Floor Statements

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

Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment, No. 33, to H.R. 8 to improve available resources for the Puget Sound Adjacent Waters Restoration program, also known as PSAW.

The Puget Sound and the waters and wildlife that call it home are cornerstones of Washington State's cultural identity, maritime economy, and environment. As the Nation's largest estuary, a healthy Puget Sound is essential to supporting over 3,000 shellfish jobs and generating an estimated $184 million in revenue annually.

Every EPA dollar spent on Puget Sound recovery efforts have leveraged more than $24 in matching funds from State, local, and tribal partners. The PSAW program supports critical ecosystem restoration projects across 15,000 square miles of northwest Washington State, the Puget Sound drainage basin, and the Strait of Juan de Fuca.

The program is part of the larger Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project to restore and protect salmon habitat throughout the Sound, especially for endangered chinook and steelhead.

My amendment doubles the per-project funding cap for PSAW projects to $10 million and raises the overall authorization level for the program by $20 million. As a result, critical Sound nearshore restoration projects in Washington State would be eligible for PSAW funding. Increasing available funds on a project-by-project basis will ensure that the PSAW program is consistent with the Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Program cap.

Recently, the CBO did an analysis of the amendment and found it will have little to no direct impact on the budget.

Mr. Chair, a special thanks to Chairman Shuster and Ranking Member DeFazio for their leadership on this measure as well. I am pleased that we are moving forward on WRDA legislation that invests in the Nation's ports, channels, waterways, and other critical infrastructure to keep the U.S. maritime system competitive.

Maintaining the regular 2-year authorization of this legislation is critical to the Nation's economy and will encourage new, good-paying jobs in the Pacific Northwest. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment to continue the robust Federal investment and stewardship needed to save the Sound.

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

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

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition, and I want to commend my friend from Wisconsin for correctly identifying one of the strategic challenges that China poses, but I am concerned this effort to amend section 1252 will make flawed language even worse.

The bill currently requires the President to provide a report to Congress that outlines a strategy to respond to competitive and, at times, malicious actions by China. In fact, my friend from Wisconsin has outlined several instances where we have been successful in ferreting out these actions all without his amendment being law.

So let me be clear, though, on the strategy. The strategy cannot and should not always be only responding to China. The U.S. needs to develop a proactive, assertive agenda to contrast with and to compete with China. Rather than setting up actions that could restrict student visa programs or suggesting that Chinese visitors are in the U.S. to do the bidding of the Chinese Communist Party, Congress should be taking a proactive approach consistent with our national security interests and, importantly, our values.

Now, I don't want to dwell too much on what is called the Confucius Institute in that issue, except to say that part of our response to something like the Confucius Institute ought to be U.S. programs to support Chinese language and culture programs for students in this country, instead of outsourcing it. There is an example where we can go on offense, instead of always responding or reacting to actions by China. Schools that wish to have Chinese language instruction should not have to rely on China for funding, as an example.

So I am deeply concerned the language in the underlying bill takes a reflexive and a narrow-minded view of the real challenge posed by China. Closing off our country is the wrong approach.

To use a football metaphor, closing off our Nation to foreign investment and to students is thinking like a defensive coordinator and not a particularly creative one. Instead, we need to think like a head coach, developing new offensive and defensive strategies, a new playbook revamping the old one.

So let me clarify. Going on offense is not just a reaction to China. It represents a strategy to keep the U.S. engaged in the global community. We should focus on multiple aspects of public policy: education, foreign trade, investment, immigration, military capabilities, innovation, and, of course, our bilateral relationship with China. A smarter strategic plan would demonstrate to the world and to the Chinese people the superiority of the U.S. model: democracy, free and open elections, diversity, open markets, and a free press. We should be exposing Chinese students to these values, making sure they understand that they have a different choice.

This is what Congress should be working on, not adding new provisions to an already flawed report. I urge my colleagues to oppose the Gallagher amendment.

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

Mr. Chair, may I ask how much time both parties have left.

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Judy Chu).

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

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 4, the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018.

I am pleased that Congress is here today to consider a long-term bill to reauthorize the FAA. This moment has been a long time in coming. Congress has not enacted a long-term FAA bill since 2012, and it is currently running on its fifth extension since that time.

