Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the life of Daniel Moreno Lofton and share this dedication by this family.

Daniel was born into this world on October 16, 1946, in Tucson, Arizona, to Peter Lofton and Jane Moreno. He was the eldest of his siblings. Daniel was presented to the Lord at the First Apostolic Church of Tucson by Pastor Reyes Coronado. At the young age of 19, Daniel made the life-changing decision to follow Jesus. He was baptized by Pastor Joe Fregoso at the First Apostolic Church of Tucson.

Soon after, he was drafted by the United States Army and served as Combat Medic in the Vietnam War from September 1967 through September 1969. As a Combat Medic, he was at the frontlines, ready to render lifesaving aid to the wounded and, in other cases, recover the remains of those soldiers lost and ensure that no man was left behind. During his service, he received the following medals, badges, and commendations: National Defense Service Medal; Vietnam Service Medal; Vietnam Campaign Medal; Air Medal; Bronze Star Medal; Combat Medical Badge; and Army Commendation Medal. When he did speak about his personal experiences in the war, it was to acknowledge how the hand of God was upon his life and spared him from bullets as they grazed by the sides of his face and ears while he rendered aid or how he was kept safe as he traversed minefields to get to the wounded. He was always grateful to have made it back with no physical injuries and always made it a point of importance in his life to acknowledge the service of his fellow veterans and the sacrifice of those that did not make it back. Daniel continued serving as an employee of the Veterans Administration Hospital for 35 years until he retired.

In 1969, Daniel met Mireya Anna Luisa Martinez at the First Apostolic Church in Tucson while she was visiting her cousin Pastor Gilbert Samano, Sr., and his family. As the friendship and love grew, they decided to marry, and on April 3, 1971, in the presence of their family and friends, they exchanged their vows and were married by Pastor Pablo Rodriguez at the First Apostolic Church of Compton, CA. Daniel and Mireya were blessed with two children, Ann Marie Lofton and Daniel Lofton, Jr.

Those close to Daniel knew him for his thoughtful and caring personality. His kindness and unwavering willingness to serve others were demonstrated through his service as an ordained minister in the Apostolic Assembly. During his tenure, he served in many leadership roles in the men's auxiliary at the district, sector, and local levels. In addition, he was assistant pastor both in San Gabriel and Whittier, CA. His ministry was characterized by visiting and praying for the sick and elderly, utilizing the gift and calling the Lord had placed upon him. He had a heart for those in need, and often, he could be found providing a meal and a word of encouragement to brighten someone's day. Other times he would ask his

wife, Anna, to pack extra sandwiches or burritos for lunch to share with someone he knew was in need. When one of his co-workers died with no next of kin, he took it upon himself to contact the Veteran's Administration and gather all the necessary paperwork to ensure that he was given a proper burial. This was typical of Daniel. Always compassionate; always generous.

As often remembered by his family, when challenges presented themselves, a few of his favorite sayings to bring encouragement were ``Help is on the way!'' ``Trust in Almighty God!'' and ``All things are possible if you only believe.'' How could one not feel better after hearing those words?

As a young man growing up on the south side of Tucson, Danny attended Sunnyside High School, where he excelled in varsity track and field and cross country, winning various awards and competitions. His specialty was the 100-yard dash, where he went on to win the city championship. He also played varsity football. Daniel loved sports and enjoyed going to games with his family or watching them on TV with his son. His passion for sports would not be complete if we did not mention how much he enjoyed watching and rooting for the U of A Wildcats.

Daniel loved his family. He enjoyed spending time with his mother, Jane, visiting his aunts and uncles, and sharing family time with his sisters, brothers, and cousins. He also enjoyed his visits with his mother-in-law, Maria Luisa, and the extended family gatherings. He especially enjoyed his time with his wife and children. Family dinners, traveling, historical sites, and church events were happily spent together.

On January 23, 2023, Daniel entered into his rest surrounded by his wife and son. Until we meet again, dear husband, father, brother, and friend, you will be fondly remembered and deeply missed.

Daniel was predeceased by his daughter, Ann Marie Lofton-Arce, as well as his brothers, David and Jesse. He is survived by his wife of 51 years, Mireya Anna Lofton; his son Daniel M. Lofton, Jr.; daughter-in- law, Angelica T. Lofton; and grandson, Zachary Arce. He is also survived by his sister, Lydia; stepsisters, Esther, Sylvia, Lourdes, Dolores, Alice, Rosemary and Emma; and stepbrothers, Michael and Arthur.

