Floor Statements

Madam Chair, I thank the gentlewoman, the distinguished ranking member of the Appropriations Committee, for yielding, but also for her leadership in bringing this to the floor.

Madam Chair, I join Mr. Turner and others in saluting the Speaker, as well as our leader, Mr. Jeffries, for making this important legislation possible.

I associate myself with everything that has been said already about Ukraine, but I want to just focus on one particular area.

It was 2 years ago and almost 2 weeks ago that I led the first high- level delegation to Kyiv, and we saw firsthand the courage of the people, the danger of the Russians. Let me just tell you what is heartbreaking about it.

Vladimir Putin has instructed his troops to use rape, kidnapping, and murder in front of family members as a weapon of war to demoralize the people of Ukraine. I hope that our colleagues will choose democracy and decency rather than autocracy and evil, because I fear that, if you choose the Putin route, you will have blood on your hands--blood of the children, blood of their mothers, raped in front of their parents, raped in front of their children.

Madam Chair, I urge an ``aye'' vote on this and all the other bills before us today.

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his great leadership of the Intelligence Committee, and I thank our members of the Intelligence Committee on both sides of the aisle for their important work to protect our national security.

Having served there, I know it is a place where we strive for bipartisanship.

Mr. Chair, as the gentleman indicated, I came to this committee in the early nineties, and my purpose was to protect the civil liberties as we protected the national security of our country. I had two purposes. One was to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and secondly, on par with that, was to make sure that we protect the civil liberties.

Over the course of that time, I have voted for legislation that is less than what I would have liked but advanced the cause. Both the chair and the ranking member have put forth a very clear idea about why 702 is important, and I associate myself with their remarks.

I just want to say to this: I went in, in the early nineties. I became the ranking member, the top Democrat on the committee. For 20 years, I was in the Gang of Eight, in terms of receiving intelligence, up until last year when I stopped being the Speaker of the House. For that whole time, it has been about what this means to the civil liberties of the American people.

I had a bill that we brought when former President Bush was President that addressed some of our FISA concerns that didn't go all the way. This bill does.

In this legislation, there are scores of provisions that could strengthen our case for civil liberties. Some of them are improvements on existing law. Some of them are new provisions in the law to protect the civil liberties of the American people.

Therefore, the Biggs amendment seriously undermines our ability to protect national security, and I urge our colleagues to vote against it.

I don't have the time right now, but if Members want to know, I will tell them how we could have been saved from 9/11 if we didn't have to have the additional warrants.

Mr. Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote on the Biggs amendment and a ``yes'' vote on the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I especially thank him for his leadership to the great State of Maryland and the city of Baltimore, as well as for calling for this Special Order this evening so that we can come together and express the heartbreak that we all felt and now to commemorate the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge and these six beautiful souls, in loving memory of them, who lost their lives on that dark morning.

I thank Congressman Mfume for organizing the Special Order. I join him and Congressman Sarbanes in recognizing the leadership role of the Governor of Maryland, Wes Moore. I want to pay tribute to the mayor of Baltimore, Brandon Scott, and to all of our congressional delegation for uniting together in a bipartisan way in response to this tragedy.

Just to remind you, it was 2 weeks ago, in the dark of night and braving the cold, a crew got to work making repairs to the Francis Scott Key Bridge. They were doing their jobs so that 30,000 people a day could go to theirs, to do their jobs.

Our love and prayers are with those who lost their lives in this collapse and with their families who lost a husband, a brother, a father, a son.

Our gratitude is with the heroic emergency responders who responded so quickly and saved lives, as well as the teams working quickly to clear the channel.

The magnitude of the collapse cannot be understated. Six families shattered, first and foremost. Tens of thousands of commuters rerouted, paralysis of a port that handles $80 billion in commerce, sending a shock wave through the entire economy. Inspired by the love, unity, and resilience of the Baltimore community, Baltimore will rebuild.

