Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the life of Korean War Veteran and great American, Fred Eugene Barber and his wife, Yvonne Barber. Fred passed away on Friday, September 10, 2021 at 90 years old. Fred's beloved wife, Yvonne, passed away only 13 hours earlier of heart failure at 88 years old. They are survived by their 2 daughters, Karen and Jan, in addition to 5 grandchildren and 8 great- grandchildren.

Fred and Yvonne married in June 1953 after dating for only 6 months. This year involved several exciting milestones for the couple, as they celebrated their 68th wedding anniversary in June and family and friends gathered to celebrate Fred's 90th birthday in August.

The couple was also extremely active in their community and held a deep love for Lake Havasu City. Fred and Yvonne were involved in the Republican Party, PACE, and their local church. Fred taught a Constitution class at various schools and other local organizations in addition to writing and publishing over 25 novels about American historical fiction and spy fiction.

Madam Speaker, I am here to express my deepest condolences to the family of Fred and Yvonne Barber and to honor their memory. Fred and Yvonne's selfless public service and local impact will never be forgotten by the people of Lake Havasu City, Arizona.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to address the serious and deadly incompetence displayed by Mr. Biden and his current military staff, including General Milley and Secretary of Defense Austin. The military leadership has been irresponsible, careless, and incompetent regarding Afghanistan. After 20 years, over $2 trillion wasted, and thousands of American lives lost, our military leadership lost this war and did so in a humiliating defeat played out in real time before the world.

Our enemies are emboldened as our military leaders showed cowardice and incompetence. Instead of resolve and a plan of action to exit a war they could not justify or win, they evacuated our troops and abandoned civilians. They abandoned our allies and left

them to fend for themselves. The British were so incensed over this humiliating defeat and abandonment of their servicemembers on the field that the British Parliament passed a resolution censuring Mr. Biden, a first in our nation's history.

Our allies lost faith in their ability to count on us.

In addition, our military leaders, led by the strange General Milley, who is obsessed with homosexuality in the military and flying gay pride flags at every opportunity, informed Congress that we did not need to keep Bagram Air Base before the civilians were evacuated. His bungling led to a disaster with 13 of our servicemembers unnecessarily killed trying to control an airport that we had no control over and had many weak points compared to Bagram Air Base. His decision cost the lives of his troops.

On top of this disastrous incompetence, General Milley and Secretary Austin abandoned over $80 billion in our top-notch military equipment and allowed it to fall into the hands of the very military we had been opposing. Milley and Austin failed to create a plan to retrieve, scuttle or destroy our valuable equipment. Helicopters, airplanes, drones, missiles, automatic weapons, MRAPS, Humvees, ammunition, mortars and howitzers were all lost to the enemy even though our leaders knew where the equipment was yet did nothing to stop the acquisition by the Taliban.

This is gross incompetence and dereliction of duty. Both the very weirdly obsessed General Milley and Secretary Austin should have resigned in shame for the humiliation they brought to this country. But they have not. Therefore, we need to remove them. I will vote to impeach both Milley and Austin and remove the stain they have left on our military and our people.

I include in the Record a letter from Arizona Representative Walt Blackman. His letter needs to be read and shared and I join him in his conclusions.

September 3, 2021

To Whom It May Concern: I proudly served 21 years in the

United States Army. Several times during my service I was on

deployment to other countries. I was responsible for military

equipment valued at millions of dollars.

I was trained as a private whose job was imperative to

track, secure and dispose of military equipment in accordance

with military regulation. While I was stationed at Fort Hood

there was a time when our military installation was on

complete lockdown because a soldier had misplaced a set of

night vision goggles. Securing and tracking military

equipment, especially sensitive items is a practice that is

constantly drilled into all soldiers.

According to UCMJ any servicemember of the United States

Armed Forces who either willfully or by neglect sells,

damages, destroys, disposes of, or otherwise mismanages U.S.

military property may face charges under Article 108 of the

Madam Speaker, I rise today in remembrance of the tragic events of September 11th, 2001, as we honor the loved ones lost 20 years ago.