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

Mr. Chair, I rise to offer what I hope will be an amendment that every Member of this body can support.

This amendment would simply prevent new planned oil and gas drilling in our national parks or on protected public lands, including national monuments, national recreation areas, or areas of critical environmental concern.

The debate yesterday and today has shown the American people that there are deep divisions between our two parties when it comes to America's energy future. We have starkly different priorities for protecting communities and the climate, securing environmental justice, and safeguarding public health.

I hope the concerns that we have raised might change some minds across the aisle, though I worry it will not. However, one area in which I believe we can all agree is that we should not allow oil and gas extraction in our national parks, our national wildlife refuges, our national recreation areas, or our conservation lands.

Mr. Chair, for those of us who have had the privilege to serve on the House Natural Resources Committee, we hear nearly every day about what parks and public lands mean to the communities in every congressional district across the country. Put simply, Americans love their parks. From the Everglades to the Grand Canyon, Shenandoah to Mesa Verde, these iconic landscapes are some of the most visited and the most loved in the United States.

It is our responsibility as elected officials to ensure future generations, our children and our grandchildren, will have the same opportunities we have enjoyed and experienced in these incredible places.

My amendment would protect these opportunities, ensuring that any new planned oil and gas extraction would not occur in our parks or our protected public lands.

Despite what some may suggest, this amendment is essential, given the repeated extremist efforts we saw under the previous administration to open protected public lands to extraction.

This amendment is necessary. I hope that all of my colleagues can join me in protecting our parks and protected public lands from unnecessary oil and gas extraction.

Mr. Chair, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Madam Speaker, today and tomorrow House Republicans are bringing the Strategic Production Response Act to the floor, a bill that forces the administration to open up even more public lands and waters to drilling any time the President releases oils from the reserve in order to lower consumer gas prices.

Now, what House Republicans are doing is effectively ending the President's authority to lower consumer gas prices while handing over our public lands and waters to Big Oil.

You might wonder why Republicans are pushing legislation that clearly hurts the American people and consumers.

To put it plainly, they are simply crossing another item off the wish list of Big Oil. It is a simple payback to the political campaign donors. This legislation is not needed. It is fabricated. It is based on a lie.

Time after time, year after year, the fossil fuel industry lobbies to control and lock up more of our public lands and waters, and it often comes at the expense of surrounding environmental justice communities.

I say it is built on a lie. There are 9,000 permits on public land effectively for Big Oil to be able to drill, access, and extract. There are 2,000 that are not being used. There are 2,000 permits on our oceans and waters that at this point 75 percent of those permits are not being used, which already affords them the opportunity to extract.

Frontline communities in this country carry a legacy of dumping activities that have endangered both the health and the quality of life of these communities.

Sadly, Big Oil has a well-documented and troubled history of concentrating their polluting projects, such as pipelines and refineries, in environmental justice communities, including communities of color, poor communities, Tribal communities, communities without political representation and a systemic discrimination in terms of the burden they carry. All of this is documented. It is documented in higher air pollution rates in those communities, water pollution and contamination, premature death, higher incidence of cancer, and other diseases that affect these communities more than any other.

Yet, Republicans, once again, stand ready to do Big Oil's bidding this week. If Republicans actually are interested in helping American families in the communities overburdened by oil industry pollution, they would support the Environmental Justice For All Act.

We have been working on the Environmental Justice For All Act for over 3 years. It was developed and shaped directly by EJ communities during an extensive engagement process.

This Act has many components, but it's based on a simple principle: All people have the right to clean air, clean water, and healthy local environments. For too many across our Nation, these rights are not yet realized.

The provisions in the Environmental Justice For All Act are about credible, equitable access to parks and outdoor activities and opportunities for underserved communities.

Federal agencies will be required to meaningfully, under NEPA, engage any communities prior to any decision when proposing actions affecting an EJ community and it strengthens Tribal consultation and input opportunities.

The bill strengthens and restores civil rights protections for communities long facing greater environmental hazards on the bases of race, color, or national origin.

The bill brings transparency, coordination, and accountability from Federal agencies when they carry out activities affecting frontline communities.

