping grants, which the administration proposed to eliminate, and funding for pre-disaster mitigation grants, for which the administration proposed a 60 percent cut. These grants support precisely the kinds of programs that help communities mitigate and prepare for the impacts of natural disasters like Hurricane Harvey, and we should be investing in them even more.

The bill also provides the President's request for the Disaster Relief Fund. We will, however, need to appropriate more money beyond that approved by the House earlier today in order to address the damage caused by Harvey and, potentially, Irma.

While there is much in this bill Democrats can support, unfortunately, for several reasons, we cannot support this bill. For example, we cannot support the bill's $705 million increase for

Interior immigration enforcement. This includes an increase of 4,676 detention beds, which is 10,000 above fiscal year 2016, and the hiring of 1,000 additional ICE officers and agents.

The administration says its more aggressive enforcement approach is critical to national security and public safety. In fact, ICE is now arresting people with no criminal infractions who have lived, worked, and paid taxes in this country for years--and even decades.

These arrests are not required for national security or public safety. They have tragic consequences for families and communities all over this country. The trauma being inflicted on them cannot be overstated.

Mr. Chairman, we are dealing with a moral question as much as a legal one. ICE has the discretion to enforce our immigration laws fairly and justly, and Congress has the discretion to prioritize how we spend taxpayer dollars.

Instead of overly aggressive immigration enforcement, we should be investing more in real security vulnerabilities. These include cybersecurity, human trafficking investigations, Coast Guard vessels and aircraft, flood mapping, and pre-disaster mitigation.

We should invest in more Customs officers. We should restore funding for research and laboratory facilities at the Science and Technology Directorate and for TSA's Law Enforcement Officer Reimbursement Program. Unfortunately, we are not doing any of this.

However, before concluding, I want to take a moment to talk about the Trump administration's announcement yesterday on ending the DACA program.

An amendment I offered in committee to clarify the basic authority of DHS to continue the program failed on a party-line vote. It would have given Congress time to enact a more formal authorization and given DREAMers the peace of mind of knowing they would not have to go back into the shadows. With the administration's announcement yesterday, that peace of mind has been cruelly snatched away.

We shouldn't wait 6 months to fix this problem. The majority should bring my bipartisan, bicameral bill, the DREAM Act, to the floor as soon as possible so that DREAMers can continue to contribute to this country free of the fear of being deported from the only home they know.

In closing, Mr. Chairman, I want to extend my appreciation for the efforts of the subcommittee chairman, Chairman Carter, and his staff, who worked with the minority throughout the development of this bill. Consistent with prior years, Chairman Carter has carried out his responsibilities honorably, fairly, and collaboratively.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Correa).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Torres).

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

Mr. Chairman, I want to express my strong support for the gentlewoman's amendment. As I said during general debate, the increases of the bill for ICE's enforcement, detention, and removal operations are excessive. They support an overly aggressive immigration enforcement approach that is tearing apart families and communities, and it is unnecessary for national security or public safety.

The cut to ICE operations in support by this amendment would leave sufficient funding for ICE to carry out its responsibilities humanely and fairly, and the increases the amendment proposes for the Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties and the Office of the Inspector General are clearly needed to ensure appropriate oversight of the Department's activities. I urge my colleagues to support the Jayapal amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, my amendment would increase

funding for the Coast Guard's polar icebreaker program by $850 million. The amendment is offset by a reduction to the funding for ICE's interior immigration enforcement.

The increases for ICE hiring and detention beds are not well justified and do not have a security focus. In contrast, the need for heavy icebreakers is very well documented.

A recent report from the National Academy of Sciences warned that ``the United States has insufficient assets to protect its interests, implement U.S. policy, execute its laws, and meet its obligations in the Arctic and Antarctica because it lacks adequate icebreaking capability.''

Mr. Chairman, this vulnerability exists because, currently, the Coast Guard has only one functioning heavy icebreaker, the Polar Star. Built in 1976, it is well past its 30-year expected operational life. It no longer has the reliability we need, and the cost to maintain it will continue to rise.

Currently, its primary mission is to clear a path through the ice to our research facilities in Antarctica. This means the only icebreaking asset we have in the Arctic is the Coast Guard's only medium class icebreaker, the Healy.

The Polar Star is expected to continue functioning for just 3 to 7 years. This will leave the United States with no heavy icebreaking capability.