The horrific events that unfolded that day claimed the lives of nearly 3,000 Americans and forever impacted many more. The senseless terrorist attacks that took place in New York City, Washington, D.C., and a field in Pennsylvania fundamentally altered our nation. Commercial airliners were weaponized, our Pentagon attacked, and the World Trade Center Towers fell. Yet, in one of America's darkest hours, Americans were united by God, heroism and compassion.

As we take a moment to commemorate the great losses our nation suffered 20 years ago, we also continue to be inspired by the raw strength and resilience displayed by our great nation in the grief and aftermath. To this day, America's fortitude continues to set an international example, even during trying times.

While this day is still difficult and we cannot bring back those precious American lives that were tragically lost by the brutal attacks, we must never forget their sacrifice and those that protect our freedom. I commend the participants of Lake Havasu City's 9/11 Rededication Ceremony for honoring the memory of the Americans lost on the twentieth anniversary of the September 11th, 2001 attacks.

May God continue to comfort the families who lost loved ones and may God bless the United States of America.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize a great man, a great lawyer, and a great Arizonan. I speak of Robert S. ``Bob'' Lynch.

Mr. Lynch is a proud graduate of the University of Arizona, obtaining a Bachelor of Arts (1961) and Bachelor of Laws (1964) degrees and a Master of Laws degree with a specialization in natural resources law from George Washington University (1972). Well known as one of the most competent water lawyers in a state where water law governs prosperity, Bob represented clients before Congress and the state legislature. His practice also included representation of clients before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Arizona Corporation Commission and in state and federal courts. His litigation experience includes matters before the U.S. Supreme Court, as well as cases before 9 of the 13 federal appellate courts, and three state supreme courts.

One area in which I was able to get to know Bob included his work as counsel and Treasurer to the Irrigation and Electrical Districts' Association of Arizona (IEDA). The irrigation districts form a key part of the water and agricultural infrastructure in Arizona. Bob guided this important group for years and guided them well.

Professionally, Bob devoted most of his practice to water, electricity, and environmental law issues. Bob was appointed in June 1996 by the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives to the seven- member Federal Water Rights Task Force, a federal advisory committee, established by the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act, P.L. 104-127. I also found Bob to be an invaluable advisor on energy and water issues. Bob was devoted to several organizations related to his specialty, including Serving on the Advisory Committee of the American Public Power Association and on the Board of Directors of its political action committee, PowerPAC (Chairman 2000-2007). He is a 2003 recipient of APPA's Kramer-Preston Personal Service Award. Bob also served on the North American Electric Reliability Corporation's Legal Advisory Committee, the Water and Property Rights (Chair) and Energy Issues Committees of the National Water Resources Association, as well as on task forces on the Endangered Species Act of both national associations. He served as President (1991-1996) and Chairman of the Board (1996-2000) of the Central Arizona Project Association. He belongs to the Arizona, Maricopa County, and Federal Bar Associations, and is a member of the District of Columbia Bar.

A gentleman of the highest order, Bob is also a scholar. His publications include ``Complying With NEPA: The Tortuous Path to an Adequate Environmental Impact Statement,'' 14 Arizona Law Review 717 (1973) and ``The 1973 CEQ Guidelines: Cautious Updating of the Environmental Impact Statement Process,'' 11 California Western Law Review 297 (1975). One case where Bob's talents came through was the case, Davis v. Agua Sierra Resources, L.L.C., 220 Ariz. 108, 203 P. 506 (2009) vacating 217 Ariz. 386, 174 P. 3d 298 (2008), where Bob successfully convinced the Arizona Supreme Court to overturn the Court of Appeals on a significant groundwater issue.

Bob is a devoted husband to his wonderful wife, Anne, in addition to a giving father and grandfather. I can say that the joy of being a grandfather cannot be exceeded and I could see that joy in every conversation I had with Bob. I would like to take this moment out of day to let the world know that Arizona is blessed to have such a talented and good man like Bob Lynch.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to wish the Meadview VFW Auxiliary a wonderful 30th anniversary. The Meadview Auxiliary embodies the very best our country has to offer. Their work with Mt. Tipton Elementary school--particularly Constitution Day in September--teaches our future leaders to respect and engage with our great republic. We are in debt to your service.