I was proud to work with Representative McEachin, who left us far too early, to develop the Environmental Justice For All Act. His legacy on this issue, is his compassion that he brought to it, his strength that he brought to it, they continue to be the legacy and the motivation to secure environmental justice and work for this legislation.

I am proud to say that Representative Barbara Lee will now join as co-lead on the Environmental Justice For All Act this session, and now the legislation will be called the Donald McEachin Environmental Justice For All Act.

We are talking about basic rights. We are not talking about anything extravagant, anything that is not proven by fact. These communities have been burdened time and time again by industry.

The legislation that we will be seeing today and tomorrow brought forth by the Republicans opens the door once again to unchecked, unmonitored and unprotected actions that will negatively continue to affect these communities.

The environment, climate, the need for remediation, and the need for involvement by all communities, and the resolution of the issues we face around climate change requires that the environmental justice community long left off the discussion, long-ignored in the history of this Nation, in the siting of projects and activities that have hurt those communities and those families, needs to be at the table.

If my Republican colleagues indeed want to reward Big Oil for their support that they have given them, it is time that they include all communities.

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 21, and I urge all my colleagues to oppose this big giveaway to Big Oil.

The bill before us today is yet another effort to open our public lands and waters to major new oil and gas extraction. This is despite the fact that oil companies already control huge amounts of our public lands and waters, most of which they don't even use.

Right now, oil and gas companies have about 9,000 approved but unused permits across 26 million acres of public land. Right now, offshore they have 2,000 active leases covering 12 million acres, three-quarters of which aren't being used.

This bill asks us to give them even more land--an area three times the size of California, or more than 300 million additional acres. Big Oil has more public land than they can use. They could expand production today if they really wanted to. Instead, they lobby Congress to open up even more lands to extraction, to lower environmental standards, and to give them more taxpayer-funded subsidies. And in the process, they lock out public land and public access from other essential uses that would contribute to the American people and contribute to the mitigation and remediation and the climate action that is required around the issue of climate and the climate crisis.

To add insult to injury, this bill would actually make it harder to help everyday Americans. It would prevent the President's ability to keep down gas prices.

Last year, President Biden took decisive action, allowing releases from the reserve to lower prices at the pump. Under this bill, if the President needed to act again to keep prices low, he would first have to pay off Big Oil by opening up our public lands.

This bill does not protect the American people, and it certainly doesn't protect our climate or environment.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment No. 55 at the desk.

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

I believe I have made it very clear that this bill is deeply flawed from the concept to execution. While I really do hesitate to improve a bad bill, I think it is important that we acknowledge one of the bill's starkest omissions.

My amendment would simply require that while developing the plan this bill proposes, the relevant Secretaries also develop a plan to consult with Tribal Governments. This is particularly important as the bill could open up an additional 300 million acres of new oil and gas extraction on public lands.

If we really intend to give away an area three times the size of California to Big Oil, then we need to understand the impact it will have on communities across the West starting with those who have stewarded these lands since time immemorial.

It is essential that the Secretaries fully and meaningfully consult with Tribal Governments to understand the impact this extractive development would have on Tribal communities from damaging air and water to destroying sacred sites.

For too long, Tribal Governments have been excluded from Federal decisionmaking processes. We have seen

the impact of that omission as homelands are degraded, sacred sites destroyed, and Tribal communities are forced to bear the brunt of pollution.

A no more important example is the example of uranium contamination that continues and the cleanup of uranium contamination that continues in around the Grand Canyon and Navajo Nation, and that has affected that community and the Navajo people for generations. It is unacceptable that we would turn a blind eye to these impacts.

Tribal Governments need to be at the table from the start helping to shape decisions that impact their communities and their ancestral lands.

This amendment would ensure that they do just that while helping to uphold the Federal Government's trust responsibility.

This shouldn't be controversial. In fact, this should have been built in from the start.

Mr. Chairman, I encourage my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk, No. 56.

Mr. Chair, I rise to offer an amendment that would prevent this oil giveaway from further burdening communities of color, low-income communities, Tribal, and indigenous communities.

Over the past several years our late colleague, Representative McEachin and I traveled the country to hear from environmental justice and frontline communities across this Nation about pollution and climate impact. We heard the tales of water not fit to drink, air not fit to breathe, and communities not safe to live in.

