Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today along with my colleagues, Representative Vargas, Representative Levin, and Representative Jacobs, to recognize Shawn VanDiver, an exemplary San Diegan for his unwavering service on behalf of Afghan allies who stood with our servicemembers through two decades of war.

Shawn VanDiver is the founder and president of AfghanEvac. Shawn built this grassroots organization into a nationwide coalition dedicated to ensuring that our Nation keeps its promises.

Since the Taliban took over Afghanistan in 2021, Shawn has brought together veterans, advocates, nonprofits, and government representatives to help our Afghan partners reach safety. His work has helped reunite families who are now rebuilding their lives in the United States.

Shawn is a Navy veteran. This service gave him the clear view that our military is more capable because of its alliances, and when he re- joined civilian life, he brought this insight to San Diego's civic consciousness.

Shawn's commitment to fairness and trustworthiness exemplifies our Nation's foundational ideals. The inspiration for his non-stop energy and advocacy is his commitment to our allies: when people risk their lives in support of our country and servicemembers, our commitment to them does not end when that war does.

As we continue to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the September 11, 2001, attacks, which kicked off our involvement in Afghanistan, and the fifth anniversary of our withdrawal, every single one of us in this chamber should remember the countless Afghans who risked their lives to support our servicemembers. Our commitment to their safety is not only the right thing to do, but also the story we tell the world about ourselves. America, at its core, is a Nation of decent people that looks out for its allies. I thank my friend Shawn for always reminding us of this basic fact and I thank him for refusing to give up.

Mr. Speaker, my intention was to vote YEA on Roll Call No. 137, on the HEATS Act to streamline geothermal energy production.

Mr. Chairman, for nearly 20 years, electricity demand in the U.S. has barely moved, but that era is over.

Today, we are facing a potential for electricity demand to grow up to fivefold. Meeting this energy demand will be a challenge. The environmental laws of the 1970s were built for defense, but the environmental imperative of today is to build, and that is why we need permitting reform.

However, that doesn't just mean building pipelines and gas plants but also wind, utility-scale solar, and interregional high voltage electric transmission, all of the above. Like President Obama used to say, all of the above and like my Republican colleagues used to openly say at least before November of last year.

I was glad to see Chair Westerman introduce and advance the SPEED Act. Reforming NEPA, the most litigated environmental law on the books, is necessary if we are going to make America competitive and if we are going to protect our environment.

There are many important reforms in this bill, and I want to note that. That is why earlier this month I led a letter with 30 of my Democratic colleagues, outnumbering the members of the Freedom Caucus we saw on the floor this week, but explaining our support for reform and exactly what we needed to get more Democrats to ``yes'' on SPEED.

At the top of that list is permitting certainty, which the ranking member has already mentioned. Mr. Chair, if

you apply for a permit for a project that complies with the law, then you should be able to get that permit, and you should be able to rely on it.

Thoughtful permitting reforms, many of which are in the SPEED Act, are meaningless if the executive branch is allowed to revoke issued permits for no good reason, or if the permitting process can be subjected to political gamesmanship.

The language added to the SPEED Act at markup would have restricted some of the political interference with issued permits, and that was a great start to solving the problem. It wasn't everything we needed, but it was a lot. I was confident that a bipartisan bill was well within reach.

I was really disappointed this week that some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, after seeing that good bipartisan progress, decided to force this bill in the other direction this week to satisfy grievances and score political points instead of doing what is best for the country. An all-of-the-above energy strategy is what we were after. That took a big hit this week.

Giving Donald Trump, or any President, the ability to decide what gets permitting reform, which would be the effect of the partisan amendment added to the SPEED Act behind closed doors, significantly reduces certainty for investment in America.

That provision codifies a broken permitting status quo, instead of setting a level playing for everyone. Energy producers, investors, and communities want to know that investment in America, regardless of the electrons powering that investment, is safe from the swing of the political pendulum, and, unfortunately, that goal has not yet been achieved.