President Biden, as has been mentioned, and the Congress must be there with resources to support every step of the way.

On that score, I would say, having been in Congress for a long time, sadly, we have been witness to many natural and other disasters that have befallen our communities, whether it was the bridge in Minnesota, whether it was the storm in Florida, whether it was Katrina in New Orleans, or whether it was water damage in Iowa. The list goes on and on, but we have all been there for each other. Maybe not all of us, but most of us have been there.

This is a big, big tragedy, but in terms of cost, much smaller than many of the hurricanes and the rest that have happened in the rest of the country. We can learn from them. Whether it is unemployment insurance for the workers, whatever it happens to be, we want to make sure that we utilize every resource at our disposal to bring people together.

The Governor has pointed out, as has Congressman Mfume, Congressman Sarbanes, and members of the delegation, the mayor, and our Senators Ben Cardin and Chris Van Hollen, that this is a national challenge. If you are a restaurateur in Tennessee, you are affected by this. If you are an autoworker in Ohio, you are affected by this. If you are a salesperson in West Virginia, you are affected by this, because of the products that come through and the jobs that are affected by it.

In closing, my father was mayor of Baltimore my whole life. When I was in first grade and when I went off to college, he was still the mayor of Baltimore. That is where my heart is.

I always was so proud of the fact that the National Anthem was written in Baltimore. Francis Scott Key, in the War of 1812, wrote the National Anthem. My brother, Tommy, who also was mayor of Baltimore, was always fond of singing it in his way.

The line in the song that I always liked the best, and I think that applies here, is when he says: ``Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there.'' That is when I start cheering at the game, not at the end, but at that point, as I just did at opening day in San Francisco. Those were the words penned by Francis Scott Key as he gazed upon the ramparts. Now a bridge bearing his name is near where those ramparts were.

As we rebuild, we will, indeed, give proof through the night that our flag is still there, our flag being our unifying symbol of our country that we are all in this together. We will be there. We will learn from other disasters. We will teach other disasters in the future by how we, in a new fresh way, in the Baltimore way, Baltimore strong, rebuild the Francis Scott Key Bridge. Proof through the night that our flag is still there.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his leadership on this very important issue. I thank the distinguished chairwoman of the Energy and Commerce Committee and associate myself with her remarks as well as with Mr. Pallone. I thank Mr. Krishnamoorthi and Chairman Gallagher of the Select Committee on China for their great leadership bringing this legislation forward to the committee of legislative jurisdiction.

Mr. Speaker, I have a few points to make, and it is interesting to hear this respectful debate.

First of all, this is not a ban on TikTok. I am a grandmother of teenagers. I understand the entertainment value, the educational value, the communication value, and the business value for some businesses on this. This is not an attempt to ban TikTok. It is an attempt to make TikTok better, tic-tac-toe, a winner.

Here is what I have to say: The people of China have come forth. The Tibetans have come forth and said on TikTok that in China they are suppressed. They cannot put their message out. Not only that, but the Chinese Government misrepresents the situation in Tibet.

Let me just tell you about Hong Kong, Mr. Speaker. During the Hong Kong election, TikTok TikToked into Taiwan that the Uyghurs on whom there is a genocide exercised by the Chinese Government, they have told the people in Taiwan that the Uyghurs like that genocide, and they told them that the people of Hong Kong liked the destruction of their democracy. They don't frame it that way, but that is their message. Again, they are suppressing the communications from Tibet.

Then, just yesterday on the steps, we heard from the Taiwan people, we heard from the Tibetans, we heard from Hong Kong, and we heard from a woman whose husband was arrested because of his communications with somebody with a shared view.

So this is controlled by the Chinese Communist Government. I can't forget this.

Forgetting that, if you can--Mr. Speaker, I can't--think of this: The Chinese Government will control the algorithm, and they can change it any time in the United States.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding and for calling this Special Order in honor of the very special person that many of us have had the privilege to serve with--in my case for over three decades. She was so proud that Congresswoman Crockett would be following in her footsteps, so it is so appropriate that she is bringing us together now for this formidable force in public service.