Their Resource and Stand-down fairs assisted countless veterans and ensured our nation's finest have their voices heard in Congress. Each and every one of the Auxiliary's members and contributors are patriots; their collation of 100,000 poppies when disabled veterans were unable to meet proved as much.

The United States is in short supply of men and women such as yourselves. The Meadview community and the people of Arizona are blessed to have great Americans setting an example for generations to come. I am proud to be a friend of the Meadview VFW Auxiliary, and I look forward to continue fighting for Veterans' issues here in Washington.

Madam Speaker, I rise to address matters concerning the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol. Others have addressed how the Committee was formulated, and how the Democrats vetoed all the Republican nominees for the Committee, and instead chose two jack-Republicans. Allowing the Democrats to control who the Republicans can pick to serve on their side is like having the Milwaukee Bucks choose the starting lineup of the Phoenix Suns. That is not my concern today.

Today, I want to point out the travesty of evidence selection. If we want the American public to get to the truth of January 6th, you must be able to handle the truth, that means all the truth, including facts you don't like or facts that may reflect poorly on people you like.

In that regard, I object to the failure to release all the evidence regarding January 6th. The 14,000 hours of surveillance video has been suppressed. Thousands of hours of body camera footage has been suppressed. Video and still photographs from official and home security systems have been suppressed that would have, and did, record the Republican National Committee pipe bomber. The investigation and report of the officer who shot and killed Ashli Babbitt has been suppressed. All we have seen is one video, which clearly shows an unlawful killing by the officer. If there are other videos exonerating him, why haven't they been released? We know that Rep. Mullins has stated publicly that the officer who unlawfully shot Ashli Babbitt felt remorse and guilt for his wrongful actions. But we do not have his own words of contrition. Moreover, many criminals show remorse and guilt after the event, yet we still prosecute them.

That brings me to the most well-funded per capita police force in the world, the United States Capitol Police. With 2,500 officers, protecting the Capitol should have been obtainable. What happened? Why were there so

many breaches so quickly? Well, we know that the rank-and-file officers want to tell us why, but they were not invited to testify. We need the truth, and these men and women need to be able to tell their stories, the story of how their own leadership, and the political leadership in Washington, D.C., failed them and led to the breaches. I include in the Record the press release dated July 28, 2021 from the Capitol Police Labor Committee whose voice, like so many, has been silenced by this Committee. They need to be heard and the truth needs to come out, even if the truth makes political leadership look inept.

Capitol Police Union to House Committee: ``Hear All Our

Voices''

United States Capitol Police Labor Committee

Washington, D.C.--Capitol Police Officers are suffering a

whole-of-force effect from the January 6th attacks on the

U.S. Capitol, says the union representing those officers.

The Capitol Police Officers' Union welcomed today's

testimony from two Capitol police officers and two MPD

officers to the House Committee investigating the Jan 6th

insurrection.

Union Chairman Gus Papathanasiou said: ``Their testimony is

a crucial start to understanding the broad and far-reaching

effects on all our officers from the violence that day.''

``In support of all our officers, our Union stands ready to

provide the Committee with the depth needed to fully grasp

the enormity of the events that day and provide the context

for how events went so terribly, and tragically, wrong.''

``The police response to January 6th represents a

disastrous collapse of leadership that was not simply an

aberration confined to that one day. It was months and years

in the making.''

``To fully understand why our officers felt so abandoned,

requires an understanding of how they came to be left

uninformed and lacking in defenses when it mattered most--

when an attack on the U.S. Capitol was being fully

realized.''

``Most importantly, we arrived at that position of

vulnerability because the voices of the rank-and-file-

officers had been ignored for years. There was no

collaboration from Capitol Police leaders with the frontline

officers, instead it was a top-down approach that left a void

of information and planning. As an officer working that day,

I can attest, there was NO plan, and certainly no contingency

plans by the Chiefs.''

``That lack of leadership had tragic consequences. The

riots led to the deaths of officers, and injuries to an

estimated 140 Capitol Police and MPD officers, some of whom

will never return to service.''

