Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I am humbled and honored to recognize the life and legacy of Stanley R. Lawson, Sr., a veteran and trailblazer in Pennsylvania.

Born and raised in Harrisburg, Stan was a loving father, son, community leader, and public servant whose life's work was defined by service to others. He was a proud combat veteran of the United States Navy, serving in Vietnam from 1960 to 1964. After returning home, he began his 50-year career in politics and public service.

Stan made history in 1969 by becoming the first African American to be elected to the Harrisburg City Council, eventually serving as the Vice President in the early 1970's. His journey in public service continued as the first African American President of AFSCME Council No. 13, the first African American President of the Susquehanna Township Board of Commissioners, and the first African American Chairman of the Dauphin County Republican Committee. In 1986, Stan stood alongside Governor Dick Thornburgh for the signing of House Bill 1855, which conveyed funding and property designated for Susquehanna Township, while he was the President of the Susquehanna Township Board of Commissioners. Those funds were used to create the Susquehanna Township parks, an example of how Stan's leadership directly improved Citizens' quality of life.

In addition to his public service, Stan was deeply committed to the local community, civil rights, and his faith in God. Throughout the 1990's, he established and managed Lawson's Grocery, Stan Lawson's Palace, and multiple residential and commercial real estate enterprises. In 2006, he became the President of the Greater Harrisburg Area NAACP, where he served for over 10 years. In 2009, he was ordained as a Deacon at the First Spirit Filled Missionary Baptist Church.

Over the course of his life, Stan earned several meaningful honors that meant a great deal to him, including the Man of the Year Award from the Dauphin County Teenage Republicans in 1971, a Resolution of Recognition from the Black Republican Council of Pennsylvania in 1982, and a Presidential Award from the IMC of Greater Harrisburg in 2012.

Mr. Speaker, I am honored and privileged to recognize Mr. Stanley R. Lawson, Sr. for his tireless, dedicated, and faithful service to God, family, friends, the Harrisburg community, our Commonwealth, and the United States of America. His lifetime of public service, his pioneering contributions to civil rights, and his enduring commitment to community leadership will endure into eternity. Stan's life example of ``service above self'' set the standard by which all should be judged.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to recognize Jonathan D. Holmes, Chairman of the Jackson Township Board of Supervisors, for his many years of service to Jackson Township, York County, Pennsylvania.

Jon has dedicated his life to serving the great People of Jackson Township. He began in 1990 after being appointed as an alternate to the Township Zoning Hearing Board, where he served for almost two years. In 1992, he became a full member of the Zoning Hearing Board. In April 2003, he was appointed to the Township Board of Supervisors to fulfill another member's term, and became Chairman of the Board in 2005, where he has served for nearly 21 years.

Jon's career as a Civil Engineer has benefited the Township greatly. As a graduate of Penn State's Engineering program, he always understood the Township's infrastructure needs and made efforts to improve the quality of life for all residents. Under his leadership, he took the Township's Public Works Department to the next level. The Township implemented a roadway improvement program that funded proper paving versus tar and chip, thus improving the safety and durability of town roads. He also improved the equipment in the Department, giving town employees the necessary tools to keep things running.

Jon led the Board during the purchase of land titled for Little Creek Community Park, the Township's first park. Today, the park includes a nine-hole golf course, walking trails, playground equipment, and a pavilion; it's a heavily used community center and loved by residents and non-residents alike, yet another tangible example of how Jon's leadership impacted the communities in and outside of Jackson Township.

Jon's leadership was recognized not only by residents, but by other leaders in Pennsylvania. He was honored by the Pennsylvania State Association of Township Supervisors and inducted into its Hall of Fame in 2025, which speaks broadly to his leadership abilities and legacy.

Mr. Speaker, I am honored and privileged to recognize Chairman Jonathan Holmes for his selfless, tireless, and dedicated service to the Citizens of Jackson Township, York County, Pennsylvania. His leadership, professionalism, and fidelity will be greatly missed, and his service sets the standard for all to be judged.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Lancaster County for yielding to me.

Mr. Speaker, the Psalms tell us that the Lord is closest to the brokenhearted, and we are brokenhearted on this day for the loss of these officers.

Mr. Speaker, every day across America, as we go about our lives, every day and every night, there are men and women who put on the uniform to keep our communities safe. They never know when they leave home, kiss their wife, their husband, their children good-bye, whether that is the last day or not. It is a burden that most of us will never recognize, can't understand, will never experience. We live in a wonderful country because of the people who are willing to risk their lives and run to the danger.

Mr. Speaker, these brave individuals, the finest in America, certainly the finest in York County, gave their last full measure in support of the safety of their community and our country. We are heartbroken, and we pray for them. We pray for the departments. We pray for their families. We pray for our community, and we hold them up. We acknowledge their sacrifice on our behalf.

I thank the gentleman from Lancaster and the whole Pennsylvania delegation, the whole House for your attention to this matter. We have to do better. We have to deal with these things successfully, and we have to continue to honor those who stand in the way of evil every day so that we can remain free.

Mr. Chair, had I been present, I would have voted AYE on Roll Call No. 244.

Stated against:

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

Mr. Chairman, I might sound like a little bit of a broken record here, but, unfortunately, the broken record of $37 trillion in debt and climbing continues as well, so we have just got to keep at it.