We are dangerously falling behind. Russia has 41 icebreakers focused on the Arctic that are active or under construction, four of which are heavy icebreakers. This puts the United States at a tremendous disadvantage, since we are unable to operate in parts of the Arctic Ocean for months at a time.

The National Academy of Sciences report goes on to recommend that: ``The United States Congress should fund the construction of four polar icebreakers of common design that would be owned and operated by the United States Coast Guard.''

Mr. Chair, the fiscal year 2017 defense funding bill included $150 million for a Coast Guard heavy icebreaker as a downpayment on what is expected to be a nearly $1 billion price tag for the first ship. However, the National Defense Authorization Act the House passed earlier this year includes a provision prohibiting the Pentagon from using any fiscal year 2018 funds to acquire an icebreaker for the Coast Guard. An amendment to strike that provision failed on a recorded vote. The solution is to fund the next installment of funds directly through the Coast Guard.

While the Coast Guard plans to sign an icebreaker acquisition contract in fiscal year 2019, it will release a request for proposal in mid-fiscal year 2018.

By providing $850 billion in this bill, enough to cover the cost of one icebreaker, we could help the Coast Guard get the shipbuilding started. Just think what we could accomplish here today. With this one amendment, we can put the United States on a path to securing our sovereign interests in the Arctic region.

We cannot afford to delay any further. I urge my colleagues to vote for this amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I just want to emphasize the fact that my amendment still leaves ICE with enough money for 30,000 detention beds. They still have the capability to address the needs in their duties.

I also want to emphasize the fact that although the money is not going to go out in fiscal year 2019, the request for proposal will be in mid-fiscal year 2018; therefore, it is critical that those who will be bidding on these contracts know that, in fact, there is money available.

Finally, I just need to emphasize one more time the fact that we are extremely vulnerable in the Arctic at this time. There are times, as I said, where we have absolutely no presence whatsoever, while at the same time, Russia has a continuous presence in that area.

Mr. Chair, it is critical that we support this amendment and get the Coast Guard the icebreaker that they need.

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chair, I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chair, I oppose this amendment and so does the Coast Guard. This is not a new issue. It has to do with a particular, underutilized commercial anchor handling tug supply vessel, the Aiviq, which is owned by Edison Chouest Offshore, based in Louisiana.

Over the last few years, the Coast Guard has been repeatedly pushed to lease this vessel. The Coast Guard has repeatedly made it clear that this vessel does not have the capability to adequately fulfill its multimission needs in the Arctic.

The question before us is whether leasing this particular vessel for icebreaking would be a wise use of taxpayers' dollars, and whether it would benefit the Coast Guard more than investments in other priorities.

The Coast Guard needs a heavy icebreaker as soon as possible, but this is not a heavy icebreaker, or even a medium icebreaker. According to the Coast Guard, the Aiviq is underpowered for icebreaking, making it unsuitable for ice rescue operations.

It has an inadequate fuel storage capacity and transit speed, vastly limiting its deployment time. The Aiviq has no helicopter hangar, making it unsuitable for patrol activities, search and rescue operations, and self-rescue. It also has a propulsion system that lacks redundancy and reliability, and it does not have thrusters rated for ice operations.

Beyond the inadequacy of the vessel's base icebreaking capabilities, the current configuration of the vessel is not suited to Coast Guard missions. It would need to be significantly reconfigured at significant costs. The fact that it is a commercial vessel also limits its ability to perform all 11 Coast Guard statutory missions.

For instance, it could not conduct right-of-visit boardings, or engage in freedom of navigation exercises that are critical to protecting U.S. sovereignty. And it would be vulnerable to right-of- visit boarding by foreign warships under international law.

The owner of the Aiviq has proposed a 7-year lease of the vessel, costing $35 million to $40 million per year. The cost, however, would be much higher considering the cost of reconfiguration.

While this amendment would not force the Coast Guard to sign a lease for the Aiviq, it seems intended to push the Coast Guard down that path. Taking $5 million from the operating expenses account for sea trials would detract from the Coast Guard's operational needs.

If the owner of the Aiviq or any other private interests want the Coast Guard to seriously consider the use of their vessels for icebreaking, they should be the ones paying for any ice trials. We should not be making the Coast Guard pay for it, and we should not be pushing the Coast Guard to enter into a lease arrangement that it does not want and that is not a good investment in helping the Coast Guard carry out its critical missions.