``As individual officers testified today, they did their

best and succeeded in their mission to protect all members of

Congress and their staff that day. The Committee needs all

the facts to understand why the U.S. Capitol was so

vulnerable, and why it will remain vulnerable if the broader

rank-and-file officers are not heard.''

``The most urgent challenge, is to keep the officers we

have right now and that requires a renewed faith in their

mission and a restored belief that Congress has their

backs.''

``Poor morale, inequitable pay and conditions, and a

leadership that refuses to engage--these are contributing

factors to the events of January 6th and they remain factors

still, today.''

``The Union asks that the Committee listen to the active-

duty police officers who have been chosen by the rank and

file to represent them.''

Madam Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the first Mohave Electric member connections for MEC's fiber-optic project and broadband service. In a first-of-its-kind endeavor for an electric co-op in Arizona, MEC is building a fiber-optic network to enhance electric operations and provide reliable broadband service for each member in MEC's service territory which consists of 33,000 members and 42,000 end points.

MEC was created in 1946 by local residents who took initiative to provide themselves with electricity investor-owned utilities refused to supply. MEC crews have now already installed more than 190,000 feet of fiber line, increasing that number every day. The work the MEC is producing for reliable internet is very important because it helps small businesses, local emergency responders, and hospitals to be able to do their job and help the people of Mohave County.

Madam Speaker, I express a sincere form of gratitude to MEC, and I encourage my colleagues to join me in celebrating a successful project and legacy as a valuable organization to the people of Arizona. These notable efforts and accomplishments to provide reliable broadband service should be recognized and acknowledged. For these reasons I stand with MEC for their remarkable impact on the Mohave County communities.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the dedicated service and life of the loved firefighter, Bryan Jeffrey Boatman.

Known as ``BJ'' to his loved ones and friends, BJ passed away at the young age of 37 in the service of his community, while assisting the U.S. Forest Service fighting wildland fires on Tuesday, July 7, 2020, near Payson, Arizona.

BJ leaves behind his devoted wife, Elizabeth Marie Boatman, and his young 8-year-old daughter, Claire Elizabeth Boatman. BJ loved what he did, serving and helping others his whole life. In this steadfast support of his community, he made the ultimate sacrifice, giving his life battling wildland fires, which so threaten our Western communities. Boatman is a hero whose selflessness and sacrifice exemplifies the best qualities of what it means to be good father, husband, and American.

Madam Speaker, I express a sincere form of gratitude to BJ Boatman, and I offer my prayers to Elizabeth and Claire, who lost a father and a husband far too soon. I encourage my colleagues to join me in honoring BJ's legacy and bravery, standing humbly in his memory having benefitted from the protection he gave our country. It is on the backs of great men like BJ that our Nation is protected, and how we can sleep peacefully at night knowing people watch over the safety of our families, homes, and communities.

BJ will never be forgotten.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today as the chairman of the U.S. Slovenia Friendship Caucus to commemorate today, July 1, as the first day of the Slovenia's presidency of the Council of the European Union.

Slovenia takes the helm of one of the EU's main decisionmaking bodies at a challenging time not just for the EU, but for the world at large. Slovenia will manage a Europe working to control the COVID pandemic, seeking to repair the economic and social damage from this virus; all the while dealing with the ongoing and critical issues with the EU and the U.S., such as countering Chinese and Russian influence, bolstering cybersecurity, and charting an economic path for the future.

As Slovenia begins its 6-month presidency, it is doing so under the slogan, ``Together. Resilient. Europe,'' which outlines an agenda where Slovenia seeks to facilitate the European recovery while also reflecting on Europe's future, strengthening the rule of law and European values, and increasing security and stability in the European neighborhood.

Slovenia officials have also made their intentions known to Balkanize the EU through engaging Western Balkan states which have yet been able to join.

Slovenia's presidential platform makes it clear they are up to the unique challenge. The challenge is not just recovering from a once-in- a-generation pandemic, but thinking strategically to promote a more resilient Europe in the future.

I wish our strong friend and ally, Slovenia, all the best.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for yielding.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the rule.

While I do not support the legislation this rule brings up, that is not the main reason for my objection. I am opposed to the rule before us because provision 6 in the rule turns off section 202 of the National Emergencies Act relating to the COVID-19 national emergency for the remainder of the 117th Congress.