First, the Great Lakes Authority has only been authorized since 2022. It still does not have a Federal co-chair, so nobody is in charge. It has no website, and it has no programs funded. They haven't done anything.

They haven't spent any money making any lives better, yet, strangely, it is still receiving Federal dollars to the tune of $4 million for projects allegedly in the watershed of the regions of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

The commission's programs are duplicative of other Federal economic development programs and are better addressed at the State and local levels. That is even if they do any projects, which they don't. They just get money.

Mr. Chairman, we have seen how the other commissions have gone. President Trump urged the elimination of many of them, and President Obama also recommended the elimination. With that level of bipartisan criticism of existing commissions, I don't see why we need to dig ourselves even deeper with another one, more debt, more projects that are supposed to be done by others, and no Federal nexus, but here we go.

I know that people in the building will scoff at the difference of $2 million and $4 million, but for folks where I live, $2 million and $4 million is a lot of money.

Remember, Mr. Chairman, whether it is four or two, no projects are being completed at this time by this organization. That is a lot of money to be throwing around at a commission that

is duplicative and, obviously, unnecessary.

Furthermore, all of us here know it is not going to stop at $4 million. This commission, like all the rest, will balloon up to tens of millions of dollars unless somebody puts their foot down. I am going to stay on this mission to try and save the taxpayers some money.

It is great for people on the commission to be Santa Claus and hand out your money to somebody else, but you are the one paying for it, Mr. Chairman. Don't have any illusions about that.

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

Mr. Chairman, there are a lot of things I agree with the gentlewoman from Ohio about. We have hardworking people. Whether they are in Harrisburg or in Ohio, they are working-class people. I am one of them, having spent most of my life turning wrenches, laying in ditches, and things like that. We know how to work in Pennsylvania.

Where we agree, apparently, but we can't say, is that the Federal Government broke it, shipping our jobs overseas, not only in the gentlewoman's communities but in my communities.

Of course, the Federal Government did that with our tax dollars. Then the Federal Government is going to come back in after they broke it and use our tax dollars to tell us that they are fixing it.

What I am saying is that these programs are being done by other Federal agencies. We don't need yet another one on top of them to take our money and have it sit in some account.

Oh, by the way, when the gentlewoman says that no one has been appointed by the executive branch, this thing was started years ago while somebody else was in the executive branch and didn't appoint anybody.

Please don't lecture me on how Donald Trump isn't appointing someone to this when President Biden had the opportunity and somebody could have autopenned it but couldn't be bothered.

Mr. Chair, we need to support this amendment. I urge passage, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, as the designee of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy) I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chair, this amendment fully defunds DOE's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, or the EERE.

This amendment is offered because we simply cannot continue to fund the destruction--and that is what it is--of the U.S. energy grid to satisfy a climate cult.

The FY 2024 minibus gave this office $3.5 billion. While the underlying bill cuts funding down to $1.9 billion, we need to defund it entirely. Why are we fooling around here, taking half of it? This thing doesn't do anything good for anybody.

This office's mission under the last administration was to ``equitably transition America to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions economy-wide by no later than 2050.''

What does that mean, net zero? What that means is everything that you see--the clothing you are wearing, the car you are driving, the cell phone you use--disappears in America because we can't make any of that stuff because it requires emissions. We will still have it, so we will just offshore that stuff to everybody else, including China. That is a brilliant plan.

If we look at wind and solar, it funds wind and solar, which are actively destroying the power grid. They are the least reliable sources of power and the most expensive. Nobody would use them, and nobody would produce them, if they weren't subsidized by your tax dollars. It funds zero-emission vehicles that only the wealthy can afford and depends on supply chains dominated by China.

It actively promotes divisive concepts like energy equity and environmental justice, which allocate tax dollars based on immutable characteristics. Are you serious? This is America?

While we successfully ushered in the end of the Inflation Reduction Act, we have to continue because there is plenty more to do. Over 90 percent of the subsidies from this organization went to corporations that make over $1 billion per year.

I am going to tell you who is going to defend it. Not me. Some people over there, some people over here will, but not me. With $1 billion per year, these subsidies could make wind and solar account for nearly 60 percent of U.S. electricity generation by 2050.

People say that is great. Isn't that good? It is good if you don't care if you can't turn the lights on because the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining. We are going to have rolling brownouts and blackouts because that is what is going to happen, like in California. Americans in the 21st century are going to become used to it. We are going to normalize living in the seventh century instead. Of course, all of this makes us wholly dependent on China for our power.

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

Mr. Chair, President Trump won the election and requested that Congress slash the funding for this office. This amendment does exactly that and deals with this out-of-control agency.

Historically, this office was responsible for some of the most egregious rules regulating the lives of Americans. Previous regulatory actions undertaken include air cleaners, fans and blowers, dehumidifiers, commercial clothes washers, and conventional cooktops. Who in the hell do these people think they are? We are Americans. We ought to be able to choose whatever we want to, yet they tell us what we can have and what we can't have. I am not sure what country you think you live in or what it should be, but it shouldn't be this.

Mr. Chair, I still urge adoption of this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

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

Mr. Chair, this amendment prohibits the use of funds to implement or enforce the Delaware River Basin Commission's rule to ban hydraulic fracturing within the Delaware River Basin.

The best way to combat high energy prices is to produce more energy in America and in places like my own Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the second largest natural gas producer in the Nation.