For too long we have allowed the vulnerable to bear the impacts of development, leaving them to pay the costs that are incurred.

We must change that narrative by ensuring that these communities are at the decisionmaking table and that their voices are clearly heard at every level of government.

This was a legacy my dear friend and our late colleague dedicated his life to, and that is why I am proud that we will be renaming the Environmental Justice For All Act in his honor in the next several weeks.

Unfortunately, the bill in front of us today would take us further than ever from achieving environmental justice and attention to frontline communities. There is no way to open up 300 million acres to new extraction without massively impacting communities of color, low- income communities, and Tribal and indigenous communities.

These already-impacted communities would face additional pollution of their air and water, additional impacts on their health and that of their children.

My amendment seeks to avoid these unacceptable impacts, preventing the Secretaries from leasing any land that would continue to increase disproportionate burdens on already burdened communities.

We must stop putting pollution over people and put an end to the cycles of exploitation that leave the most vulnerable facing avoidable impacts.

Mr. Chair, I encourage all of my colleagues to support the environmental justice amendment and to vote ``yes'' on this amendment.

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

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk, No. 57.

Mr. Chairman, my amendment would ensure that this Big Oil giveaway doesn't prevent America from leading the world in clean energy production.

Rather than tethering ourselves to the energies of the past, we need to move forward with the energy of the future. The President knows that; my Democratic colleagues know that; and the American people know that. It is time we all embrace clean energy deployment.

Instead, the bill before us today would support Big Oil and only Big Oil, pushing the public off their lands while locking up acres that could be used for wind, solar, and other clean technologies.

This bill gives away public lands and waters to oil companies and gas corporations at a time when we should be taking urgent action to address the climate crisis and transition away from fossil fuels.

Public lands have huge renewable energy potential. Offshore wind alone could produce more than 2,000 gigawatts, nearly double the Nation's electricity use in 2021.

Rather than embrace this opportunity, H.R. 21 would require land managers to open lands to oil and gas but wouldn't consider other potential uses, including renewable energy.

My amendment would close this gap, requiring the Secretaries to consider the impacts to renewable deployment before leasing new lands to the fossil fuel industry.

The American people want affordable, reliable energy. They aren't interested in seeing Big Oil protect their record profits and increase their profits

while boxing out and locking out developing technologies. It is time to stop prioritizing polluters over people and commit to a clean, just energy transition.

Our public lands and waters have an important role to play in reducing emissions, protecting the climate, and supporting communities. We need to make sure that they are available for renewable energy production and not locked up with fossil fuel companies.

Mr. Chair, I encourage my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, since Speaker McCarthy won't tell us what he had to give extremist Republicans in his caucus in a backroom deal for power, we can only assume that they agreed to tank the economy and destroy millions of jobs unless Congress slashes Social Security.

Raising the debt ceiling is a routine matter of business that has been passed cleanly by Republican Presidents, including Trump, and Democratic Presidents alike.

If Republican lawmakers default, the shock will plunge the world into a recession and a financial crisis.

Let's not forget that 65 million Americans are on Social Security.

This debate is clear. Speaker McCarthy made a deal with the devil in exchange for the power to hold our economy hostage and push through extremist Republican proposals, such as Senator Rick Scott's plan to sunset Social Security.

We can't allow it to happen. Tell us what to aim to cut and save Social Security.

Offered By: Mr. Grijalva

Amendment No. 55: Page 3, line 9, strike the closing

quotation mark and the final period.

Page 3, after line 9, insert the following:

``(4) Tribal consultation.--The plan required by paragraph

(1) shall include a Tribal consultation plan with Tribal

governments and the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary

of Agriculture, the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary

of Energy.''.

Offered By: Mr. Grijalva

Amendment No. 56: Page 3, line 9, strike the closing

quotation mark and the final period.

Page 3, after line 9, add the following:

``(4) Community protections.--The plan required by

paragraph (1) shall not include oil and gas leasing on any

Federal land where oil and gas leasing would result in or

exacerbate disproportionate burdens on communities of color,

low-income communities, and Tribal and Indigenous

communities.''.

Offered By: Mr. Grijalva

Amendment No. 57: Page 3, line 9, strike the closing

quotation mark and the final period.