Eddie Bernice Johnson sat in that chair reigning for the whole time. She reigned. We always went to her for guidance and advice. Not only did Eddie Bernice make history, Mr. Speaker, she did make a difference as the first African American and the first woman to wield the gavel of the powerful Science, Space, and Technology Committee.

Not only did she make history and make a difference, she enabled our country to make progress. We marveled at the respect that she commanded in the scientific community, the academic community, in industry, from her constituents, and from her colleagues on Capitol Hill. The capstone of her career, our Chips and Science Act in her last term in Congress, will drive decades of scientific discovery while recruiting a diverse, inclusive workforce for the industries of tomorrow.

Indeed, she insisted on it. She insisted on investing in STEM education so American minds of all kinds could solve our greatest challenges, the challenges of our time.

Eddie Bernice was always talking about taking our Nation into the future. We chatted quite a bit--she was soft-spoken toward the end but with great force. And we chatted and laughed about and admired what is written on the walls of the Science, Space, and Technology Committee, a quote from the poet Tennyson, and it is so much about Eddie Bernice:

For I dipt into the future,

far as human eye could see,

Saw a vision of the world,

and all the wonder that would be

She understood that wonder. May it be a comfort to her beloved son, Kirk; dear grandchildren Kirk, II, David, and James and her entire family that we mourn their loss. We pray for them during this sad time. We thank them for sharing Eddie Bernice Johnson with us in this Congress, but, more importantly, with our country. May our darling Eddie Bernice Johnson, whom we all loved so dearly, rest in peace.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding and for her tremendous leadership over a long period of time. She is a great intellectual resource in helping Ukraine. I thank Marcy Kaptur very much for her leadership.

Madam Speaker, nearly 1 year ago, many of you will recall, in this Chamber we had a joint session of Congress. We were honored by the presence of President Zelenskyy who had come directly from the battlefield and brought us a flag signed by the soldiers. He delivered a magnificent speech.

President Zelenskyy made clear the necessity of American support by saying: Your money is not charity. It is an investment in global security and in democracy.

The fight of the Ukrainian people for democracy is just remarkable to behold, but their fight is for their democracy and ours, as well.

Being empowered by the investment we made last Congress, passed by an overwhelming bicameral vote, Ukraine has battled historically against the tide of the biggest army in Europe, the Russian Army.

It is important for the American people to know that Ukraine has reclaimed and won back 50 percent of the land previously seized by the Russians. They have won back 50 percent. More than 60 percent, close to two-thirds of the money that we have invested in military assistance for the Ukrainians has been spent in the United States. It has been spent in the United States creating jobs here as we support the Ukrainians.

Madam Speaker, nearly two-thirds of the money has been spent here, and 100 percent of the determination of victory belongs to the Ukrainian people.

Others have mentioned, Mr. Hoyer included, that at the same time, our hearts break when we hear about the atrocities committed against women by Putin's forces.

Women are subjected to rape as a weapon of war. They have been murdered in front of their parents or in front of their children and raped in the same way. Tens of thousands of children have been kidnapped by the Russian soldiers.

I said to someone who knows about these things: Isn't it sad that the brutality of war has turned these soldiers into brutes?

They said: Make no mistake. The Russian soldiers do what they are ordered to do.

These rapes, these kidnappings, and these murders of families in front of family members are the direct order of Vladimir Putin, who is a very evil person.

We must put an end to this unadulterated evil. The longer we wait to get them the money, more people will die, more children will be kidnapped, more women will be raped, and more uncertainty will be injected into the situation as to whether or not we are there to protect democracy and to support it.

As the war wages on, the administration has repeatedly made clear: America is at the end of the supply of money we have voted and Ukraine is nearly out of time.