We are here to consider a comprehensive, bipartisan piece of legislation that provides long-term, predictable funding for the FAA, improves aviation safety, addresses workforce needs, and advances vital research in the aviation field.

Whether large or small, airports across the United States play an important role in communities by connecting people, goods, services, and creating jobs. In Washington State, my constituents rely on airports of all sizes. In my hometown of Arlington, general aviation at Arlington Municipal Airport is vital, and the annual EAA fly-in brings in people from all across the country.

Bellingham International Airport in northwest Washington is a developing airport, which requires further investments in terminal and operations infrastructure to help keep pace with passenger demands.

Paine Field Airport in Snohomish County is a growing hub in the Pacific Northwest, with the construction of a new terminal and expanded air service expected later this year.

Each of these airports plays a different, yet important, role in serving the local community and the national aviation network.

The bill reflects Congress' consensus to reform FAA's aircraft certification processes, improve aviation safety, provide additional protections for U.S. passengers, and help to better prepare the aviation workforce and further the safe integration of unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace.

One of the most important things this bill does is to make FAA's certification process more streamlined, consistent, and efficient, while maintaining the highest level of safety.

The U.S. aviation industry is an economic powerhouse. It is particularly important to my home State of Washington. In our State, general aviation, alone, contributes an estimated $3.6 billion to the economy and more than 30,000 jobs a year.

Without question, predictable and timely certification of aircraft and aircraft components is critical for domestic manufacturers to get their products to market. These reforms are desperately needed to allow U.S. aviation manufacturers like my constituents in Everett, who are, as well, smaller contractors, to compete globally.

This bill ensures that FAA's product certification remains the gold standard abroad, as well, so that U.S. manufacturers remain competitive.

As passenger growth continues, Congress must ensure airports have the right tools in place to safely accommodate this new demand.

The bill makes a host of improvements to make our skies safer, including:

Ensuring the FAA safety workforce is utilized efficiently and receives enhanced training;

Strengthening the FAA's current voluntary safety reporting program for pilots so that critical safety enhancements are not needlessly delayed;

Making progress toward NextGen implementation through engagement with local communities and airports in the process;

Improving the Federal Contract Tower Program to allow airports to make investments in their critical infrastructure; and

Ensuring flight attendants have sufficient rest between duty periods.

It also includes numerous provisions that enhance the air travel experience for more than 900 million passengers who fly each year, including:

A prohibition on airlines involuntarily bumping passengers after they have boarded;

A prohibition on the use of cell phones for voice communications during flight; and

A requirement for airlines to create a one-page document outlining the rights of passengers, which will bring much-needed transparency to this industry.

One of my top priorities is to ensure working families in the Pacific Northwest get a better deal, which means expanding opportunities, creating more jobs, and making sure that the next generation of workers have the tools necessary to succeed.

This bipartisan bill that my colleagues and I have agreed to will protect and create American jobs through airport construction and aerospace manufacturing, ultimately boosting the Nation's economy. As an example, the Port of Skagit is focused on expanding the Skagit Regional Airport and is working to build a new hangar and longer taxiing runways. These improvements are not only for safety, but will create well-paying jobs in construction.

Further, the Career Connect Washington initiative aims to connect more than 100,000 students, over the next 5 years, with career-focused learning opportunities, building a bridge from school into high-demand and good-paying jobs. Across my district, nearly 900 young adults participating in this initiative have connected to apprenticeships, job shadows, or other structured work-based activity.

This bill builds on these efforts to better prepare students for the aviation workforce by:

Encouraging schools, industry, and other stakeholders to address the skills gap in the aviation maintenance field; and

Requiring a GAO study of best practices to incentivize, recruit, and retain new aviation workers.

I am pleased that the bill includes my proposal to create a Youth Access to American Jobs in Aviation Task Force. This task force will work with aviation trade schools and community colleges, airline carriers and industry, labor unions, and other relevant stakeholders to develop recommendations to encourage high school students to enroll in aviation manufacturing, maintenance, and engineering apprenticeships.