Page 3, after line 9, add the following:

``(4) Exclusion.--The plan required by paragraph (1) shall

not include oil and gas leasing on any federal lands that are

viable for renewable energy production.''.

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

As Ranking Member Nadler from the Judiciary Committee said, H. Res. 12 is a dangerous government attempt to interject extremist politics into our justice system and shield MAGA extremists from legal consequences for their actions, including January 6 and the follow-up and investigations that are ongoing now. He is right about that Republican strategy. H. Res. 12 is both political cover and a political weapon.

Like any legislation, H. Res. 12 is driven by the motivation of its sponsors, the Republican majority in the House of Representatives. For example, legislative action on climate change is motivated by urgency and our collective health and life, but H. Res. 12 is intended to intimidate, scare, and ultimately cower our public institutions into standing down as our descent into division and fascism continues.

Power for the sake of power is truly dangerous. H. Res. 12 is just that.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record the following exchange of letters regarding H.R. 2415 and H.R 2641.

House of Representatives,

Committee on energy and commerce,

Washington, DC, December 13, 2022.

Hon. Raul M. Grijalva,

Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources,

Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Grijalva: I write concerning H.R. 2415, the

``Orphaned Well Cleanup and Jobs Act of 2021.'' This

legislation would amend section 349 of the Energy Policy Act

of 2005 to eliminate existing subsection (g) which authorized

a technical and financial assistant program at the Department

of Energy to help States remedy environmental problems caused

by orphaned or abandoned oil and gas wells on State or

private land which is within the jurisdiction of the

Committee on Energy and Commerce.

In an effort to expedite the filing of the Natural

Resources bill report for legislative history purposes, I

agree to not seek a sequential referral at this time. The

Committee takes this action with our mutual understanding

that by forgoing a sequential referral request of H.R. 2415

at this time, we do not waive any jurisdiction over the

subject matter contained in this or similar legislation.

Finally, I would appreciate your response to this letter

confirming this understanding and ask that a copy of our

exchange of letters on this matter be included in the

Congressional Record to memorialize our understanding.

Sincerely,

Frank Pallone, Jr.,

Chairman.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1519, I call up the bill (H.R. 8393) to enable the people of Puerto Rico to choose a permanent, nonterritorial, fully self-governing political status for Puerto Rico and to provide for a transition to and the implementation of that permanent, nonterritorial, fully self-governing political status, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 8393.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 8393, legislation I was proud to introduce along with my colleagues, Representatives Nydia Velazquez and Darren Soto, Resident Commissioner Jenniffer Gonzalez- Colon, and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, to resolve Puerto Rico's territorial status.

This bill being on the floor today was far from assured. There were many times over the past several weeks when it appeared there wasn't any hope of ever bringing this bill to the floor. In fact, my colleagues and I were negotiating final changes as recently as 24 hours ago.

But with the prodding of Leader Hoyer, we persevered. In spite of opposition to the historic nature of what we are about to accomplish, we persevered.

I commend and congratulate my colleagues who put aside their philosophical differences and worked to arrive at a compromise that we can all support.

Last year, the Natural Resources Committee held two legislative hearings where Puerto Rican-elected government officials, legal and human rights experts, and residents offered testimony and feedback to the committee on the details of those bills.

Those bills that we were discussing were two bills, one dealing primarily with statehood status and the other one seeking a self- determination path. Those two bills were diametrically opposed, and until the negotiations began, little progress was seen moving the question of status forward.

The Puerto Rico Status Act combines important elements of these two bills to present a compromise that also incorporates input from the full range of voices among Puerto Rico's status debate and that would be supported by a majority of Members of Congress. That is the bill that we bring forward today.

We had in-person public hearings, including with over 100 individuals who shared comments and suggestions on the text with the delegation at our public forum in Puerto Rico. In addition to these in-person opportunities for public input, we also published the draft text on POPVOX, an online submission tool that members of the public used to share more than 100 comments, all of which were reviewed and considered while developing the final language.

The Puerto Rico Status Act is, therefore, the product of a participatory and informed process. It incorporates expertise and knowledge from a wide range of stakeholders who have grappled with the dilemma of Puerto Rico's second-class political status for many years.