What this line really does is kill a joint resolution I introduced 2 weeks ago in accordance with the National Emergencies Act. The framers of this act wrote the law to inject congressional oversight to rein in the emergency powers codified into U.S. law that give the President additional powers in times of declared emergency.

Section 202 outlined the process where, 6 months after an emergency is declared, Congress meets to consider a joint resolution of termination, forcing the debate on the necessity of continuing the national emergency and correlating powers given to the President.

Over a year later, Congress has never met to debate the merit of the COVID-19 declared emergency, even after the President extended the emergency another year. This is because Congress has a poor track record in enforcing our emergency duties.

In fact, there are over 30 active emergencies on the books dating back to the Carter administration--hardly emergencies, I take it--few of which this body has ever met to debate the merit of the emergency and the powers it invokes.

With nationwide cases falling, vaccine rates rising, mask mandates being lifted, and States reopening with no capacity limits, it would seem appropriate to debate whether or not this Nation is truly in a state of emergency, not to mention, once again, the mandated duties of oversight of the executive branch.

Therefore, I introduced H.J. Res. 52 to have this debate. I did this because the first joint resolution I introduced was killed in a prior rule.

Now the majority is killing debate on the COVID emergency for the entire 117th Congress unless the majority leadership determines we can have this debate. I guess that is not part of the law.

This completely goes against the explicit expedited procedure in the law providing for quick and efficient oversight. This is tyranny of the majority at its finest.

Why must we continue to neglect our duties?

Why must we continue the congressional track record of being asleep at the wheel and yielding more power to the executive?

The National Emergencies Act mandates that we have this debate, and that is all my joint resolution does--require the people's Representatives to meet, debate, and vote on a termination resolution of the COVID emergency powers in accordance with the law.

Madam Speaker, you may feel that we are still in an emergency. You may still feel COVID is a threat but not a national emergency, or you may feel the national emergency is over. However you feel, I am simply asking that we engage in the debate as the law requires.

Using the National Emergencies Act, the executive has requested powers outside the scope of Article II. As this declared emergency continues, the executive could request even more. This body should debate on whether to rein in the extraordinary powers, especially among the backdrop of a radically different COVID situation in this Nation.

In a time when this body is trying to reassert its claim on Article I authorization, simple oversight like this restores trust. Trust is a series of promises kept with the citizens of this great Nation. Imagine that, trust, just by following the definitions and the law.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this rule.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to address what I think, and what I think the record will establish, are errors pertaining to my inquiry into circumstances surrounding the killing of Ashli Babbitt.

There are rules of decorum in the House of Representatives. In debate, members are to ``avoid characterizing another Member's personal intent or motives and discussing personalities.'' Another rule is that members are to ``refrain from speaking disrespectfully of the Speaker, other Members.'' When made on the floor, such disrespectful behavior and boorish conduct is subject to objection to take down the words. But no such process applies when rude, impolite and candidly false statements are made about one member by another off the floor. So, I take this opportunity now to address and correct the incorrect statements uttered by Rep. Liz Cheney, the now former conference chair.

On June 16, 2021, Rep. Cheney tweeted the following: ``On January 6, as the violent mob advanced on the House chamber, I was standing near @RepGosar and helped him open his gas mask. The Capitol Police led us to safety. It is disgusting and despicable to see Gosar lie about that day and smear the men and women who defended us.''

First, I did not wear a gas mask on January 6. Second, at no time have I ``smeared'' any of the ``men and women who defended us'' nor did I ``lie about that day.'' What I have done is ask questions and demanded transparency. I did express concerns over the actions of one Capitol Police officer, the one who shot and killed Ashli Babbitt. Merely questioning the actions of one officer does not equate to questioning (much less ``smearing'') ``all'' the ``men and women who defended'' us, as stated by Ms. Cheney. This is a false comparison and not true at all.