This legislation includes a title on unmanned aircraft systems, or drones, which are flourishing in the skies at a pace we did not imagine just a few years ago. Provisions in the current bill will help the commercial drone industry safely thrive, while also addressing the many issues these new users present as they become integrated into U.S. airspace.

Finally, this bill enacts a multiyear reauthorization, Mr. Chairman, of aviation taxes and FAA expenditure authority. This will provide the stable, predictable funding needed to carry out its safety mission and ensure the FAA remains the world leader in aviation research and development.

While these are all positive areas to address, I understand that some amendments on slot exemptions and slot swaps have been made in order that would have regional consequences. I oppose these efforts and believe it would be better to have a more substantive discussion to address these issues in the committee.

Mr. Chairman, we have the biggest, most complex, and busiest aviation system in the world. We are years past due in enacting a long-term FAA reauthorization that will allow the U.S. to remain the gold standard in aviation. I am pleased to cosponsor this bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I thank Chairman Shuster and Ranking Member DeFazio, as well as Chairman LoBiondo, for their work on this bill.

I know Mr. LoBiondo is leaving Congress this year, and we may get a better Democrat or a better Republican in that seat, but we will not get a better Representative for this Congress in that seat than Frank LoBiondo.

Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Titus).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. Esty).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington, D.C. (Ms. Norton).

I yield the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nebraska.

Mr. Chairman, I support the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nebraska.

This amendment would require the Comptroller General to conduct a study on the current and future supply of individuals for the U.S. aviation workforce. The study would review the current state of our aviation workforce as well as barriers to entry.

A strong and robust aviation workforce will ensure the U.S. remains the global leader and innovator in civil aviation; therefore, I support this amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today to oppose the amendment offered by the gentleman from Minnesota.

Mr. Chairman, I understand the concerns that he has with his local MPO. We all face our own challenges with local MPOs, but they are an important decisionmaking body that ensures local governments can take full advantage of Federal transportation programs in a coordinated manner.

This amendment is attempting to break apart the operating structure of a local MPO, seemingly to punish it. It does not achieve the outcome the gentleman is hoping to achieve except to create government dysfunction.

I would also note that some frequently argue that local decisions should be made by local decisionmakers. They say, ``Keep the Federal Government out of our business,'' except this amendment declares, if the decisions are not made to the liking of one Federal official, he can step in and blow up that local decisionmaking body.

Mr. Chairman, I am urging my colleagues, therefore, to oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, we have no other speakers, and I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois. There is no doubt that time and time again, the airlines have a lot of work to do in the realm of customer service. With little competition in the U.S. airline industry, airlines are no longer required to compete on the quality of services they provide to consumers, yet, the industry has become the world's most profitable due in large part to countless ancillary fees they charge passengers.

I believe certainly that more must be done to restore basic rights and fairness in air travel. However, the amendment, as drafted, does take a one-size-fits-all approach to customer service that may not be appropriate for every situation.

Before legislating prescriptive requirements for the airlines when passengers are displaced, I think the committee should hold additional hearings and study these issues more thoroughly. I hope we can agree on that.

A recent lesson learned was with the Department of Transportation tarmac delay rule, a rule with great intentions that had several unintended consequences, such as passengers becoming stranded overnight at diversion airports hundreds of miles from their destination. Congress had to mitigate some of these issues in the 2016 FAA extension.

When we are proscriptive on the customer service front, we have to be sure we are getting it right. But I do want to thank Mr. Lipinski for offering this amendment. I hope he will continue to work with the committee to perfect it, but I stand in opposition to it.

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, but I do support the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Puerto Rico.

This amendment requires the U.S. Government Accountability Office, or the GAO, study air cargo traffic in the Caribbean, including an assessment and data collection. This data and assessment are needed to help assess Puerto Rico's role as a cargo hub for international traffic. I look forward to seeing what the GAO reports.

Therefore, I support this amendment, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

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

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, even though I support the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I support the amendment being offered by the gentlewoman from Virginia.

This amendment would create within the FAA Commercial Space Transportation Office an office of spaceports, a centralized policy office that will support and promote infrastructure improvements at FAA-licensed spaceports.