Finding a resolution to Puerto Rico's political status has been elusive and difficult, and it has been that way for a long time. Recent efforts to resolve the issue began in 1991 with competing bills introduced in the House and Senate, followed by legislation sponsored by our former colleague Don Young in 1998, and finally the Puerto Rico Democracy Act in 2010, sponsored by then-Puerto Rico Resident Commissioner and current Governor Pierluisi.

While each of those previous bills passed the House, as we hope our bill will today, as well, they ultimately failed because they did not possess the necessary elements to end the colonial status of the island through a fair and informed process.

In becoming chair of the Natural Resources Committee, I made the issue of resolving Puerto Rico's political status a priority. It is crucial to me that any proposal from Congress to decolonize Puerto Rico be informed and led by Puerto Ricans.

As a non-Puerto Rican, I cannot claim the experience of Puerto Ricans who have fought for equality and autonomy for their island for so many years. However, as someone of Mexican descent and indigenous ancestry, I feel a sense of solidarity with the people of Puerto Rico in that enduring struggle. We continue to strive for equality and preserve our traditions, as we all do that, and that struggle is a shared experience among marginalized and disenfranchised people in this country and in Puerto Rico.

I am proud to be discussing a piece of legislation, a proposal, today that assists the people of Puerto Rico to directly be involved in determining their political future.

In recent years, we have seen all too painfully that the current colonial territory status is no longer viable and is incapable of providing either adequate political or economic benefits to the people of Puerto Rico.

Puerto Rico's current status is what impedes its economic development. PROMESA and its financial oversight and management board, the shortcomings of the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, or PREPA, and the inadequate Federal response under the previous administration to disasters like Hurricane Maria and the COVID-19 pandemic, these are all products of the current territorial status.

Recent Supreme Court rulings have only further clarified that, as a territory, Puerto Rico lacks the same constitutional protections and rights as in the 50 States.

This bill would finally stop offering the problem as a continued solution and would let the people of Puerto Rico choose a nonterritory, noncolonial status for themselves.

I am extremely grateful to all the political and community leaders, residents, and staff who worked to produce this compromise and contributed to this bill.

I thank House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer; the Governor of Puerto Rico, Pedro Pierluisi; Representatives Velazquez, Soto, and Ocasio- Cortez; and Resident Commissioner Gonzalez-Colon for their leadership and dedication throughout a difficult but very necessary process.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, the only point of darkness that I can see is the greatest democracy on Earth, the United States of America, and what this bill does is provides some light and consistency to that great democracy by saying you must rid yourself of this colonial legacy. Our great Nation should not be a colonial holder of other countries and other futures. This is an opportunity to break from that and to encourage democracy.

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez). As I indicated earlier, my thanks go to her for her work, as well.

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York.

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from New York.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

(Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Soto), someone who, with other colleagues, worked through this difficult process and produced the consensus today.

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Ocasio-Cortez), one of the principals that worked on this consensus.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor).

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

This has been a typical debate on Puerto Rico because the question of status and the question of decolonizing our relationship with the people of the island is a question that causes spirited debate. That is okay, but spirited debate with misinformation and hastily drawn conclusions is not the way to debate. We will leave that for another day.

The important point today is that this did not get parachuted at the last minute. This has been a difficult process for all involved, and, I might add, a bipartisan process, to bring one final resolution regardless of where the clock is in terms of this session. This is the time that this was completed.

Madam Speaker, I am proud of this, and I am urging a ``yes'' vote on the legislation.

There are two fundamental differences between ourselves and the minority on this. The intent of the bill is simple: that there be three options, all requiring a deliberate and informed decision by the people of the island.

The current status is not one of those three options. Why? Because the intent of this legislation is to allow the Puerto Rican people not to be colonized and be a colony. That is the decolonization part of the legislation.

The other part, although it has been the habit lately of people wanting not only to predict outcomes of elections but to guarantee outcomes of elections, contrary to that philosophy, this directs that the people of Puerto Rico make the decision and respect that decision.

Our identity as a Nation is built on the values that we are all here to support and respect. It is built on the rule of law. The people of Puerto Rico, as citizens of this Nation, must be extended the respect and the consideration that, since 1898, we have been the overseer of a colony in this country. We must extend them the opportunity to choose their path forward.

That is all it is. It is democratic; it is fair; and it is overdue.