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

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

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

Earlier this evening, the same amendment was soundly defeated twice on this floor, so I am not sure why there is a need to go over the same worn ground again.

The Davis-Bacon Act is a longstanding law that ensures workers on federally funded construction projects are reasonably paid, no less than the wages paid for similar work in the local community. It is simply a matter of fairness that we ensure that the Federal Government pays fair wages for an honest day's work.

Mr. Chairman, I have heard the gentleman from Iowa suggest that Davis-Bacon's history is linked to discrimination. But I believe he may be misinformed in thinking that it was the cause and not the solution.

In 1927, a contractor who was employing African-American workers was building a Veterans Bureau hospital. Congressman Bacon found that there were very serious issues related to the pay of low wages and the discrimination against the wages of migrant workers. He introduced Davis-Bacon initially to help make sure that these construction workers would be paid the prevailing wages in their community. As I said, these workers happened to be African American.

I urge all of my Members to, once again, vote ``no'' on this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Kilmer).

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

Mr. Chairman, the House has already voted twice against this amendment today, and I hope it will do so again.

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

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment.

This is not an appropriate amendment for inclusion in an annual spending bill. The

Coast Guard opposes the amendment because their mission to protect natural resources is not specific to individual regulations. Enforcement limitations on specific regulations would place a significant burden on the Coast Guard.

In addition, Congress should not be in the business of micromanaging fish conservation. The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission is an interstate commission which allows Atlantic Coast States to collectively manage the conservation of their shared coastal fishery resources. We should allow the Commission to do its job in managing fish stocks.

Congress shouldn't second-guess them and micromanage fish regulations in particular locations. There is a process in place for addressing these issues at the regional level, and we should allow that process to work.

Currently, the consensus position of the Commission is that the fishing restrictions should remain in place and the stock assessment for striped bass is planned for next year. This ban was put in place after going through the Federal rulemaking process. If a change is needed, it should follow the same process.

I believe this amendment places an undue burden on the Coast Guard, and it is bad precedent for Congress to interfere with a State-driven process. For these reasons, I oppose the amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, we should allow the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission to do its job, and I continue to oppose this amendment.

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

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

Mr. Chairman, under the OMB directive from 2007, all Federal agencies are already required to use the E-Verify system to confirm the employment eligibility of new hires. Beyond Federal employees, a 2008 executive order and a Federal acquisition regulation already require that employees of Federal contractors also be verified as eligible to work through E-Verify, so my opposition to this amendment is primarily on the basis that it is unnecessary.

Given that the current administration has proposed making the use of E-Verify mandatory for private sector hiring, it just doesn't seem likely that it would somehow weaken the current requirement for the Federal Government to use the system. This funding limitation simply is not needed.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate the City of Paramount on its 60th anniversary. I am deeply honored to represent this hub of innovation and history as part of California's 40th Congressional District, and I hope my colleagues will join me in paying tribute to Paramount and its residents.

The City of Paramount was incorporated in 1957 after two communities, Hynes and Clearwater, merged. The unincorporated Hynes-Clearwater community staged a hard-fought campaign, ``Save Paramount for Paramount,'' contesting its annexation from surrounding communities, and secured the right to self-governance.

The city we now call Paramount has been home to a rich and enduring history. The city's ``Hay Tree,'' where the price of the world's hay used to be set each day, stands today as a

State Historical Landmark, proudly representing Paramount's inspiring past as a major hay and dairy producer. Iceland, an ice rink opened in 1940 by Frank Zamboni and an early Paramount landmark, celebrates the city's rich ice skating history. Iceland has not only been a widely enjoyed community asset, but the training facility for professional skaters such as Olympic champions Sonia Henie and Dorothy Hamill. The world-famous Zamboni Ice-Resurfacing Machine, which Mr. Zamboni developed in Paramount, is a memorable illustration of the area's enduring spirit of innovation.

In the spirit of the city's motto, ``Positively Paramount,'' residents of Paramount share a commitment to making the city the best it can be. Named an ``All-America City'' in 1988 for its redevelopment efforts, Paramount continues to flourish as a thriving urban center. The city's revitalization in recent decades has inspired an arts movement, sparked investments in commercial and residential rehabilitation, and, most notably, reinvented the downtown.