We need to get permitting reform done in this Congress. I look forward to working with my colleagues across the aisle in the Senate to craft a bipartisan product that could become law. This is not the final draft. I think there is more we can do.

Mr. Speaker, due to a flight travel delay, I could not be present for votes on December 15, 2025. My flight was originally scheduled to arrive at 3:32 pm ET, but it was delayed. My flight arrived at 5:45 pm ET and I could not make it to the Capitol in time for votes. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 335, and YEA on Roll Call No. 336.

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

Mr. Chairman, my amendment includes the language from my bill, H.R. 1948, allowing the International Boundary and Water Commission, or IBWC, to accept up to $5 million per year from other Federal agencies or outside entities, such as cities, States, and nonprofit organizations, for wastewater treatment and flood-control projects like those that would fight the cross-border sewage crisis in San Diego.

The IBWC has jurisdiction over the South Bay International Wastewater Treatment Plant in San Diego, where longstanding operational and maintenance failures have allowed raw sewage to flow from the Tijuana River into San Diego's beaches. This has created a public health crisis that strains local resources, poses significant environmental risks, and forces our servicemembers to train in polluted sewage water.

Under current law, Federal agencies, State governments, and local entities cannot transfer funds to projects under IBWC's jurisdiction. This leaves IBWC reliant on annual appropriations or emergency funding to build and maintain its facilities.

My office, along with the rest of the San Diego delegation, has secured $360 million in emergency funding to help address chronic issues at the South Bay treatment plant. I thank all of the people in this Chamber who have supported that, including a number of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who are veteran Navy SEALs and have been very concerned about this issue.

This amendment would provide another tool to ensure San Diego does not need to move from emergency to emergency to secure adequate funding for the plant. If we can get money from other sources, there is no reason not to accept it. For some reason, current law prevents us from accepting even a donation from a nonprofit that would want to help us with the issue.

Mr. Chair, I say let's get out of the way. H.R. 1948 passed out of the House on suspension in June of this year, and I hope to see it become law on any topical legislative vehicle before us. In this case, our amendment would authorize additional funding sources to further expedite the completion of clean water projects that fall under IBWC's jurisdiction. I think it makes sense and is good for everyone.

Mr. Chair, I appreciate the support of my colleagues, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the support of my colleague, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Rouzer), and the committee. I urge support of the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Dr. Glenn Cockerham, a distinguished physician, veteran, educator, and leader in ophthalmology who has devoted his career to serving our nation's Veterans. Throughout his decades of service, Dr. Cockerham has led national efforts to improve eye care for Veterans, advanced ophthalmic policy across federal health systems, mentored future physician leaders, and exemplified integrity and professionalism in every role. After many years of service to our nation, he retired in June from the Department of Veterans Affairs.

After earning his medical degree, Dr. Cockerham completed his ophthalmology residency at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C., followed by a fellowship in Cornea and Refractive Surgery at Harvard Medical School's Mass Eye and Ear Infirmary.

He obtained the rank of colonel while serving in the U.S. Air Force (USAF), and his military assignments included Senior Flight Surgeon with the 7th Special Operations Squadron, Chief of Flight Medicine, and Chief Consultant for Surgery at the U.S. Air Force Surgeon General Office.

Dr. Cockerham served as the National Program Executive Director for Ophthalmology Selvices and was responsible for the implementation of policies impacting eye care services throughout the Veterans Health Administration. His previous national leadership roles include Acting Deputy Director at the Department of Defense/Veterans Affairs (DoD/VA) Vision Center of Excellence and Acting Chief Consultant for VA Specialty Care Services. He is also a Clinical Associate Professor in both the Departments of Ophthalmology and Pathology at Stanford University School of Medicine.

In 2009, Dr. Cockerham was honored with the Olin Teague Award for War-related Research Most Beneficial to Veterans, which he received alongside Dr. Gregory Goodrich. The award recognized their exceptional research on traumatic brain injury (TBI) and its impact on vision in Veterans. Their work focused on identifying and addressing vision problems associated with blast-related TBI, including the development of innovative screening tools and therapies. Dr. Cockerham's contributions led to the identification of critical TBI-related vision disorders and the generation of data that inforned U.S. Department of Defense prevention efforts.