Today, President Zelenskyy returned to the Capitol to make a compelling case for America's continued support to help Ukraine finish the fight; because the battle for Ukraine, again, is a battle for democracy itself, and we will not let death, destruction, and dictatorship of Vladimir Putin prevail.

President Biden's supplemental funding request must be brought to the floor as soon as possible so that we honor our duty to stand with the Ukrainian people until victory is won. It has been said on both sides of the aisle, the cost of war is great. Should Putin prevail and then go on to other invasions of NATO or non-NATO countries, it will only cost more money, more lives, more families separated. That cannot be what we are about.

At the same time, this legislation calls for us to honor a commitment to peace in the Middle East by our support for Israel and the humanitarian assistance that is in the legislation for the Palestinian people as well as others.

Madam Speaker, I thank Ms. Kaptur for her leadership during this Special Order and for yielding time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today on World AIDS Day, as we remember tens of millions of beautiful souls we have lost around the world to HIV and AIDS and pray for their families.

Over the last two decades, our fight against HIV/AIDS in the world has been transformed by PEPFAR, made possible by the leadership of President Bush and bipartisan support in Congress.

It was my privilege to be a leader in this fight on the Foreign Operations Subcommittee where we secured more than $100 billion for PEPFAR to support its life-giving work.

I salute President Bush and Mrs. Bush for their ongoing attention and commitment to this issue. I have traveled to visit the clinics in Africa and have been told by people there that PEPFAR gave them hope. They would never have been tested if they didn't think there was an opportunity for something to improve their lives. They lost the stigma of being tested positively by having hope given to them.

I thank President Bush and Mrs. Bush for helping address the issue with their Pink Ribbon Campaign.

As we go forward, let us hope that this body will soon reauthorize PEPFAR for what it means.

During the COVID crisis, I spoke to the head of the World Health Organization and asked him if PEPFAR helped. He said, yes, the science, the distribution of drugs, the network that was created was all very helpful to us in the fight against COVID, especially in Africa.

Again, thanks to President Bush for his leadership at the time. I told him at that time that I am with you as long as it is big. He made it big, and he has made it constant; and we salute him and are grateful to him for that.

This year's World AIDS Day is fraught with meaning because our nation faces the imperative of reauthorizing PEPFAR HIV is very resourceful: it keeps adapting to survive, and so must we. I join so many of my colleagues and voices across the world in calling on Congressional leaders to make reauthorizing PEPFAR a top priority as we negotiate government funding legislation. Today, and every day, America must demonstrate to the world that we remain fully committed to building an AIDS-free generation, with health equity and justice for all.

Mr. Speaker, it is with overwhelming joy that I rise today to pay tribute to Bishop Marc Andrus, Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of California: a spiritual luminary and moral leader whose more than three decades of service has been nothing short of exceptional. Bishop Marc embodies the creed of the City of St. Francis: `Lord, make me an instrument of thy peace.' Indeed, as an instrument of peace, he has played a beautiful symphony: honoring our sacred responsibility to care for those in need, to defend the dignity of all God's children and to preserve our precious planet.

Whether in the pulpit or in our communities, the magnificent ministry of Bishop Marc has made a direct, and extraordinary, impact. He has held the position of Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of California since 2006. As such, he leads a flock of 27,000 Episcopalians across 75 congregations in Northern California: walking with them down the path toward salvation and social justice. At the same time, his support for the Episcopal Impact Fund and a capital campaign to support Bay Area congregations has only amplified his impact--empowering more people of faith to perform good works in their communities. And his leadership on the San Francisco Interfaith Council helps bring our City together to work for housing and health care, education and environmental impact, justice and peace.