I will not be intimidated by false implications. I will continue to seek transparency and find out why, who, and how the officer that killed Ashli Babbitt did what he did. There could be good, solid reasons for using lethal force at that moment. Perhaps he thought Ashli was armed with a knife, a bat, or a gun. Maybe he simply panicked. Unfortunately, with the evidence currently released, we have one video (taken by a CNN collaborator who, while filming for CNN, urged people to ``bum'' the Capitol) and that video does not show a gun, a bat, or any weapon whatsoever. The video simply shows an unarmed woman starting to climb a window. If there is evidence to the contrary, I have called for its immediate release. I call for all the evidence, all video from that day, whether it incriminates or exonerates. The goal, my goal, is truth.

I have maintained my demand for release of all surveillance video. As it stands, all the American public has, in terms of evidence, is that (1) Ashli Babbitt was in the process of a misdemeanor (entering federal property without permission); (2) Ashli was unarmed; (3) Ashli was a 14-year military veteran who loved her country, the Constitution, and wanted election integrity; (4) no verbal instructions or warnings were given; (5) no escalation of force continuum was considered or used prior to using lethal force; and (6) no aid was rendered by the officer once he killed Ashli. All of these factors suggest an unlawful use of force, and the American public has a right to find out if that is true. Getting to the bottom of this incident is not an indictment of all Capitol police officers and such a suggestion is not logical or fact based.

I have spoken to law enforcement experts. I have watched the only video that is publicly available of the shooting of Ashli Babbitt. The officer that shot Ms. Babbitt is seen on the video hiding in a vestibule. All that can be seen are his hands holding a loaded side arm pointing at Ms. Babbitt. For approximately 14 seconds. The only video available shows no verbal or non-verbal warnings. No effort to tell Ms. Babbitt not to climb through the window. No effort to push her back or use non-lethal force of any type. Rather, after hiding in a vestibule and aiming for 14 seconds, the officer fires one round from the side, killing Ms. Babbitt. Thus, this officer went from ``officer presence'' straight to lethal force, and skipped verbal commands, soft controls, hard controls

and intermediate weapons. The jump to lethal force needs to be fully reviewed and investigated. At present, it does not appear justified. If there is justification, release the evidence now.

One law enforcement expert I talked to described this as lying in wait to shoot someone and a criminal offense. This was not acceptable police work. I reject the comment that one must either support every police officer 100 percent of the time or be ``against'' law enforcement, or to quote my colleague, to ``smear'' all police officers everywhere. Such notions are not worthy of serious discussion. I put my record of support for law enforcement up for comparison to anyone. But support need not be blind . . . or stupid. I can take issue with a bad cop. I can take issue with a bad killing. To see this swept under the rug under some false pretext of ``he was protecting Congress'' is as ridiculous as it is insulting. Using that logic, no police officer would ever be challenged on any killing--``He was trying to uphold the law.'' Using this logic, that would end the inquiry. That is not how our laws work.

Life is not that simple. The law of self-defense and the defense of others is based on the circumstances. Was the attacker armed? Did the officer have time to use non-lethal force? Was there backup? Was the suspect warned or commanded? What exactly was the risk? Trespassing risk is different than a risk of assault or murder. In this case, Ashli may or may not have been trespassing. I say this only because depending on what door she went through, some of the people in the Capitol on January 6th were literally invited in by the guards. But assuming she was trespassing, did she pose an imminent risk of death to the officer or someone else? This unarmed 110-pound woman, who was draped in a flag and trying to climb a window? Why did the Officer wait 14 seconds to shoot all the while aiming at her? Why did he not audibly warn her? Why didn't he step out of his hiding place and confront her? Or use a taser? Or a baton? Or simply push her back out?

These issues, and the professional opinion of a law enforcement expert, lead to the conclusion that the officer that shot Ashli Babbitt was lying in wait, hid for 14 seconds, then used lethal force to kill an unarmed, non-threatening woman. If that is true, then no way does this constitute a lawful killing. The fact that some members think it is acceptable police work, and call me a liar for pointing out these so far undisputed facts, reflects more on naked hatred for the truth than a love of transparency and honesty. If anyone thinks this is good police work, release all the evidence so we can discuss it. I stand by my concerns, and my questions, and I stand with the American people who demand answers.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the lifelong career of a great Fire Chief, Mike Farber. In a 40-plus-year career, Mike has selflessly risked his life as a firefighter for the people of Arizona. His courageous leadership and expertise was reflected in his role as a serving member of the Mesa Community College Curriculum Committee and Fire Science Advisory Committee. For three consecutive years, Mike facilitated a Leadership Academy and brought numerous recognized leaders from the fire service to share their wisdom and to help mentor the district's officers and staff.