Unfortunately, unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats at the Delaware River Basin Commission have instituted a hydraulic fracturing ban for a portion of the State of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, stripping away property and mineral rights from Pennsylvanians in contravention of the will of the State's own legislature.

The result is a prohibition on the development of critical shale plays in eastern Pennsylvania that can bring desperately needed natural gas to market and the unconstitutional taking of the mineral rights of Pennsylvanians, all while keeping prices high.

To be clear, this amendment simply prohibits the Delaware River Basin Commission from implementing or enforcing its hydraulic fracturing ban but does not impact the ability of the States in the Delaware River Basin Commission to regulate hydraulic fracturing as they see fit.

During previous debates on this issue, mistruths were spread about the impact of this policy change on the water reservoirs that serve New York City. These claims are false and easily disproven by the facts.

The safety of hydraulic fracturing has been demonstrated through its extensive use across the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and across the country for decades now.

The Obama-era EPA determined that the practice did not pose a threat to drinking water.

Simple geography and hydrology make this outcome an impossibility. All of New York City reservoirs are upriver from Pennsylvania or on the Hudson River, which does not connect to Pennsylvania, precluding any impact in Pennsylvania from reaching these reservoirs.

Mr. Chair, the intention of this amendment and its primary impact will be unleashing Pennsylvania's full energy potential by allowing Pennsylvanians in the river basin to use their property and mineral rights as they see fit as free Americans, subject to the laws passed by their elected Representatives.

It is time to stop this underhanded attack on property rights, representative government, and State sovereignty and restore American security. Opposition to this amendment is support for the hydraulic fracturing ban and for higher energy, in particular, natural gas prices for our constituents.

Mr. Chair, I urge passage of this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I have done my homework for years now, and it is the same song every time because nothing changes. While I agree with the gentlewoman from Ohio--she does know something about this and, of course, it is allowed in Ohio, but she said that it is not appropriate to overrule regional and local governments, but that is exactly what the DRBC does. It overrules regional and local government.

By the way, it overrules the Commonwealth Government. While the Governor has a say, there are four other voting members who can overrule that Governor. Quite honestly, what we don't need is somebody from another State telling us how to run our business.

There is no political accountability. We don't vote for people in Delaware, New Jersey, and New York. They are wonderful people, and we appreciate them, but our job is to represent Pennsylvania. That is what I am doing. Pennsylvanians want to have access to their land and to their mineral rights, and they should have it, not unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats.

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

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

Mr. Chairman, this amendment eliminates earmarked funding for the Delaware River Basin Commission.

Unfortunately, this bill includes an earmark providing nearly three- quarters of a million dollars to the Delaware River Basin Commission, marking just the third time the Federal Government has provided the DRBC funding since 1998.

The unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats at the DRBC have unilaterally instituted a hydraulic fracturing

ban for a portion of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, stripping away property and mineral rights from Pennsylvanians in direct contravention of the will of the Pennsylvania Commonwealth's legislature.

The result is a prohibition on the development of critical shale plays in eastern Pennsylvania that can bring desperately needed natural gas to the market and the unconstitutional taking of the mineral rights of American citizens.

This attack on Pennsylvania energy and American energy is at a time when residential natural gas prices are near record highs, and my friends on the other side of the aisle literally run ads saying that I increase their energy prices while they do it every single day and they are just about ready to do it again.

It creates significant inflation for my constituents and the constituents of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and it empowers our enemies abroad.

The earmark in this bill rewards the radical commissioners with money from the very taxpayers and ratepayers the DRBC is attacking.

Providing funds to such an out-of-control, radical commission is a step in the wrong direction that incentivizes others to follow its lead, and it keeps our energy costs high.

This amendment would prohibit Federal funding for the DRBC, ensuring that we do not further incentivize this commission to attack American energy and the rights of Pennsylvania's citizens.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Will the gentlewoman yield?

That is correct.

Mr. Chairman, the community funding process, just understand if you are not familiar with congressional jargon, that equals earmark. That is three-quarters of a million dollars to this organization that heretofore hasn't needed the money because they extort members of the States that they exist in all kinds of fees, applications, and licensing agreements from townships and other municipalities for private individuals. That is how they are paid for. Yet now we are going to pay three-quarters of a million dollars from the Federal Government when we are $37 trillion in debt.

While I am happy to agree that we should test the effluent, I am good with that, but apparently we don't care about the effluent from Ohio to Pennsylvania or from Pennsylvania to Ohio where we conduct the same activity. Oh, by the way, there have been no cases of any issue where hydraulic fracturing caused some effluent issue that I know of or that I imagine my counterpart on the other side of the aisle can speak to.

As a matter of fact, I said that the Obama-era EPA said that it was completely safe.

While I agree that we should do those things, and if there is a problem we absolutely have to get after it, but we are just throwing money at this thing when there is no evidence that there is a problem. There is zero evidence that there is a problem, number one, and there is zero evidence that they need any of this money, but there is $37 trillion of evidence that we don't have the money to pay for it.

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

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

Mr. Chairman, this amendment would eliminate funding for the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy, or ARPA-E, program.

Modeled after the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, known as DARPA, the agency funds research and development of advanced energy technologies.

It sounds like a noble goal.

Despite a purported goal to identify and promote revolutionary advances in energy, the agency is more focused on misguided, ineffective climate and so-called green priorities.