Madam Speaker, I thank all the Members who worked on this--in particular, Representatives Velazquez, Soto, Gonzalez-Colon, and Ocasio-Cortez--for the difficult periods and times they went through in this process, and obviously Majority Leader Hoyer for his insistence, his prodding, and, on occasion, his calmness to get us to this point.

I thank the staff on our committee: chief counsel, Luis Urbina; deputy chief counsel, Margarita Varela; policy aide, Ivan Robles; staff director, David Watkins; and director of our Office of Insular Affairs, Brian Modeste.

I also thank each and every one on Leader Hoyer's staff: Trent Bauserman and Chris Bowman; also Renata Beca-Barragan on Ms. Velazquez's staff; Gabriella Boffelli on Miss Gonzalez-Colon's staff; and Andrea Valdes on Mr. Soto's staff for their hard work and dedication to getting us to this point today. Sometimes that kind of work is underappreciated. I acknowledge their work and thank them.

Madam Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the service of three long-time staffers, each of whom has served this body and the American people for more than two decades.

All of us on this floor recognize the essential contribution staff make towards our individual and collective success--whether crafting policy, shepherding legislation, or serving our constituents. Knowledgeable, diligent, talented public servants are the glue of this institution, and those who dedicate their lives and careers towards this service deserve our special appreciation for sharing their wisdom and experience with the next generation of public professionals.

The staff I hope to honor here today embody those ideals, working tirelessly and selflessly to support progress on issues that matter to the American people, serving as a model for our entire team and for this chamber. Though no speech could encapsulate the breadth of their dedicated service, I firmly believe they deserve to be recognized before the full House for their distinguished careers.

David Watkins, the Staff Director for the House Committee on Natural Resources, began his career on Capitol Hill more than two decades ago, first joining the office of his hometown Congressman and our esteemed colleague, Representative Lloyd Doggett.

David then joined the Committee working on public lands issues before working his way up to Subcommittee Staff Director, Chief Counsel, and eventually to Staff Director of the full Committee. Under David's leadership in the majority and minority, our Committee saw historic accomplishments, from advancing comprehensive environmental justice legislation to supporting self-determination for the people of Puerto Rico.

Even as the Full Committee Staff Director, David's work on the behalf of public lands was never far from his heart. Throughout his career he was an adept advocate for special places, advancing historic lands bills from P.L. 111-11 and the Dingell Act to the Great American Outdoors Act.

Perhaps most of all, David was a trusted and respected leader on our team, helping to support and develop staff, incorporate diversity and inclusivity, and ensure we championed issues too often forgotten. His knowledge of Committee process and history was invaluable as I took on a Committee leadership role, and his guidance and good humor have helped our Committee through many long markups and floor debates.

Nancy Locke, the Chief Clerk of the House Committee on Natural Resources, has been in her current role since 2019, but her service to this Committee and this Congress began long before.

Nancy first joined the Committee more than twenty years ago, first serving as the Clerk for the Subcommittees on Energy and Mineral Resources and National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands under Chair Doc Hastings, before working her way up to Deputy Chief Clerk and then Chief Clerk of the Full Committee. Her distinguished career also included more than a half decade of service on the House Education and Labor Committee as their Chief Clerk.

Throughout her time on the Hill, Nancy has seen this chamber change hands and change in its composition, but she has remained an unwavering force. Over the years, Nancy has kept our hearings and markups in order, consistently ensuring proper procedure, and keeping the Committee on track.

Her famed weekly meetings served as an opportunity for her team to coordinate activities across the Committee but was also at the heart of our work--she kept the trains running on time, helped ease staff transitions, and organized procedurally complex Committee business.

In addition to her work as Chief Clerk, Nancy has provided invaluable mentorship to

many talented teams of Subcommittee Clerks and Policy Aides, whose own successes serve as a testament to her guidance and leadership.

Finally, I want to thank Chris Kaumo for his twenty years of service. I have known Chris since before I was a Member of Congress as he was one of the first staffers on my first campaign. Chris was an essential force in my early work in this Chamber, helping to organize and staff our offices, while ensuring quality service for the people of southern Arizona.

From running phone banks to now serving as a Deputy Staff Director and Senior Advisor to the Committee, his work and friendship have meant the world to me. When I first assumed my role as Ranking Member on the House Natural Resources Committee, I asked for Chris's help in a new capacity, and brought him on to serve as Staff Director on the Subcommittee for Indigenous Peoples of the United States. In that role, Chris has been an essential advocate for elevating Indigenous voices and protecting the rights of Indigenous communities.