The City of Paramount has transformed the Paramount Pond from a vacant lot riddled with blight to a unique and thriving plaza, whose artistic features encourage community and family-oriented values and celebrate ice skating history. Only a block from Frank Zamboni's ice rink, families, residents, and tourists can dine at three different restaurants, admire the beautiful bronze sculptures, and play on a miniature Zamboni Ice-Resurfacing Machine. At the heart of Paramount are the Civic Center Gardens, connecting City Hall, the community hospital, and the county library. The gardens are much-loved by Paramount residents, and reflect the city's commitment to innovation and community unification.

Paramount's commitment to redevelopment continues to this day. City leaders have recently come together to support a multimillion dollar campaign to revitalize more than 155,000 square feet of downtown Paramount. Paramount Town Center West and Paramount Town Center East have been renovated. A new, vibrant shopping center, Clearwater Crossing Shopping Center, has been completed. New outdoor patios where families can dine, additional public parking, and wider sidewalks are making Paramount a more pleasant place for all. The city's redevelopment efforts and business-friendly reputation have attracted major restaurant chains including Applebee's, Habit Burger Grill, Chipotle, and Waba Grill, as well as retailers including WSS Shoes and AutoZone.

I hope my colleagues will join me in sending their best wishes and congratulations to Paramount on its 60th anniversary. Let us salute its optimistic spirit, and its commitment to embracing the future through smart investments, innovation, and creativity. May Paramount remain strong, successful, and ``Positively Paramount'' in the years ahead.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize F. Gavina & Sons, Inc., a coffee company located in my 40th Congressional District of California, in the city of Vernon. The company, one of America's largest family-owned coffee companies and the nation's largest privately held minority roaster, celebrates their 50th anniversary in 2017.

The history of this coffee company is a story about family. Brothers Jose Maria and Ramon Gavina left their native Basque region of Spain in 1870, in search of a better life. They settled in the fertile mountains of southern Cuba and planted the seeds of what would become Gavina Coffee.

Don Francisco Gavina was born on the family coffee estate, Hacienda Buenos Aires. As a boy, he worked in the fields with his own father, watching and learning the secrets of growing quality coffee. He spent hours upon hours helping sow the seeds and urging the little plants to grow.

The family left Cuba in 1959, and arrived in Los Angeles in 1963, where they put down roots. The family later leased a 1,100 square foot building in Vernon and purchased a small roaster from Bob's Big Boy restaurant. By June 1967, when they founded F. Gavina & Sons, Inc., they were roasting, packing and selling Cafe Gavina Espresso.

In the beginning, they focused on producing Cuban-style coffee, but eventually expanded into other coffees that appealed to Middle Eastern and Vietnamese coffee drinkers. About 35 years later, Gavina's retail brand, Don Francisco's Coffee, had become the top selling coffee in Southern California, behind Folgers and Maxwell House.

The family began selling their coffee to a small group of McDonald's restaurants in 1983. In 2005, Gavina created a stronger blend that resulted in a double-digit increase in the chain's coffee sales.

According to the Los Angeles Times, by 2010, F. Gavina & Sons, Inc. had become a $114 million business and was roasting 40 million pounds of coffee a year. A fifth of their revenue was coming from making and packaging private label coffees for McDonald's, 7-Eleven, and Costco stores. Gavina coffee brands were being sold in 20 states, and in stores like Ralph's, Walmart, and Vons / Safeway.

Don Francisco's sons, Paco, Pedro, and Jose, and his daughter, Leonor Gavina-Valls, grew up on the plantation and learned about coffee in the fields. Along with their own children, they still personally select beans, cup samples as they arrive, and oversee the specialty coffee roasting and production every day. They do all of this so that their customers and guests can be ensured a wonderful cup of coffee every time, from first sip to final drop.

Today, they carry on the dream in their 240,000-square-foot eco- friendly, state-of-the-art coffee roasting facility, just a few blocks from their original 1,100 square foot building. Gavina Coffee employs more than 250 people, and services businesses of all sizes--from mom and pop shops to multinational accounts. The company offers four leading U.S. coffee brands: Gavina Gourmet Coffee, Don Francisco's Coffee, Cafe La Llave Espresso, and Jose's Gourmet Coffee.