For years, ARPA-E has drifted from its mission and provided grants to companies and projects that are neither high risk nor something that the private sector cannot and does not support.

Among recent awards, ARPA-E has supported the Net-Zero Game Changers Initiative, which is subsidizing climate-warming refrigerants and Jetsons-style electrification of aviation.

With all due respect, as a member of the Transportation Committee, if they want to electrify aviation, God bless them. Let them and the Wright brothers from the gentlewoman's great State of Ohio invest. It is always better when the private sector invests. It is always more efficient, and the outcomes are always better.

The Trump administration has also called for the elimination of this program, and rightly so, recognizing the private sector's primary role in taking risks to commercialize breakthrough energy technologies with actual, real market potential, not made-up ones by the good idea fairy from the Federal Government.

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

Mr. Chair, I certainly appreciate the chairman's view. I think his view is actually the same as mine, recognizing that it has already had a 24 percent reduction. Quite honestly, that is great that it has produced all of these patents, but wouldn't it be better if the private sector produced those patents? Right now, the American taxpayer is paying for those patents, but you know who is not getting any of the money, the royalties, or the licensing for those patents? The very taxpayers who pay the bill.

Again, I get that many see this as a great jobs program, and it provides a lot of great things for America, but those things should be provided by the private sector because we simply cannot afford to pay for all of this stuff. Something has to give.

The private sector wants to make money. It wants to get patents. It wants to license things. Good for them. They should do it. The American taxpayer doesn't want to pay for it. If they are paying for it, where is the return on the investment?

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

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

Mr. Chair, this amendment eliminates funding for the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Loan Program and transfers that savings to spending reduction. This is another wasteful, so-called green energy handout program that should be and must be eliminated.

The ATVM Loan Program has been plagued by a failure to produce viable products, political favoritism, inefficient use of taxpayer funds, a failure to create promised jobs, and a significant potential for fraud and misrepresentation.

Unfortunately, this is to be expected from this kind of program. The very nature of the program ensures that it will be the government selecting winners and losers based on political considerations, as opposed to actual marketable technologies.

Instead, we can and must empower the market to provide consumers with products they actually want rather than forcing them to adapt to whatever technology the bureaucrats and good idea fairies in Washington, D.C., think they want or demand that they want.

Despite the massive amount of subsidies provided through this program and others to electric vehicles, it is clear that the majority of the American people do not want them.

The government-funded EV bubble appears to be deflating. The truth is, 98 percent of all cars on the road today are gas-powered, and 97 percent of all annual car purchases are gas-powered.

I am not against EVs. If you want to buy one, God bless you, go buy one. It is just that the Federal Government should not be involved in it. What is the proper role of the Federal Government in buying your car? I submit it is not the proper role.

Despite literally paying folks to produce and buy these cars, overall market penetration has been minimal, sales are slowing, and consumer sentiment is moving away from EVs.

According to McKinsey & Company, the place where the last Secretary of Transportation worked, 46 percent of current battery electric vehicle owners are likely going back to internal combustion engine vehicles for their next purchase.

Consumer Reports found EVs to be associated with 79 percent more problems than conventional vehicles. It is absolutely clear that this program has failed, and we need to stop the forcing of Americans to transition to EVs, even though we think that they should and they don't want to.

It is long past time to finally bring an end to the green new scam and defund this misguided program, as well as all the other DOE loan programs that pick winners and losers based on politics rather than markets.

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

Madam Chair, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining.

Madam Chair, the gentlewoman from Ohio and I certainly agree that we shouldn't be forced to buy things for vehicles that we don't want. They are heavier. They are more technologically sensitive. I mean, you are essentially driving a computer around. Like the gentlewoman said, when it breaks, you are paying through the teeth for the whole thing. We certainly agree on that.

Yet, Madam Chair, that is all being forced on us by Washington, D.C. It comes out of this town. That requirement and those mandates come from this town.

To the 40,000 jobs that this supports, Americans are great at building cars. I don't care whether you drive a hybrid, an electric vehicle, or a traditionally powered vehicle, including diesel. That should be your business. Yet, this picks the winner and says: You are going to drive an electric vehicle, subsidizes it, subsidizes the manufacture of it, and then subsidizes the purchase of it.

Madam Chair, no one is subsidizing the purchase of my vehicle. It has 340,000 miles on it.

Even Elon--I talked to him, once a darling of the left, now much supported by the right--agrees that there should be no subsidies for these vehicles. He doesn't want subsidies on anything, and I agree with him on that.

As far as being in competition with China, unfortunately, China provides the vast majority of what makes these vehicles work. We are buying this stuff from our enemies. Let's buy it from Americans and let Americans determine what they want. What they have said is that they don't want EVs forced down their throats.

If they want to buy one, they can buy one. If they don't, then they can buy whatever they want. I am just saying that the government shouldn't be involved in paying for it. It is not fair to people who don't buy them and have to pay for them anyhow.

Madam Chair, I urge adoption, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, Federal loan guarantee programs transfer the risk of the loans to the taxpayer, pure and simple. As with any government subsidy, they reduce market discipline of loan recipients. You are not worried if you are getting a loan because the taxpayers are going to pay it. You don't care whether you produce anything or not.

The checkered past of the DOE's loan guarantee program demonstrates that it is not immune from these concerns. Among the most egregious examples of title 17 loan failures are Solyndra, Fisker Automotive, and A123 Systems. All three entities received hundreds of millions of dollars in loan guarantees, paid for by the taxpayer, before filing for bankruptcy and leaving the taxpayer holding the bag and getting nothing for it.