Mike was also well known for his extensive experience and educational background. For more than 20 years, Mike has taught courses at Mesa Community College and Central Arizona Community College in Tactics & Strategy, Hydraulics, Supervision, Algebra, and Communication. His commitment and work ethic to civic duty and his community is a characteristic that all Americans should strive for. I believe that Fire Chief Mike Farber is a great example of what being an American is about. His impact and involvement will not be forgotten by his local community and state.

Madam Speaker, I express a sincere form of gratitude to Fire Chief Mike Farber, and I encourage my colleagues to join me in celebrating a successful career and legacy as a valuable protector to the people of Arizona.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Republic of Azerbaijan on its 103rd anniversary of their annual Republic Day as well as its 30th anniversary of independence from the Soviet Union.

I do not want my good wishes to be seen as ignoring the issues currently going on between Azerbaijan and Armenia. I am putting my faith and confidence that the hostilities are resolved, and the appropriate borders will be restored. Independence for Azerbaijan is a time to reflect on the territorial sovereignty and right to independence for other nations as well, as liberty benefits everyone.

Azerbaijan is an important partner in the region. I find this year's occasion special because it marks 30 years since Soviet occupation. The Soviet Union and its ideas of communism subjected millions of people to authoritarian rule, stripping them of their natural, human rights. However, the people of Azerbaijan have successfully emerged from this dark period in history and continue to be a shining example of democracy and independence.

It's important that the people of the United States recognize the nations that emerge from authoritarian rule to contribute to the ever- growing push for liberty and self-governance. Azerbaijan, after being subject to centuries of

oppressive rule under the Russian Empire and USSR, were rewarded with the gift of independence. That is why this week we can proudly stand with our friends in Azerbaijan to celebrate their 103rd Republic Day and share in our collective belief in freedom.

Madam Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to join me in celebrating Azerbaijan's Republic Day and in recognizing our shared commitment to freedom, democracy, and the principle of self-governance. I would like to share my most heartfelt congratulations on this momentous occasion.

Madam Speaker, this week is National Police Week. I rise today to honor the courageous men and women in blue.

We know that a single week is simply not enough to recognize the service and sacrifice that police officers and their families make. Thank you for your dedication and thank you for putting your lives on the line in order to make our communities safer each and every day.

Unfortunately, our brave law enforcement officers have come under attack by the liberal media and leftists who dangerously and wrongfully suggest that the answer to all problems is to defund the police. This growing antipolice rhetoric is disgusting, and it threatens the safety and security of communities across America.

Members of our law enforcement community regularly face dangerous and demanding circumstances, yet they possess a willingness to set aside their own safety for the sake of others.

Let me be perfectly clear, I back the blue 100 percent. You have our unwavering support and gratitude. Once again, during National Police Week, thank you for your sacrifices and leadership you provide our communities. May we never forget how appreciated you are every single day.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize those that fight for true economic independence in this country, the mining industry. Recently, the Arizona State Senate passed a resolution recognizing and honoring the importance of mining in Arizona and the nation at large which was joined by the Arizona House of Representatives in a Concurrent Resolution, No. 2009.

As a member of the House Natural Resources Committee, a variety of energy subcommittees, and as former Chairman of the Western Caucus, I have worked with the mining industry and I understand the difficult job the industry has in navigating a political climate that takes for granted its indispensable and vital products. Indeed, many misguided, naive, or simply ignorant people seek to ban mining, restrict it, or eradicate it from our lands. This is foolish and only increases the costs of every product made with mined resources (which is almost everything) and makes us reliant on China and Russia.

I am proffering the Arizona Concurrent Resolution for the Congressional Record for all to see that at this time in history, the leaders of Arizona understand the importance of mining and will not allow federal bureaucrats and radical environmental socialists to shut down our key industry.