In honor of their 50th anniversary, Gavina Coffee created a special Anniversary Blend which is roasted in Los Angeles and uses beans grown on the award-winning Carmen Estate in Panama by a third generation coffee-growing family. The Anniversary Blend, which entered the market on June 19, 2017, comes in a commemorative tin with a 10-ounce bag of ground coffee. Flavor notes in the new blend include caramel, honey, and ripe fruit with a chocolaty finish.

Fifty years have brought many changes to the original company, but one thing remains the same: Members of the Gavina family still run the day-to-day operations of the company, with a new generation of Gavinas poised to continue the pursuit of a great cup of coffee.

Gavina Coffee's 50th anniversary celebration includes: the opening of their first brick and mortar store in downtown Los Angeles, named Don Francisco's Coffee, Casa Cubana; the special anniversary blend; reaching the goal of 100% zero-waste-to-landfill; a continued commitment to leaving a greener coffee footprint through their Direct ImpactTM Initiative, which is based on four core pillars of dedication to farmers, sustainable sourcing, environmental sustainability, and social stewardship; continuing to donate coffee to local shelters and missions; and continuing to support organizations such as the Komen Race for the Cure, Avon Walk 39, Children's Miracle Network Hospitals (CMNH), EnrichLA and the International Women's Coffee Alliance.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to please join me in raising our coffee cups to the Gavina family and F. Gavina & Sons, Inc. as we celebrate their 50 years of success. We look forward to the next 50 with great anticipation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Dr. Mary R. Stauffer on her upcoming 100th birthday, which will be celebrated on August 27, 2017, in Downey, California.

Born in Toledo, Ohio on August 26, 1917, to Amelia and Reverend Henry Schuh, Mary Ruth Schuh was raised in a home of three generations of Lutheran ministers. At age six, she started teaching Sunday school. Her early teaching experience and involvement with the church introduced her to a lifelong interest in education and philanthropy.

Mary loved reading and studying, and in 1935, she was the class valedictorian of Bexley High School, near Columbus, Ohio. With a scholarship, she attended Capital University, a Lutheran College. By working as an unpaid assistant for a pathologist at White Cross Hospital, she gained invaluable experience and a glowing recommendation for medical school. She graduated summa cum laude from Capital University in 1939.

Mary was admitted to Ohio State University Medical School, where she was one of just five women in a class of 75. She graduated top of her class on April 15, 1943. Concurrent with her MD, she earned her MS in Pathology by applying the first electron microscope in the U.S. to biological research.

On December 18, 1943, she married a co-resident in pathology, Dr. Floyd (Dal) Stauffer, a scholar and an athlete. Dal was commissioned into the Navy on their wedding day and reported to duty in Bremerton, Washington, on January 1, 1944. In Bremerton, Dr. Mary completed her residency, but just when she opened her own practice, Dal was transferred to Pensacola, Florida. In 1953 after Dal completed his service in the Navy, the family moved, and settled in Downey, California.

After briefly working as a physician for the Los Angeles Unified School District, Dr. Mary Stauffer opened her own OB-GYN practice and in 1954 joined the Downey Community Hospital Medical Staff. As her practice grew, she always kept Tuesday and Thursday afternoons open for her five children's activities.

Dr. Mary Stauffer was one of the first obstetricians to offer expecting mothers an educational program. Based on Grantly Dick-Read natural childbirth (before Lamaze), she developed a series of three lectures. The third was held with spouses at her home and included an 8-mm film of her delivering twins. In 1976, after delivering babies for 23 years in Downey, she transitioned into general practice.

In 1972, Dr. Mary was chosen Chief of Staff at Downey Community Hospital. In 1987, with a donation of $100,000, she was the first physician to qualify as a member of the Founders Gallery of the hospital. She hoped to be the first of many.

Dr. Mary's other honors include the 1983 Ohio State Medical School Alumni Achievement Award, the 1997 Distinguished Service Award from Capital University, and the 2007 Delta Kappa Gamma Chi State Distinguished Public Service Award. She was also named California State ``Woman of the Year'' in 1998 by California State Senator Betty Karnette and in 2010 by State Senator Hector De La Torre, and was a 2012 Downey High School Hall of Fame Honoree. In 2007, Dr. Mary was one of the founding directors of the Columbia Memorial Space Center. Later she rescued an Apollo capsule from unclaimed freight to become the center's welcoming icon. In 2014, the Downey Unified School District renamed West Middle School the Mary R. Stauffer Middle School.