To add insult to injury, A123 Systems and Fisker Automotive were purchased by Chinese companies for pennies on the dollar. The taxpayers paid, and China was enriched, meaning the CCP was the ultimate beneficiary.

Madam Chair, this is crazy that we are even talking about this. What government supports another government that says that they are your enemy or that you are their enemy? China has said that we are their enemy. Yet, we are selling them, at pennies on the dollar, these taxpayer subsidized failures. It is outrageous.

Madam Chair, the so-called Inflation Reduction Act provides for approximately $11.7 billion for the Loan Program Office to issue new loans. This additional funding raises significant concerns that the program will, once again, be used as a piggy bank for energy sources and vehicles that the American people don't want and that drive up costs to consumers.

People will ask why everything costs so much. It is because we are subsidizing it. When you are guaranteeing the loan and the loan fails and you are on the hook for it, the American taxpayer doesn't know that they cosigned these loans, but they did.

Like I said, to add insult to injury, then China gets the place. It is unbelievable that we should even have this conversation, but we do.

Madam Chair, I urge adoption, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I certainly respect the chairman of the committee and his views, and I say this: Next year, when I offer this amendment, I will leave some room in there for administrative purposes to oversee the loans that are already out there. That is a fair argument.

Yet, I would say this, too: I am the proud Representative of Three Mile Island, which is going to be reopened without any government assistance. It is privately owned. They made a deal with Microsoft, which just proves the point.

The American taxpayer already pays the rates for electricity. They are already paying the investors for the investment in nuclear, and I am a great supporter of nuclear. I just don't think it should be the position of the Federal Government to take money out of people's pockets to pay for these things.

Madam Chair, maybe you live in an area where you are not serviced by nuclear power. Maybe you live in south central Pennsylvania where Three Mile Island is going to reopen, but all the money and all the power is going to go to Microsoft. Why should the consumer pay for that?

I am sorry. We have figured out how to do nuclear power and do it well in the United States of America. Quite honestly, probably one of the only times it is screwed up is when the Federal Government gets involved with it. I understand the chairman's position and I appreciate it.

Madam Chair, I still urge adoption of the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, I rise to offer this amendment to reduce funding for the Northern Border Regional Commission, or the NBRC, to fiscal year 2019 levels.

We are changing up here a little bit. We are looking for ways to reduce spending so the American people can keep their money, so we don't have to go further into debt. This is just another unnecessary, redundant program. Like the other regional commissions, the NBRC provides economic development assistance to projects in various States, in this case, Maine, New Hampshire, New York, and Vermont.

These commissions simply serve as a slush fund for parochial and regional projects with little to no national nexus. There is no Federal connection to these things.

Let's take a look at some of the funded programs taken from the 2022 annual report, which is the latest one available: $304,000 to purchase a sound system for an auditorium in New Hampshire, over $350,000 to expand rail yard capacity in upstate New York, another $350,000 for a sailing center on Lake Champlain.

Madam Chair, these projects are probably awesome. They are probably all great. Some of them ought to be funded by private investments and others should be funded by States or localities. Instead of pandering to special interest groups, we must pare back these wasteful programs that only serve as a boondoggle for a limited slice of Americans.

The sailing center on Lake Champlain sounds awesome, but most south central Pennsylvanians aren't going there, but they are paying for it. They get to pay.

Let's be clear: This amendment does not zero out the commission's funding. It simply reduces the funding to pre-pandemic, pre-Biden spending levels.

I think most people agree we are spending too much money. Let's start there and see how we can do better.

Madam Chair, I urge adoption, and I reserve the balance of my time.

I will get to that one later.

Madam Chair, I certainly appreciate the gentlewoman's arguments. I just say that there is a guy named ``Friedman'' who was traveling overseas. He came upon a public works project. Everybody was down in the ditch with shovels digging--many men digging with shovels, and he said to the person running the thing: What is with all of the shovels? Why don't you buy them some equipment so they can get this work done faster? The guy said: This produces a lot of jobs.

Mr. Friedman said: Why don't you give them all teaspoons instead and you can have even more jobs, or at least the job can last longer.

Of course, throwing money around produces jobs. As far as it being infrastructure, a sound system for an auditorium, while it is infrastructure, I don't think--many people think of infrastructure as roads, bridges, airports, ports, things like that, not a sound system or a sailing center. Those are nice things to have, but those are parochial. Those are local interests that should be provided at least by the State, not the people in the Federal Government. We have lost sight of the role of the Federal Government, which is why this amendment is in order.

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

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer this amendment to halve the funding for the Southwest Border Regional Commission, again trying to save some money by not spending money on redundant things.

Yet again, this commission serves as a duplicative slush fund for parochial interests, this time for projects in the southern border regions of Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas.

This commission only had its first chairman confirmed in 2022 and was only funded starting in fiscal year 2021, so it is relatively recent.

Look, I know folks on this side of the aisle care about the border. I imagine and hope that folks on the other side of the aisle care about the border. However, the answer to solving the border problems is to actually enforce our Nation's immigration laws, not to give $4 million to a commission that does not even appear to have an operational website.

By the way, this current administration, the Trump administration, is handling the border, so we don't need to waste another $4 million on this commission.