Dr. Cockerham is also a widely published academic, with peer-reviewed work appearing in JAMA, Opthalmology, Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, Military Medicine, the New England Journal of Medicine, and others. His research has informed clinical practices and contributed to national conversations on eye health.

Dr. Cockerham has played a key role in shaping the future of ophthalmology and advancing care for Veterans. His expertise has influenced health policy, clinical standards, and medical education, and he continues to impact both federal healthcare systems and academic medicine. He was and remains a strong advocate for patient safety, clinical excellence, and the needs of Veterans at the highest levels of government. It is an honor to formally recognize his remarkable service and enduring contributions to our nation and to the field of ophthalmology.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today because we face a critical moment for American leadership.

Amid mounting pressure to compete with China in energy, biotechnology, and AI dominance, any smart country would invest in itself and invest in the future. Unfortunately, this administration seems committed to doing the exact opposite.

Funding cuts to the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation have kneecapped the world-class research ecosystem that has made America great in the 20th century.

The politicization of science hurts the health and well-being of hardworking American citizens, and it compromises our ability as a nation to compete with other nations.

During August, I held a townhall with hundreds of my constituents who are researchers and graduate students in science, technology, engineering, and math. During the townhall, I discussed the dangers of this administration's agenda for public health, national security, and global competitiveness, and they asked that I tell you some of their stories.

One researcher studies ocean and Earth sciences at San Diego's prestigious Scripps Institution of Oceanography. Her research focuses on addressing the threats that toxic algal blooms pose to public health, fisheries, and coastal recreation.

With cuts to NASA, NOAA, and the National Science Foundation, she has seen labs at Scripps shut down and watched her coworkers lose their jobs.

Another scientist whose research focuses on ensuring energy security has felt the consequences of this administration's policy. She has had her research censored by an administration that is indifferent to and may be hostile to scientific research. She has watched critical datasets and research tools disappear from government websites overnight. As she so aptly put it: ``I have sacrificed so much of my livelihood for the betterment of our planet, only to see it all burn down in less than half a year.''

Myiesha, a researcher at UCSD, overcame her own traumatic brain injuries and chronic illnesses so she could study the effects of infectious diseases on vulnerable patients. Now, Myiesha faces a new challenge: overcoming an administration that has cut her authorized research, cut her working hours almost in half, and cut her income significantly.

Mari is a Ph.D. candidate studying biomedical sciences at UCSD. She researches the neuroscience behind drug addiction so we can fight the opioid crisis. Just as her field gained momentum--overdose deaths declined in 2024 for the first time in over two decades--her lab was threatened with funding cuts. Mari has watched her lifesaving research be halted and had two of her own fellowship applications withdrawn because of the administration's actions.

Eugene is a Ph.D. candidate at Scripps. He is researching how to repurpose bacteria to stop certain cancer-causing proteins. The lab next door to Eugene's was doing a $129 million trial on monkeys, working to develop an HIV vaccine. After the Trump administration canceled the lab's grant, the monkeys were killed needlessly, funding already spent was wasted, and patients will now have to wait even longer before we find an HIV vaccine.

Maya, a UCSD grad, cofounded BrainStorm Therapeutics, a biotech startup researching treatments for brain diseases like Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and epilepsy. Maya has seen the grants that support startups like hers cut. This threatens the transformational science that she and her colleagues are working on.

The final story I will tell, and maybe the most emblematic of the issue, is that of Dr. Ardem Patapoutian. He is a world-renowned researcher who won the Nobel Prize for his work on researching the sense of touch.

Mr. Speaker, I think we can all agree that is the kind of talent we strive to encourage in this country.

When his research funding was delayed by the Trump administration, Dr. Patapoutian received a call from China within 2 days. They offered him his pick of whatever research institution he wanted in China, guaranteeing his funding for the next 20 years.