In 1993, her passions for education and philanthropy came together in the Mary R. Stauffer Foundation, a private educational foundation she established to give back to Downey, the community where she had had a successful medical practice. On June 30, 1997, at nearly 80 years old, Dr. Mary retired from her medical practice and became the full-time CEO of her educational foundation. Since starting the foundation almost 25 years ago, she has donated well over $5 million for innovative educational projects in the Downey Unified School District and scholarships for Downey students. Among the projects that the foundation helped with initial startup funds are Academic Olympics for middle schools; Project Lead the Way; Robotics Clubs; and Character Counts, a city-wide program.

The foundation invites teachers annually to propose grants for creative projects, such as a Cooking Cart with lessons in math and science. Other projects have become traditions and encourage use of local resources, such as the Autry Museum and the Mission Control Program at the local Space Center.

In the 2016-17 school year, over 800 students received these now- traditional merit awards: Junior 4.0 GPA; Scholar-Athlete for students who have lettered in a sport with a 3.5 GPA (created by Dal, Mary's late husband); and the Stauffer Scholar award to start a college savings plan for 4.0 GPA 6th and 7th graders. In the same year, 90 students received scholarships to attend community college or trade school.

Dr. Mary's favorite saying is ``be the best you can be.'' Her decision that the Mary R Stauffer Foundation will continue in perpetuity will carry on her legacy of helping to make Downey students the best they can be.

On Sunday, August 27th, the community will celebrate Dr. Mary's birthday at the Columbia Memorial Space Center. A full program will commemorate this momentous occasion with local school projects throughout the facility, special guests, and, of course, a birthday cake. Light refreshments will also be provided by the culinary arts students of the local Downey schools.

Congratulations to Dr. Mary Stauffer and her family: sons Jim and John; daughters Dorothy Knight, Judi Saunders, and Janet Suzuki; granddaughters Dawn Martens, Diane Saunders, Katherine Rieth, Mary Owens, Jessica Stauffer, and Jordan Nichols; and great grandsons Phoenix Rieth and Quillan Owens.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to please join me in thanking Dr. Mary R. Stauffer for her many years of enriching the lives of others so they can be the best they can be, and wish her a very Happy 100th Birthday.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Tony Zapata, who recently concluded his service as Commander of Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) Post 4696 in East Los Angeles. As a representative of East LA in Congress, I have had the honor of getting to know Tony over the years, especially in his capacity as the organizer of the annual Memorial Day and Veterans Day events at the Cinco Puntos intersection.

Tony, a Vietnam veteran, comes from a family with deep military roots. His grandfather served in World War I, his father and two brothers served in WWII, two of his uncles served in Korea, and his son went to Kuwait. It should come as no surprise, then, that Tony has shown an unstinting dedication to those who serve and have served in our nation's armed forces.

Tony was born in Del Rio, Texas, and graduated from high school in 1963. In January 1965, he enlisted in the U.S. Navy. After boot camp in San Diego, California, in April 1965, he went aboard the U.S.S. Evans (DE-1023) in Bremerton, Washington, as a Machinist's Mate Fireman Apprentice. In August 1967, he was assigned to North Island Naval Air Station in Coronado, California, as an Airman Aviation Ordnance man. He was trained in Search and Rescue operations on NHU1 Helicopters, also known as Hueys.

In November 1967, Tony was sent to Okinawa, where he joined a Search and Rescue Unit with the 3rd Marine Division Temporary Attached Duty (TAD). From Okinawa, he went to Cubi Point in the Philippine Islands. At Cubi Point, he qualified with an M-60 Machine Gun(mounted). In January 1968, he went on to Da Nang, South Vietnam. After one year in Vietnam, he returned to North Island Naval Air Station, where he was Honorably Discharged in February 1969. He was awarded the National Defense Medal, Vietnam Service Medal, Republic of Vietnam Service Medal, Republic of Vietnam Service Medal, Expeditionary Medal, and Meritorious Service Ribbon.

In May 1969, Tony went to work for Travelers Insurance Company as a Workman's Compensation Investigator. After Travelers, he worked as an inspector at U.S. Can in Commerce, California, until his retirement in 2006.