This amendment also requires a report to Congress evaluating the Federal Government's national security and civil space launch demands, and offers recommendations on how we can further support and promote greater investment in commercial space infrastructure. It also requires the Comptroller General to study spaceport activities in the U.S.

Commercial space transportation and enabled industries includes satellite and ground equipment manufacturing, satellite services and remote sensing, and distribution industries. In 2015, the size of the global space industry was estimated to be $335 billion; the size of the U.S. space industry was approximately $126 billion, which includes $89 billion in revenues generated by satellite services, manufacturing, ground equipment, and launch services.

The commercial launch of satellites is particularly important as these technologies offer us a range of services from television and radio broadcasts to high-speed internet and weather forecasting.

This amendment will strengthen the Nation's competitiveness in this nascent industry and offer us a better understanding of how we can maintain a robust and resilient network of space transportation infrastructure.

Mr. Chairman, with that, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the amendment offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts.

It would direct the FAA to engage and cooperate with airlines to identify and facilitate opportunities for them to retrofit their aircraft with devices that mitigate noise. Air traffic noise is an extremely important issue to those who live in communities surrounding our airports. This noise can be destructive to the well-being of the residents of these communities. This amendment would go a long way toward mitigating future noise issues around our airports.

I support this amendment and ask my colleagues to do the same.

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York.

This amendment directs the FAA Administrator to offer a public comment period and public hearing with respect to the New York North Shore Helicopter Route and would then be required to review the applicable regulations related to the route and assess the noise impacts on communities and the availability of alternative or supplemental routes to reduce those impacts.

I oppose it on the grounds that it is really not good policy to legislate on noise in a piecemeal fashion, addressing each region and each airport one by one. That is not the best way to address air traffic noise. The community has been aware of this issue for some time and certainly of the occasionally unreasonable exposure to helicopter noise reported by residents in urban areas.

The Aviation Subcommittee held a roundtable on this in October of 2011 to explore this issue, and perhaps it is time to re-up that roundtable to get some movement on this issue.

Further, I have concern about possible unintended consequences of legislative proposals that could lead to the redistribution of aircraft noise. Although well-intentioned, such proposals have social justice ramifications and often can end up distributing noise over socially economically disadvantaged communities. We have to make sure that noise is distributed equitably if we are going to make these decisions.

I would be happy to work, and I think on our side we would be happy to work with the gentleman and the cosponsors to try to address these concerns by talking directly with the FAA, but I have to oppose taking the solution towards a legislative resolution.

I ask my colleagues to oppose it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the 70th anniversary of the independence of the state of Israel, which falls on April 19 this year.

Israel is an important friend and ally of the United States.

The United States and Israel share a unique bond based on democratic principles, common values and mutual strategic interests.

In Washington state, the Puget Sound region is home to the fastest growing Jewish community of any metropolitan area in the United States, including almost 10,000 Israelis.

On April 22, people from across Washington state will gather for a Yom Ha'atzmaut festival, celebrating 70 years of Israeli Independence.

I would like to recognize the Israeli-American community for its contributions to Washington state and honor the hope of the Jewish people.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to express my continued support of American maritime jobs through enforcement of the Jones Act.

The Merchant Marine Act of 1920, more commonly known as the Jones Act, was named for its primary sponsor at the time, Senator Wesley Jones, of my home State, Washington State.

The Jones Act exists for good reason. It sustains and protects a strong domestic maritime and shipbuilding industry. It creates jobs for U.S. mariners, many of whom are veterans. It underpins U.S. maritime defense policy and is essential to preserving national security interests at home and abroad. The Jones Act requires the use of American-owned and -operated vessels to move all waterborne cargo between points in the U.S.

I have long maintained that the Jones Act ensures that domestic industries can remain vibrant contributors in the global shipping industry.

At its core, the Jones Act is a critical labor standard that helps put U.S. seafarers to work and maintains important workplace rights. In Washington State, approximately 60 percent of the State's ferries employees working on vessels are Jones Act compliant.

In 2012, I called on the then-administration to protect American jobs by adhering to the Jones Act in response to rising gas prices and the proposed release of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

Last year, I spoke up to support the Jones Act fleet in its heroic response to the natural disaster that hit Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

As a member of the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Subcommittee, I am committed to working with my colleagues to uphold the longstanding tenets of the Jones Act to safeguard the important role maritime industries play in our economy.