Although his funding is still delayed, Dr. Patapoutian chose to stay here because of the world-class research ecosystem in the United States that is currently being eroded and under attack.

These stories show the risks we take when we cut funding that supports critical scientific advancement. China is far outpacing us in the research and development space. If we are going to keep up, we have to put up. If those of us in this body are truly serious about putting America first, this is simply not the way.

It is encouraging that, despite the administration's attempt to politicize science, a bipartisan bloc of the Senate Appropriations Committee has chosen to modestly increase scientific research funding rather than cut it. I am very thankful for that. I hope we will do the same here in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the commitment to investing in America's future. We in the House should do the same. We need to invest in science and not undercut it.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize General Atomics, a world-leading technology company headquartered in the district I represent, and their historic achievement of completing the ITER Central Solenoid. This giant custom-designed magnet, 60 feet tall, 14 feet wide, and weighing over 1,000 tons, is the largest pulsed superconducting electromagnet ever built, and it is a major step in the long journey toward commercial fusion energy.

General Atomics was one of the early trailblazers of both nuclear fission and fusion. Under the leadership of their chairman and CEO, Neal Blue, General Atomics has pioneered many new innovations, from groundbreaking advances in nuclear technology to remotely operated aircraft, and electromagnetic systems.

Fusion energy will provide a source of virtually limitless baseload power and a clean and safe pathway for true energy security. It is no wonder countries across the globe are racing to achieve fusion first, and San Diego is leading the way with the leadership of companies like General Atomics and others.

I look forward to celebrating many more accomplishments with my friends at General Atomics.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, my bill, H.R. 1948, allows the International Boundary and Water Commission, or IBWC, to accept up to $5 million per year from other Federal agencies or outside entities like cities, States, and nonprofit organizations for wastewater treatment and flood control projects like those that would fight the cross-border sewage crisis in and around San Diego and Coronado.

The IBWC has jurisdiction over the South Bay International Wastewater Treatment Plant in San Diego, where longstanding operational and maintenance failures have allowed raw sewage to flow from the Tijuana River onto San Diego's beaches. This has created a public health crisis that strains local resources, poses significant environmental risks, and forces servicemembers to train in polluted sewage water.

Under current law, Federal agencies, State governments, and local entities cannot transfer funds to projects under IBWC's jurisdiction. This leaves IBWC solely reliant on annual appropriations or emergency funding to build and maintain its facilities.

My office, along with the rest of the San Diego delegation and our California senators, have worked hard to secure $360 million in emergency funding to help address chronic issues at the South Bay International Wastewater Treatment Plant. This bill would provide another tool to ensure that San Diego and Coronado do not need to move from emergency to emergency to secure adequate funding for this plant.

I thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who have helped move the ball forward on this issue, including the San Diego delegation, our California senators, and my colleagues who are former Navy SEALs, who understand the harm of training in these polluted waters.

I also thank the cities of San Diego, Coronado, Imperial Beach, the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce, San Diego Coastkeeper, WILDCOAST, and other San Diegans who have made stopping this catastrophe a top priority.

Mr. Speaker, due to a flight travel delay, I could not be present for votes. My flight was originally scheduled to arrive at 4:15 p.m., ET, but due to the delay, arrived at 5:36 p.m., ET. Therefore, I could not make it to the Capitol in time for votes. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 146, and YEA on Roll Call No. 147.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my bill, H.R. 1578, the Veterans Claims Education Act.

I wrote this bill after a veteran in my district alerted my office about a challenge he faced accessing his hard-earned VA benefits. This veteran contracted with a for-profit company that promised to increase the veteran's disability benefits in exchange for a cut of the veteran's disability payment from the VA.

It is unconscionable that for-profit entities, known as claim sharks, prey on the trust and good will of our veterans to line their own pockets.

My bill takes a big step to correct this and will protect veterans in San Diego and throughout the country from similar scams in the future. The Veterans Claims Education Act provides educational resources to steer veterans toward veterans service organizations, qualified lawyers, and accredited entities who can provide not-for-profit assistance to veterans.