The commission received $250,000 in FY21 but is now being funded at $4 million in this bill for zero results.

Can anybody show or tell me what the results of this commission are?

Again, this amendment simply strikes this figure in half, so even though it is wasteful and useless generally speaking, I am only taking away half, which is still $2 million.

I don't care whether you are from Ohio or south central Pennsylvania, $2 million is a lot of money.

Mr. Chair, I urge support of the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, of course, all these States--Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas--are on the border. If we are funding this organization to deal with the border, I don't know what to say other than it is duplicative. If you disagree with that, I am not sure what to say to anybody about that.

I have been to each one of these States, and of course, people who own a bakery want a parking lot. I had a business, too, and I wanted trucks and employees, and I needed tools. Do you know what I didn't do? I didn't go to the Federal Government for that. I sucked it up and paid into my business from the money that I made conducting my business, and I grew my business. That is America, not calling on the Federal Government to send a couple of million dollars because I want to make things nice for myself. We get it. We hope all Americans can do great things and make it nice for themselves.

Our government is out of money. It is broke, $37 trillion and climbing. We don't have any money. All this is borrowed money, Mr. Chairman. Every cent of it is borrowed. Who borrows money to do things they don't need to do that somebody else in the government is already doing?

Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment to reduce funding for the Southeast Crescent Regional Commission, the SCRC, to fiscal year 2019, so not zeroing it out, just taking it back to prepandemic levels, so we can try to afford some of the stuff that we are borrowing money, again, to pay for.

Again, this commission serves as a duplicative slush fund for parochial interests. People say: Where does all of my tax money go? Here is another example. This time, it is for projects in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia.

Again, many of these projects are worthy. The question is, should the Federal Government be paying for them, especially when the Federal Government doesn't have any money? The commission operates duplicative programs that are better addressed at the State and local levels.

From 2010 to 2020, the SCRC received $250,000 annually, all without having an appointed Federal co-chair. Just think about that. I know $250,000 is nothing around this place, but there was nobody at the wheel that whole time. That number has now ballooned to a whopping $16.25 million in this bill.

There is absolutely no reason for that dramatic increase in funding, especially when funding projects with no national nexus, like electric vehicle charging stations, stormwater management, and green infrastructure, according to their own 2023-2027 strategic plan.

There is a charging station down the street from me. The owner of the place put it in. He probably got money from the Federal Government. That is probably why he did it. He probably wouldn't have done it on his own. I have to pay for it. How is it fair to me? I don't own an electric vehicle. A lot of people don't own one, yet we are paying for this one.

Our constituents simply do not have the money for these projects that have no impact on their lives because they don't live there. In many cases, it drives up inflationary spending, which is the $37 trillion I keep referencing.

Every time we borrow money here, it makes everybody else's prices go up. We have to quit borrowing it, especially to pay for things that we can't afford, don't need, and somebody else is already doing.

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

Mr. Chair, I certainly thank the gentlewoman for her viewpoints and comments. I have lived in Florida and Georgia--they are wonderful States--and traveled through all the rest.

I have an awesome mother who helped me in that business and was a part of it. I don't know my father. That is American ingenuity. That is striving even against all odds, like the government, your taxes, your insurance, your payroll, your receivables. We have done it, and we did it without the help of the Federal Government. Many people want to do it. Some people get help from the Federal Government. It is unfair to those who do not.

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

Madam Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call 199.

Mr. Speaker, I am honored to recognize Dr. Hagir Elsheikh, a distinguished resident of the 10th Congressional District, for her exemplary public service, charitable leadership, and extraordinary contributions to healthcare and autism advocacy within the Commonwealth and the Nation. Dr. Elsheikh is the Chairwoman and CEO of Hagir Network and the founder of multiple mission-driven organizations, including Kareem's Mission Autism Support Center, Tomorrow's Smile Inc., HSE Staffing Agency LLC, Autism Care Solutions LLC, and KMission TV LLC.

A serial entrepreneur, nurse, educator, and a former Sudanese refugee who survived political torture and violence, Dr. Elsheikh came to Pennsylvania in 2001, where she rebuilt her life and impacted thousands through programs that serve children with autism, train and employ caregivers, and create educational media. She also mentors women and youth throughout Pennsylvania in leadership, business, and civic engagement.

Dr. Elsheikh has earned awards such as the 2025 Globe St. Humanitarian Woman of Influence Honoree, Honorary Doctor of Humane Letters from Central Penn College, 2024 YWCA Carolyne L. Smith Legacy Award Recipient, 2024 Harambee Award, Life Esteem Inc., Pennsylvania Senate Citation Honoree, and her work was featured on France 24, BBC, WITF, ABC, AlhurraTV, and VOA. Her memoir, Through Tragedy and Triumph: A Life Well Traveled, supports survivor scholarships and peacebuilding initiatives.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the 10th Congressional District, I am honored to recognize Dr. Hagir Elsheikh as a courageous leader, international diplomat, and philanthropist for her exceptional service to the Citizens of Pennsylvania, and for her tireless efforts to build love and compassion into every sector she touches, from healthcare to charity. Her life stands as a model of resilience, passion, and public service.

Mr. Speaker, I'm honored to recognize Corporal (Cpl) George Ivanoff, United States Marine Corps (USMC), on the auspicious occasion of his 100th Birthday on July 24, 2025.