The Jones Act exists for good reason. We should use it to good effect.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the distinguished life and distinguished career of 98 year-old Mr. Alfred Nyholm Larsen of Bellingham, Washington.

Mr. Larsen is a World War II, U.S. Navy veteran who served in the United States, Europe and Asia.

Mr. Larsen also worked under the ACTION program which oversaw federal volunteer programs such as Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA).

He created the Retired Senior Volunteer Program, which is one of the largest volunteer efforts in the country for individuals 55 or older.

He is a proud father of four and is spending his retirement in his home state of Washington.

I would like to thank and recognize Mr. Larsen for his commitment to the state of Washington and his service to this country.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the distinguished career of Commander Pat Slack of the Snohomish Regional Drug & Gang Task Force, who will be retiring at the end of this year.

Commander Slack is an army veteran who received the Bronze Star for his service in Vietnam. Following his service, he spent 25 years with the Snohomish County Sheriff's office and five years as a Deputy Chief with the Everett Police Department.

In 2000, he became the Commander of the Snohomish Regional Drug & Gang Task Force, which has become the largest of its kind in the state under his leadership. The task force targets drug trafficking organizations and street gangs involved in drug activity to reduce availability and trafficking of drugs in the state and county. This is with the ultimate goal of improving the quality of life in our communities.

Commander Slack was instrumental in starting the drug take back program in Snohomish County and he has been a member of a number of national and local teams and organizations focused on drugs and public health.

I would like to recognize Commander Slack for his excellent leadership and his commitment to fighting the opioid epidemic in my district.

Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the Garamendi-Hunter amendment because I know how important a strong icebreaker fleet is to national security.

The committee recognizes this reality, as elsewhere in the bill we give the DOD some important authorities to support icebreaker procurement. However, this section 123 prohibits DOD funding for icebreaker procurement. This amendment strikes this provision because flexibility will be essential to funding new icebreakers.

Coast Guard shipbuilding budgets are insufficient for icebreaker procurement absent radical cuts elsewhere. As co-chair of the Arctic Working Group, I know that the United States needs icebreakers. These ships protect economic interests in the region, and they defend our sovereignty.

As the Arctic becomes increasingly navigable, the importance of icebreakers will only grow, and I urge my colleagues to support the Garamendi-Hunter amendment.

Mr. Speaker, due to a request by the Governor of Washington to lead the largest-ever state delegation to the International Paris Air Show, I was unable to participate in floor proceedings for the week of June 19-23, 2017.

Had I been present, I would have voted: YEA on Roll Call No. 309; YEA on Roll Call No. 310; NAY on Roll Call No. 311; NAY on Roll Call No. 312; NAY on Roll Call No. 313; YEA on Roll Call No. 314; NAY on Roll Call No. 315; NAY on Roll Call No. 316; NAY on Roll Call No. 317; YEA on Roll Call No. 318; NAY on Roll Call No. 319; YEA on Roll Call No. 320; NAY on Roll Call No. 321; YEA on Roll Call No. 322.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to the American Health Care Act.

Over the past several weeks, I have held six townhalls where I have discussed health care with more than 800 of my constituents. Thousands more have called or contacted my office.

Erica, from my hometown of Arlington, told me that, thanks to the Affordable Care Act, her family can now keep their house and pay their mortgage.

Nancy from Bellingham told me she works with families who rely on Medicaid to avoid bankruptcy due to extra medical costs that come with caring for babies with disabilities.

So many Washingtonians support the Affordable Care Act and benefit from it. And of my constituents who oppose the Affordable Care Act, none of them have asked me to support legislation that would cover fewer people. None of my constituents have asked Congress to make poor people pay more for insurance. And not one of my constituents have asked Congress to give the rich a massive tax break, but that is

what the American Health Care Act will do.

This bill, Mr. Speaker, will hurt people--women, seniors, individuals with disabilities, and middle class families. It will result in universal chaos, not universal coverage.

I strongly urge my colleagues to oppose this measure.