My bill also provides vets filing a disability claim with an online search tool to help veterans find accredited entities that can assist with claims. It creates an online portal to report claim sharks targeting veterans, which charge a fee for their services.

Republicans and Democrats may have sincere policy disagreements about how to provide world-class care to our Nation's veterans and their families, but I know we all agree that no one should be able to profit from the service and sacrifice of our veterans.

I thank the chairman and the ranking member and the entire House Veterans' Affairs Committee for advancing this legislation out of the House. I thank the numerous veterans organizations for their advocacy, including the American Legion, the Paralyzed Veterans of America, the VFW, and other great organizations.

I look forward to working with these groups to make this law the law of the land, and I urge my colleagues to support the bill and our veterans.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Dr. Margaret Leinen, who is stepping down as director of Scripps Institution of Oceanography and vice chancellor for marine science at the University of California San Diego.

The Scripps Institution of Oceanography works to study and find solutions to our most pressing environmental challenges, such as the relationship among our oceans, climate change, and human health.

Under Dr. Leinen's leadership, Scripps grew its degree programs and student enrollment, doubled its sponsored research and philanthropic funding, and furthered UC San Diego's reputation as one of the prestigious research institutions on the world stage.

Dr. Leinen has shaped our ocean and climate research. She oversaw the commissioning of state-of-the-art research vessels, the opening of multiple new facilities, and fostered Scripps' relationship with San Diego's developing blue economy industry.

Dr. Leinen has also served as the U.S. Department of State's science envoy for the oceans to Latin America and the Pacific and as assistant director for geosciences at the National Science Foundation. I have enjoyed working with her and learning from her at the U.N. climate change conferences, or COP.

Dr. Leinen's work has left an extraordinary mark on oceanography. I thank Dr. Margaret Leinen for her service. Along with all of San Diego, I wish her the best in her retirement.

Recognizing Dr. Alessandro Sette

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a constituent of mine, Dr. Alessandro Sette, for being awarded the Order of Merit of the Italian Republic and being granted the status of knight, or Cavaliere dell'Ordine della Stella d'Italia, for his exceptional work in immunology. He was previously elected fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the American Academy of Microbiology.

Dr. Sette is a professor at the La Jolla Institute for Immunology in the centers for autoimmunity and inflammation, infectious disease, and vaccine research. He has dedicated his career to understanding our body's immune system and developing interventions against cancer, autoimmunity, allergies, and infectious diseases. His laboratory works to understand scientific structures called epitopes that the immune system recognizes in diseases, and he uses this knowledge to improve our immune responses.

Dr. Sette's research led to the creation of the Immune Epitope Database, which is a vital source of experimental data on antibody and T cell responses. Dr. Sette's research revealed how T cells can fight pathogens like tuberculosis, dengue, SARS-CoV-2, pertussis, and the virus that causes Mpox.

Dr. Sette and the La Jolla Institute team were the first in the world to publish a detailed analysis of our immune system's response to the coronavirus. Their research exemplifies San Diego's role in developing the cures and treatments of tomorrow.

I congratulate Dr. Alessandro Sette on his achievements and on this most recent distinct honor of being knighted by the Italian Republic.

Recognizing Dr. Shane Crotty

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the remarkable Shane Crotty, a San Diegan and world-renowned immunologist whose work has transformed our understanding of the human immune system.

Dr. Crotty's groundbreaking research into the body's response to virus was not only vital to the global fight against COVID-19 but also to the advancement of vaccines and treatments for a wide range of infectious diseases.

In recognition of Dr. Crotty's enduring contributions to research on the immune system, he was recently elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. This honor is a testimony to the value of his scientific contributions and to the curiosity, integrity, and commitment to public service that define his work.

At a time when public trust in science is more important than ever, Dr. Crotty stands as a beacon of integrity, innovation, and hope. His tireless pursuit of knowledge continues to save lives and will inspire future generations of researchers.

I am grateful for his leadership and proud to honor his legacy, and I thank Dr. Crotty.

Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted NAY on Roll Call No. 112.

Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of difficult things about this, but one thing I want to say is that the Republicans are actually trying to change the rules of the game to say that this tax cut doesn't cost any money. The Senate is ignoring the rules we have observed for decades, ruling out the Parliamentarian, just declaring that extending these tax cuts doesn't cost any money, and that is a falsehood. We are just changing our accounting rules to do this.

The other fault with this is the chairman, Mr. Arrington, rightly pointed out we are borrowing $2 trillion every year, but this does nothing about that. All this does is take money from important programs to fund the extension of tax cuts, many of which are for the wealthy. Some may be for the nonwealthy, but much of it is for the wealthy. It is the wrong thing to do.

Every independent analysis says this will not lower the budget deficit but will increase it. Mr. Speaker, if you don't believe me, look at when we vote for the debt ceiling increase; $5 trillion to $18 trillion. What are we going to vote for? This is the wrong direction.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to strongly oppose efforts to repeal the waste emissions charge, commonly known as the methane fee, which is a commonsense measure that benefits American industry, protects consumers, and provides much-needed regulatory certainty in the energy sector.

Addressing methane emissions, especially fugitive emissions from oil and gas, is one of the most effective ways to combat the climate crisis, protect public health, and ensure America's energy sector remains globally competitive.

Methane has a global warming potential 80 times higher than carbon dioxide over a 20-year period, meaning that even small leaks can erase the climate benefits of utilizing cleaner energy sources. Unfortunately, methane regulations have been caught in a cycle of constant change.

The first Trump administration repealed methane regulations from the previous administration. When President Biden took office, we led efforts to reinstate these crucial protections. Then, in 2022, House Democrats passed the Inflation Reduction Act, which not only reinstated strong methane controls but also implemented a market-driven approach to reducing waste, the methane fee.

The methane fee is not a blanket tax on energy production. I think the gentleman from Virginia suggested that this was a tax on small polluters. Actually, it is a tax only on larger emitters because it is only applied for 25,000 metric tons annually, so it is on the larger ones.

It is designed to encourage companies to capture more methane rather than venting or leaking it. The methane fee provides proof to consumers and competitors that we are serious about producing the cleanest, most efficient natural gas on the market.

Repealing the fee would hurt American industry by eliminating incentives to modernize operations and remain competitive in an international market that increasingly values low-emission energy.

Now, I am supposed to get up here and bash Big Oil, but actually, Big Oil is for the methane fee. The largest companies--ExxonMobil, TotalEnergies, and Cheniere Energy--support strong methane rules. They oppose this repeal because they know reducing waste makes business sense. How is that? Because the customers for our gas around the world--Korea, South Korea, Japan, the EU--are demanding cleaner gas.

These companies know that the methane fee demonstrates that our gas is cleaner. Also, the consumer demand from those customers has led to the development of technologies to detect methane, its presence, and its concentration in a way that we can make much more efficient ways to regulate it.

A repeal would undercut responsible producers who have invested in cutting-edge methane detection and capture technologies that make them globally competitive.

Even if this CRA passes today, the problem doesn't simply disappear. My colleagues on the other side never miss a chance to point out that the natural gas revolution has contributed to our historic energy independence and cut our CO2 emissions from energy production. That is true, but even small leaks of methane wipe out that advantage from a climate perspective.

World markets and domestic politics are demanding that the industry can prove with real credibility and transparency that we fixed this methane problem. It is increasingly apparent that the viability of exporting U.S. liquefied natural gas depends on American policies to address methane pollution.

If we don't do this, we are going to have to pass bipartisan legislation to do the same thing to ensure that the industry standards provide for the cleanest, most efficient natural gas production.

Industry and ratepayers have asked us for certainty, consistency, and an assurance that America will remain a global leader in energy production and resilience. The customers want this to happen. The large producers want this to happen. I don't see why Democrats and Republicans can't agree on this.

We need long-term solutions, not more political whiplash. I urge my colleagues to stand with responsible energy producers and American consumers to reject efforts that repeal this vital provision.