Cpl Ivanoff, born in Harrisburg in 1925, left Harrisburg Catholic High School early to answer the call of duty to our Country by joining the USMC in 1943. He served with valor in the Pacific Theatre on the islands of Peleliu and Okinawa, where he was twice awarded the Purple Heart medal for wounds suffered in combat. On the occasion when his Corpsman was wounded, Cpl Ivanoff attempted nobly to evacuate him, but both were struck by enemy mortar fire that ultimately killed his Corpsman and forced his own medical evacuation.

Once healed from his wounds, Cpl Ivanoff rejoined his unit in the pivotal battle of Okinawa, where he fought valiantly for 45 days. While advancing on the enemy position, incoming fire forced him to take cover in an artillery shell hole. Looking out to spot the enemy, he was shot through the face. Unconscious for a time, he woke to feel a gaping hole in his face. Confronted with the thought of imminent death, he prayed to the Lord for forgiveness, and lost consciousness--seemingly for the last time. To his surprise, he regained consciousness again. Spotting a couple fellow Marines taking cover behind rocks from the same sniper who had shot him, Cpl Ivanoff asked for a rifle, offering to risk his life to take the sniper out; but they forced him away.

He was carried on a stretcher to the hospital tent where he fully expected to die. He was given Last Rites by the Company Chaplain and left by himself. Presumed dead by the doctors and nurses, he was not tended to. Eventually, one doctor said ``Hey, this guy is still alive!'' Miraculously, after his wounds were addressed and he was stabilized, he not only survived, but fully recovered.

Cpl Ivanoff returned home a hero. He finished his education at Harrisburg Catholic High School and began his civilian career at the Post Office. He became an accomplished amateur golfer, earning the 1968 Harrisburg Championship, and still golfs at 100 years young.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Citizens of the 10th Congressional District and a grateful Nation, I'm honored, humbled, and privileged to recognize United States Marine Corps Corporal George Ivanoff on his 100th Birthday. I wish him continued great health, love, and happiness in his future adventures, and continued Godspeed. For his selfless, honorable, and tireless service to our great United States of America, ``Thank You'' will never be enough. He is the standard by which we all should be judged.

Mr. Speaker, evidently, this is what gutting Medicaid looks like. You see it goes up 25 percent over 10 years. This only happens in Washington, D.C.

Mr. Speaker, the difference between the last administration and the current one is the last administration restricted the States from cleaning up the Medicaid rolls and verifying eligibility. I don't know what coalition in the House of Representatives is for that. Apparently, it is the same one that is for over $100 billion lost annually to improper payments.

There is a coalition here, Mr. Speaker, that wants to take tax dollars and pay $100 billion, losing it annually to improper payments. What we are asking the States to do is verify eligibility

and issue payments to protect people in poverty, pregnant women, the disabled, and children.

Mr. Speaker, what the Republican plan is doing is saving Medicare for the people it was intended to be there for.

Mr. Speaker, I'm honored to recognize Mr. Brian Wisler on his well-earned retirement after 35 years.

Mr. Wisler was hired by the Central York School District in 1990 as an elementary physical education teacher--where he shortly after, in May of 1991 was the creator of the Central York School District Elementary Track meet--which was later renamed in honor of long-time principal Jefferey Fox (who supported the initiative), to the Jefferey Fox Track Meet. Starting with just five events the track meet has grown to now include myriad events including dozens of runs, javelin throws, high jump, long jump, tug of war, softball and foxtail throws and others--that sometimes feature entire classrooms on the field.

The incredible day of sportsmanship directed by Mr. Wisler has positively impacted thousands of students over the years--proving his dedication to the students of North Hills and Sinking Springs elementary schools. After 35 years of teaching and engaging students, and 33 track meets, Mr. Wisler's service sets the standard by which we should all be judged.

Mr. Speaker, I'm privileged and honored to recognize Mr. Brian Wisler on his retirement. I wish him and all his students Godspeed on their future adventures.

Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 117.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for allowing this bill to come to the floor.

Mr. Speaker, I am here today to urge support of and for H.R. 1540, the Falun Gong Protection Act, a bill I have introduced to confront one of the most egregious, barbaric, and medieval human rights atrocities of our current time.

As we stand on the precipice of this vote, I ask you to join me in taking a stand against the Chinese Communist Party's systematic persecution of Falun Gong practitioners.

Since the early 1990s, the Falun Gong, a spiritual practice rooted in the principles of truth, compassion, and tolerance, has been targeted by the Chinese Communist Party. By 1999, Mr. Speaker, an estimated 70 million to 100 million people, roughly 5 to 7 percent of China's population, were practicing Falun Gong.

This popularity triggered a brutal response from the CCP, unleashing a campaign of illegal detentions, forced labor, torture, and most horrifically, forced organ harvesting, a practice that amounts to mass murder.

On July 20, 1999, the CCP detained hundreds of thousands of Falun Gong practitioners and banned their practice outright. Since then, the persecution has only intensified.

Multiple studies, including the 2020 report from the Independent Tribunal Into Forced Organ Harvesting, have exposed an incomprehensible gap between the number of organ transplants performed in China and the number of registered donors.

Mr. Speaker, the math simply doesn't add up, and we all know why.

Just think about it: An independent tribunal into forced organ harvesting literally had to be set up to look into this because China is a closed society. Regardless of what people might think because we are allowed to travel to China, they are not showing you this part.