In 1992, Tony began to become involved with the VFW, and began full- time VFW involvement following his retirement. In 2010, he was appointed Commander of VFW Post 4696.

Tony has shown an inspiring commitment to assisting veterans and their families with their benefits. He has also been involved with helping homeless Veterans get into VA programs, including help with housing, education, and medical benefits. He has also enjoyed working with local elementary school students. In his talks with students, he has described the importance of patriotism, spoken about Memorial Day and Veterans Day, and reminded his young listeners that freedom is not free. He has also described how they can support our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan by writing letters and sending care packages to our servicemen and women overseas.

On May 29, 2017, Tony stepped down as Commander for Post 4696, but I am pleased to hear that he will still be involved with the VFW as an at large member. I hope my colleagues will join me in sending Tony Zapata our deepest gratitude for his record of service overseas and here at home. His defense of our country, and his faithful support of our veterans and current servicemembers, is an inspiration to us all.

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Yes, I am opposed to the bill.

Mr. Speaker, this is the final amendment to the bill, which will not kill the bill or send it back to committee. If adopted, the bill will immediately proceed to final passage, as amended.

In last year's election, no campaign rhetoric was more infamous than the President's promise to ``build a great, great wall on our Southern border'' and ``make Mexico pay for it.''

The reality is the funding would come from U.S. taxpayers, not from Mexico, as the President promised. This motion to recommit strikes the $1.6 billion appropriation for construction of nearly 74 miles of border wall.

Beyond the initial 74 miles, we have no idea of how many miles of border wall the President plans to build or how much it will cost because we have not received the required report on the long-term plan and justification for border security investments.

Even with the plan, we will need time to evaluate whether investments in the border wall are more cost effective than alternatives and more urgent than clearly established unmet needs.

With $1.6 billion, we could buy two of the four heavy Coast Guard icebreakers we need to protect U.S. interests in the Arctic. This purchase would help minimize the danger highlighted in a National Academies of Science report, which concluded the Coast Guard requires four new heavy icebreakers to protect U.S interests in the Arctic, where Russia has an ever-increasing presence.

The Coast Guard is ready to solicit proposals for new icebreakers in fiscal year 2018. In this bill there is no funding for essential icebreakers. There is no acquisition funding for them in the Homeland Security bill.

The $1.6 billion could also be used for investments in additional scanning technology in the hiring of thousands of Customs officers at every U.S. port of entry. This would reduce wait times for travelers, better facilitate the flow of commerce, and contribute to economic growth in many of our districts. It would also enhance our ability to intercept contraband and illegal narcotics mostly smuggled directly into the U.S. through our ports of entry, not where the wall would be built.

The bill before us does not adequately address these and other areas of security vulnerabilities.

As Members of Congress, protecting our Nation and the American public is our greatest responsibility. It is our obligation to act in their best interest and to invest their tax dollars wisely. If the only Homeland Security item in this bill remains the funding for 74 miles of border wall, we will fail to meet our obligations.

Unfortunately, the President's border wall is now a proxy for the broader immigration debate. There is a false and misleading assumption that building a border wall will solve the immigration challenges we face. The reality is we will never be able to fix our broken immigration system with an enforcement-only approach that turns a blind eye to the desperate circumstances that compels so many to make the often deadly journey to the U.S.

We will never be able to address our immigration challenges by treating as criminals the millions of undocumented people in this country, many of whom are our neighbors and friends.

For years or even decades, the vast majority have called the U.S. their home. They have paid their taxes, acted responsibly, contributed to their communities, and worked hard to provide opportunity for their family.

Immigration enforcement is as much a moral issue as it is a legal one. Our Statue of Liberty has always been a welcoming symbol of hope for those who, like now, are fleeing poverty, oppression, famine, war, and violence in their home country. Many of our ancestors come from somewhere else, often within certain legal status, and made significant contributions to help our country become the greatest in the world. Today's immigrants continue to contribute to that noble legacy.

What we truly need is comprehensive immigration reform that protects our homeland and reflects our American values. Democrats stand ready to work with Republicans to achieve that goal, but Democrats will not support the use of taxpayer dollars for an ill-conceived border wall that has more to do with a campaign promise than the security of our homeland.

In spite of the President's assurances, Mexico is not paying for this wall. The American taxpayer is. My motion to recommit would prevent that from happening. I urge my colleagues to support the motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.