When St. Luke's Hospital was on the verge of closure, Bishop Marc stepped forward to

help marshal an effort to rescue this pillar of health, healing and history in San Francisco's Mission neighborhood. The Blue Ribbon Panel that he co-chaired--which brought together community members, labor leaders, local officials, health professionals and industry stakeholders--quickly assembled a plan of action to rebuild the hospital so that it could continue to provide outstanding medical care. And when COVID struck, he was an invaluable resource for helping his diocese--and our City--navigate the chaos and uncertainty, convening experts twice a week to coordinate on policy decisions and public outreach.

Bishop Marc's clarion call for marriage equality was consequential in moving the nationwide fight forward. At a time when the Episcopal Church had not approved of rites for same-sex marriage, Bishop Marc publicly urged all couples--gay or straight--to be married in a civil ceremony with a blessing to be performed by the clergy. He went on to lead efforts within the Episcopal Church to win official marriage rites for same-sex couples, and he supported two amici curiae briefs bolstering marriage equality in the courts. And he brought great pride to our City when, as the very first person that he ordained as Bishop, he ordained the first transgender member of the Diocese of California clergy.

Growing up among the rolling hills and mighty rivers of eastern Tennessee, Bishop Marc could hear the Lord's call to be good stewards of His Creation. As an influential voice across the Episcopal Church, and co-chair of its Environmental Task Force, he has helped formulate climate policy recommendations and design initiatives to mobilize for climate action. In 2021, Bishop Marc led an Episcopal delegation to COP26--not only to reaffirm our moral duty to care for God's Creation, but also our obligation to advance eco-justice for communities hit hardest by the climate crisis. Thanks to his efforts, the Episcopal Church gained official observer status, giving it a platform to engage more directly with negotiators on all areas of the convention to address the climate crisis. At COP27, speaking at a panel that I appeared on, he offered striking moral clarity on the need to rescue our planet for future generations.

How fitting that, this Saturday, many from his congregation and his many friends in our City will gather at Grace Cathedral in San Francisco for the 174th Convention of the Diocese of California, where we will celebrate his towering legacy. But more profound than the praise we will offer him at the event will be the impact of prayerful leadership and service, which will be forever etched in the hearts of so many in the Bay Area and beyond.

I thank Bishop Marc for walking with us down the righteous path. May his retirement be filled with the same faith, charity and hope that he has so generously shared with us for so long.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution to support one of our closest allies in the world and partners, Israel, as she defends herself against terrorist attacks.

I thank Chairman McCaul for his leadership in bringing this to the floor. I also thank Chairman McCaul as well as Ranking Member Meeks for their leadership and working together, crafting this resounding statement of support, and doing so in a unifying, bipartisan way.

Mr. Speaker, on October 7, we watched in horror as Hamas terrorists unleashed a brutal assault on Israel's families and slaughtered so many. We have gone into some detail about the brutality of it all. It is brutality outside the circle of civilized human behavior. The attacks were horrible.

With this resolution, the United States Congress resoundingly declares our support for Israel, not with revenge but with justice, that justice will be done.

While doing so, we continue to remain concerned about the humanitarian situation in Gaza, with civilians caught in the middle of the war. I echo Secretary Blinken's call for a humanitarian pause so that innocent lives can be saved.

Mr. Speaker, 80 years ago, on the floor of this House, my father, Thomas D'Alesandro, as a Member of Congress from Maryland, called upon the Roosevelt administration to support the establishment of the State of Israel in what was known as Palestine at the time. He was early in calling for that, so it is in my DNA to protect that State of Israel.

Hamas is dedicated to the destruction of the State of Israel. Hamas has been declared a terrorist organization by the United States. Hamas must be destroyed, but in destroying them, we must protect the children in Gaza. They use them as shields. We want to protect them.

This resolution, with overwhelming bipartisan support on the floor of the House, is so necessary. I urge a unanimous vote and thank the chairman and ranking member for their leadership.

Mr. Speaker, I missed a series of votes due to my participating in official memorials and honoring the legacy of my friend Senator Feinstein. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 518 and ``yea'' on rollcall No. 519.