He is a Committee leader and a trusted advisor, and I am deeply indebted to his long service to our district, state, and the Nation.

Madam Speaker, though David, Nancy, and Chris will be deeply missed on the Natural Resources team, I have no doubt they will find fulfilling and exciting opportunities in their next steps. I want to thank them all for their dedication, service, and friendship over the years.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6611) to authorize the Embassy of France in Washington, DC, to establish a commemorative work in the District of Columbia and its environs to honor the extraordinary contributions of Jean Monnet to restoring peace between European nations and establishing the European Union, and for other purposes, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the measure under consideration.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 6611, introduced by my colleague, Representative Keating.

This bill authorizes the French Embassy to establish a commemorative bench in Washington, D.C.'s Rock Creek Park to honor the historic contributions of Jean Monnet.

Jean Monnet was a French diplomat and entrepreneur known as a founding father of the European Union.

Monnet served as a key diplomat during World War II, coming to Washington on France's behalf to meet with President Roosevelt to negotiate a massive aircraft purchase at the start of the war.

Later in the war, after Nazi Germany invaded France, Monnet negotiated with American authorities to deliver much-needed supplies to the British front lines. Monnet's efforts helped save millions of lives and led the way in uniting Europe in the postwar era.

Monnet himself said that walks through Rock Creek Park helped him think and develop plans to achieve peace and unity in Europe. I can think of no better way to honor his legacy than this legislation.

I thank my colleague, Representative Keating, for introducing this important bill and championing the legislation.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes,'' and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 314) to repeal the Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Act.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the measure under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 314, the Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Repeal Act, introduced by Senator Merkley of Oregon. Our colleague, Representative Schrader of Oregon, has the House companion to this legislation.

This bill will provide long-awaited relief to the Klamath Tribes by restoring the Tribe's self-governance over the management of its own judgment funds.

Like many tribes, the Klamath Tribes were terminated by Congress in the 1950s--in their case, through passage of the Klamath Termination Act. In addition to termination, the legislation established procedures for the sale of reservation land belonging to Tribal members.

At the time, the Tribe was required to submit to the Secretary of the Interior a final roll call of Tribal members. The final roll call was eventually used to settle the Tribe's ongoing Indian Claims Commission suits under the Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Act.

Fortunately, in 1986, the Klamath Tribes' Federal trust relationship with the United States was restored. However, the judgment fund did not account for this restoration and limited the ability of the Tribe to settle any outlying claims.

Today, the Klamath Tribes have no ability to determine how Tribal funds can be allocated to Tribal members or other Tribal priorities. This goes against Tribal sovereignty and is a violation of the authorities upheld by Federal recognition.

S. 314 will right this wrong by repealing the outdated Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Act and restoring the Tribe's ability to exercise its sovereign authority over its own Tribal judgment funds.

I thank Senator Merkley and Representative Schrader for introducing this important piece of legislation and supporting the Tribe in its lengthy quest for a remedy.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez), the chair of the Subcommittee for Indigenous Peoples of the United States.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 789) to repeal certain obsolete laws relating to Indians.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the measure under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 789, the Repealing Existing Substandard Provisions Encouraging Conciliation with Tribes Act, introduced by Senator Rounds of South Dakota. Here in the House, the bill is led by my friend and colleague, Representative O'Halleran.

This bill would repeal 11 antiquated Federal laws that pertain to American Indians and Alaska Natives.

As this body is well aware, Federal Indian law has existed since the foundation of the United States, and it governs the relationship between the Federal Government, American Indians, and Alaska Natives.

The policies and principles of Federal Indian law have undergone many transformations throughout American history, as it was once the policy of the Federal Government to commit violence and forced displacement against Tribal communities.

Although the Federal Indian laws of today are better at upholding the principles of Tribal self-determination and sovereignty, many laws that reflect the prior Federal policy during the eras of genocide, removal, assimilation, or termination still remain as law.

S. 789 will address this concern by repealing 11 outdated statutes, many of which pertain to the colonial and Indian boarding school eras.

I thank Senator Rounds and Representative O'Halleran for introducing this legislation and ensuring that the Federal law reflects the respect that we hold for Indian Country.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez).

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.