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

I rise in support of H.R. 276, as amended, introduced by the gentlewoman from American Samoa (Mrs. Radewagen), which will ensure reliable air service into American Samoa.

American Samoa is situated in the center of the South Pacific, about 2,500 miles south of Hawaii. Its nearest neighboring islands are at least 500 miles away, and the territory is more than 7,000 miles from where we stand today.

This remote location already makes export and travel difficult and costly. Complicating matters more is the fact that the current cabotage laws prohibit foreign air carriers from carrying passengers between the islands, except in certain emergency situations.

The Department of Transportation has authority to issue waivers in such emergency cases, but the waivers are good for only 30 days. A foreign airline that is otherwise fit to provide service between American Samoa's islands is, therefore, forced to apply monthly for a waiver.

H.R. 276 would remove this burden by permitting DOT to grant the cabotage waiver for up to 6 months. This change ensures that domestic air transportation is provided and sustained between the islands, benefitting both the people and the economy.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LoBIONDO: Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from American Samoa (Mrs. Radewagen).

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from the Northern Mariana Islands (Mr. Sablan).

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

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 7, the latest attack on women's reproductive rights.

Today's bill comes on the coattails of the new administration's yesterday reinstating the global gag rule, which limits women's reproductive health care outside the U.S.--and all of this after 3.2 million women and men across the country participated in the women's march last Saturday. The march sent a clear message that this administration should not undermine women's rights and women's health care.

And this is the response--to undermine women's reproductive health care?

Madam Speaker, the people of our country are watching; they are showing up; they are paying attention; and they will not back down in the face of attempts to move this country backwards.

I urge my colleagues to oppose

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to this budget resolution that would begin the process of repealing the Affordable Care Act without a plan to replace it, and I rise on behalf of my constituents who are imploring Congress to save the Affordable Care Act.

Luanne from Coupeville, Washington, wrote to me. She said:

As someone with several serious preexisting conditions, I

could not get insurance coverage in the past. My husband and

I spent an incredible amount of money--including retirement

savings and out-of-pocket dollars--for my care and

prescriptions. There were truly times when we had to choose

food over medication.

And without the ACA, Jennifer from Lynnwood told me that her best friend ``will be forced to work as many jobs as she can in order to obtain money due to the costs of her pregnancy that will no longer be covered. . . . . She needs the Affordable Care Act, as do many Americans. Please, I beg you, do not get rid of it. . . . The Republicans in Congress do not understand how much of us low-income Americans need this.''

These are just two of the hundreds of Washingtonians who have contacted me over the past 2 weeks.

Mr. Chairman, do not take away these lifesaving benefits from Luanne, Jennifer's friend, and the rest of my constituents.

I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5769, the Howard Coble Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2014.

As a former ranking member of the Coast Guard Subcommittee, I am very pleased that this bill provides the necessary resources to keep the men and women of the Coast Guard on the job. I am also pleased this bill makes needed advancements in our Nation's engagement in the Arctic.

Our country faces a steep opportunity curve when it comes to the Arctic. We haven't made the needed investments in that region to protect our environment, our economic interests, and our national security. But as our country gets ready to take over the chairmanship of the Arctic Council in 2015, this bill signals that our country is ready to engage further in Arctic issues. It requires the Coast Guard to come up with a plan for moving our icebreaker fleet forward; it encourages the development of forward operating bases for the Coast Guard in the region; and it improves the ability of the Coast Guard to monitor, patrol, and protect our Nation's Arctic waters.

I am hopeful that this bill will finally push the Coast Guard to reactivate the mothballed Polar Sea icebreaker so that it can act as a bridge towards a new icebreaker fleet. In the longer term, funding a new icebreaker fleet will require a whole of government approach. The Coast Guard simply does not have the acquisition budget to build a new icebreaker fleet on its own.

The Department of Defense, Coast Guard, and National Science Foundation need to work together to develop a funding strategy for assets they will all use. This bill endorses such a strategy.

Finally, I am very pleased that this bill includes $10 million for the Small Shipyard Grant Program, a successful effort that provides infrastructure spending to shipyards in the Pacific Northwest and around the country that creates jobs and supports local economies.

With that, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.