Mr. Speaker, I rise for the purpose of speaking with great sadness and emotion about the loss of our great Senator, our senior Senator from California, Senator Dianne Feinstein.

I do so, as I say, personally, as a friend, neighbor, and fellow San Franciscan. All of us do so with great pride as the great Senator she has been to our State, and the longest serving woman Senator from California.

She came here with Barbara Boxer, she stayed on, and she left on her own terms. She was the first woman mayor of San Francisco, coming into office under sad circumstances but leading us with great dignity, with great effectiveness, and with great leadership.

Much more will be said about it. We will have so much time to talk and brag about Dianne Feinstein. Her legacy will be a long one that we will all be inspired by. However, today, at this time, just hours since her passing, rather than talk about her, let us just pray that she rests in peace.

In that regard, Mr. Speaker, I ask that all present in the Chamber, as well as Members and staff throughout the Capitol, please rise for a moment of silence and in remembrance of the late Honorable Senator Dianne Feinstein.

Mr. Speaker, with deep condolences and sympathy to Senator Feinstein's daughter Katherine and her granddaughter Eileen, and the entire Feinstein family, I offer a privileged bereavement resolution and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding and for her leadership on this issue.

I commend the chair and ranking member of the Armed Services Committee for the legislation that came out of their committee 58-1, the bipartisanship to protect and defend, which is the oath of office that all of us take to serve in government; and also, though, to acknowledge that, on the floor of the House, these poisonous resolutions came forward and were added to the bill. I rise to move to instruct House conferees to honor our men and women in uniform by protecting their fundamental health freedom.

I was listening with interest and prayerfully, frankly, to the previous speaker, who just said that terminating a pregnancy is not a health issue. Well, for some people, it might be.

Do you believe in the Hyde amendment? I am not a fan of the Hyde amendment, but that is the law of the land. Under the Hyde amendment, if there is rape, incest, or the life of the mother is at risk, then that changes the dynamic in terms of public policy.

Now, suppose a family member has a situation where the life of the mother is at risk or a child of a servicemember is the victim of violence and rape in the community. Would you want that person to have their health needs met? If they are in a State that says absolutely not, then they would have to travel elsewhere to have their health needs met, in keeping with the Hyde amendment.

If you believe in the Hyde amendment, which I don't subscribe to, but many of you do, how can you deprive the life of a mother--whether it is a servicewoman herself or the spouse of a serviceperson, or child of a servicemember--the ability to seek the healthcare that they need?

The NDAA has long been bipartisan. This year, House Republicans are now engaging in a version that would restrict servicemembers from receiving full reproductive rights.

This is disrespectful. Shame on those who play political games with the courageous people who would give their lives to save ours.

Mr. Speaker, this month we observe the 50th anniversary of the coup in Chile. It is important to note the role that the House played in declassifying documents relating to the United States' role in the coup of Allende and the Presidency of Pinochet.

I rise to pay tribute to our former colleague, Maurice Hinchey, who in 1999 introduced legislation to declassify documents related to the coup in Chile. Following his leadership, I took his legislation to the House Intelligence Committee conference.

In our markup of the conference report of the Intelligence Authorization Act for fiscal year 2000, I was successful in getting an amendment passed in committee that mirrored the Hinchey legislation. This language was sustained on the floor and when the FY 2000 Intelligence bill was signed by President Clinton, it became law.

The legislation stated that no longer than 270 days following enactment--we wanted a shorter period of time, they wanted a longer period of time. This was the compromise--270 days following the enactment, the CIA had to submit a report on all of its activities in various events in Chile in three categories: the assassination of President Salvador Allende; the ascension of Pinochet to the Presidency; and the violation of human rights committed by the henchman of President Pinochet.

In 2001, therefore, the CIA prepared 16,000 documents for declassification. Since then, thousands more documents--maybe up around 23,000 documents--have been declassified.