The CCP's secrecy ensures that China remains closed to scrutiny, but the evidence is clear: Falun Gong practitioners are the primary victims of this barbaric organ harvesting system.

The tribunal's findings are staggering. They concluded that forced organ harvesting has been committed for years on a massive scale with Falun Gong practitioners as the main source.

The report states that the CCP and its leaders have actively incited the persecution, imprisonment, murder, torture, and humiliation of these individuals solely to eradicate their beliefs. This is not just a violation of human rights; it is a crime against humanity.

Now, far away in the United States, many in the organ transplant community are unaware of China's illicit practices, shielded by the CCP's repressive control of information and global propaganda, but the truth is undeniable: The Chinese Communist Party has built an infrastructure to persecute millions of not only Falun Gong practitioners but also Uyghurs, Tibetans, Christians, and others it deems a threat.

The CCP's utter disregard for human life shocks the conscience. This barbaric practice must end, and it must end now.

H.R. 1540 is a historic step forward, the first binding commitment by Congress to take decisive legal action against the persecution and forced organ harvesting of Falun Gong practitioners.

This bill imposes sanctions on those who would participate in or facilitate forced organ harvesting in China. It directs the Secretary of State to investigate whether the CCP's actions constitute crimes against humanity or genocide and to report on China's organ transplant policies. It also establishes U.S. policy to reject any cooperation with the PRC's illicit organ transplant industry while the CCP remains in power.

Mr. Speaker, this bill paves the way for accountability, sanctions, punishment, and acknowledgement of those complicit in these atrocities.

The Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Patronis). The time of the gentleman has expired.

The United States cannot continue to stand idly by. We must use our authority. We must use our position as leaders in the world to curb these practices and send a clear message to everybody that not only will we not tolerate this assault on human dignity, on humanity itself, but that no country, no people should.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a vote in favor of H.R. 1540. Let us stand together not just for Falun Gong practitioners but for the millions suffering under the CCP's oppression and tyranny. Let us affirm that the United States will always champion truth, compassion, and tolerance.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chair, again, for bringing the bill to the floor.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 9) authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the National Peace Officers Memorial Service and the National Honor Guard and Pipe Band Exhibition.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material into the Record on H. Con. Res. 9.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to have introduced this bipartisan resolution along with the Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management Subcommittee Ranking Member Greg Stanton of Arizona.

This resolution authorizes the use of these Capitol Grounds for the 44th Annual Peace Officers' Memorial event to honor the law enforcement officers who died in the line of duty in 2024.

According to the Fraternal Order of Police, last year, there were 342 on-duty officers who were shot, 50 of whom were killed.

In February of this year, tragedy occurred in the district I am honored to represent when multiple police officers were shot while in the line of duty. One, Officer Andrew Duarte of the West York Borough Police Department, made the ultimate sacrifice. Mr. Speaker, he was only 30 years old.

Police officers across the country put their lives on the line every single day to keep us safe. Every day that they go out, they put their uniforms on and leave their families, and they don't know what they are going to run into. Every day can be a boring day where nothing happens. They can go through a whole career that way, but they never know and their families never know. Every single day, they are prepared. They are ready to give everything as a sacrifice to their communities to make sure that safety is preserved.

That is why I and my friend, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stanton), are extremely honored to once again be able to sponsor this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I urge support of this resolution, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, like my friend, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stanton), implied, these are heartbreaking, heart-wrenching stories about real people. Oftentimes, in our country, people look for heroes. They look to sporting fields. They look to pop culture for their heroes, but their heroes walk right among them, right in their own communities every single day, again, being willing when they put on that uniform, when they sign up, to say, ``I will give all for my community,'' running to the sound of the gun, running to the danger, unlike most other people whose senses, whose sensibilities, tell them to go the other way.

This is the smallest thing we can do to acknowledge the enormous sacrifice that law enforcement makes every single day in our community, to acknowledge that sacrifice and to honor those heroes who are near and far.

In closing, I reiterate my support for H. Con. Res. 9, which will honor the fallen men and women serving our Nation as law enforcement officers.

Mr. Speaker, I urge support of this resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, this past Saturday, February 22, 2025, beautiful York County, Pennsylvania, was shaken by a horrific act of violence.

Officer Andrew Duarte of the West York Borough Police Department was killed in the line of duty while responding to an active shooter at UPMC Memorial hospital at York, which also included a hostage situation that wounded five other individuals.

Officer Duarte demonstrated extraordinary courage, with no regard for his own personal safety, as he ran to the sounds of the guns and as he put himself in harm's way to protect others. He paid the ultimate price to protect the innocent.

This serves as yet another stark reminder of the selfless and tireless dedication of our law enforcement officers who put their lives on the line each day to keep us safe.

On Monday, I spoke to the chief, Chief Millsaps, who told me that Officer Duarte's last act, as he laid dying and bleeding out, was to pull one of his injured fellow officers to safety and behind the line of fire. ``Thank you'' will never be enough.

As we mourn this breathtaking loss, we pray for Officer Duarte and extend our deepest condolences to his family, fellow officers, loved ones, and all who were fortunate enough to have crossed his path.

May his bravery remain at the forefront and his legacy endure. His dedication to duty, tireless service, and selfless sacrifice set the standard by which we should all be judged. Let us honor him by remembering the immense price of safety and peace.

May God bless Andrew.

At this time, I ask the House to observe a moment of silence.