During the debate on the FY 2000 legislation, it was argued that the search for documents related to human rights violations in Chile--now, we are talking about murder, disappearances, imprisonment, torture; that is what we are talking about--directed by the National Security Council was sufficient. They said we did that. It is sufficient. They said nothing further was needed and raised the question of how much money will this cost and how much time will it take for the Director of Central Intelligence to produce an adequate report.

However, Maurice Hinchey argued, in these words: ``It is time that the Central Intelligence Agency accounted for its role in the military coup that toppled the democratically elected government of Salvador Allende and led to his death. The American people need to know how our government supported the rise of Augusto Pinochet, a ruthless dictator who systematically murdered and tortured his enemies.''

In May 2016, I had the privilege of leading a strongly bipartisan congressional delegation to Chile. When we visited the Museum of Memory and Human Rights--and I would recommend that if you get to Chile you certainly see that--it was emotional and gratifying for some of us to see the documents that we had declassified under Maurice Hinchey's leadership helping bring the truth to light.

To this day in Chile there is still great sadness about the loss of life and other crimes against humanity perpetrated by Pinochet's henchman. Last week was the 50th anniversary, and at the observance--an event marking 50 years since the coup--President Gabriel Boric spoke eloquently about the importance of reconciliation and democracy. Democracy--he said it again and again. Thankfully, the President had also called for a plan to find the nearly 1,500 people who are still missing or unaccounted for, for their families.

It is my hope that this spirit will lead to more revelations and accountability.

As we mark 50 years since the coup, I salute the leadership of Maurice Hinchey. He was a champion of justice; not only in Chile but in Argentina and in other countries suffering under similar despotic regimes, including those affected by Operation Condor.

Operation Condor was how all these vicious dictators coordinated their activities. Maurice Hinchey saw the connection and coordination among the dictatorships in the death and violence in their countries, and in relentlessly speaking out against it, he made a difference.

His family is still active in the civic life of New York State. He passed away on November 22, 2017, but his leadership in the fight for truth and justice continues to be an inspiration to us all.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. I thank her for her leadership on this important issue and for giving us all the opportunity to speak on the rule that would bring this shameful legislation to the floor.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly oppose the Republicans' latest assault on the health and safety of our children. Every child deserves clean air to breathe. We in California believe this is our sacred duty. That is why our State has taken strong action to reduce vehicle pollution, preserve our environment, and protect our children.

I just have one question for our colleagues across the aisle: Why? Why don't you want children to have cleaner air to breathe? Why don't you understand what this means to their health? Why do you not understand the connection between pollution and asthma and how unfair that is to children in our population?

That is why more than five decades ago this Congress acted to preserve California's authority to protect our children and has repeatedly reauthorized that since.

Despite this precedent, this bill would restrict the ability of States like California to protect families from dangerous pollution.

Now, it is important for people to understand that as the gentlewoman

pointed out, this is at the discretion of the States. Seventeen States have decided that they would use such a waiver in order to protect the children and the air that they breathe.

Why would you want to throw the American auto industry into disarray, diminishing leadership and the electric vehicle future?

Mr. Speaker, as the gentlewoman referenced, it is an economic decision that the auto industry makes. We have in this body, in the Democrat majority, come to the aid of the auto industry--not corporations, but the industry and the workers--and we want our auto industry to be preeminent in the world.

California is a very big market for the auto industry. For 50 years they have lived with this emissions standard, this waiver, that enables that to happen. If you are making cars for California it is easier than to make the same safe cars for the rest of the country because it is a big market in California.

Sixteen other States have followed suit, representing at least 40 percent of new auto purchases in our country--a big chunk of our auto industry economy.

Again, what would be the reason that you would interfere in the free market of the auto industry and the free breathing for our children of cleaner air? The only explanation could be that Big Oil opposes this legislation. They are so living in the past. They don't even realize that the future is upon us, and the future is for the children.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on this rule.