Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, on June 16, the Northwest Youth Corps will celebrate its 40th anniversary. This program, which is headquartered in my district, is the largest Youth Conservation Corps program in the Northwest. For over four decades, it has given over 27,000 teenagers and young adults the opportunity to participate in conservation stewardship in Oregon, Idaho, and Washington State.

These teenagers and young adults work to improve our lands and waters, which helps to reduce the potential for catastrophic wildfires and maintain our outdoor recreational assets.

The Northwest Youth Corps, which is well known nationally for its innovation and quality, was recently awarded $12 million from the Inflation Reduction Act to improve urban tree canopies and make urban forests more resilient to climate change across the Northwest.

I am proud to celebrate the Northwest Youth Corps on their anniversary and look forward to their continued contributions in our local communities and our forests for years to come.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I mistakenly voted Yea on Roll Call No. 202, passage of H. Res. 1210, the Resolution ``Condemning the Biden border crisis and the tremendous burdens law enforcement officers face as a result.''

I intended to vote Nay, as I've consistently done on similar politically-charged, non-binding resolutions that play politics instead of work to achieve a bipartisan solution to the border. I regret the error.

Mr. Speaker, last week I voted against H.R. 7109. This is yet

another performative messaging bill brought by House Republicans. It would add a citizenship question in the census and then require congressional districts to be drawn based on the number of self- identified citizens.

Previously in 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected an attempt to add a citizenship question to the census. The fact is House Republicans want to use this bill to redraw congressional districts to their advantage.

It's shameful that House Republicans continue to waste time pushing this unconstitutional bill as part of their nonsense conspiracy theory that non-citizens are voting in federal elections.

Time and time again, post-election reviews have proven that our elections are secure and voter fraud is exceedingly rare. This bill is attempting to solve a problem that doesn't exist, all for political games.

Even more concerning is the fact that actions like this undermine the public's confidence in our elections. This is a grave and dangerous issue. Elections are the foundation of our democracy, and the U.S. House of Representatives should be protecting the voice and vote of every American.

Mr. Speaker, last week I mistakenly voted Yea on Roll Call No. 191, passage of H.R. 2925, the Mining Regulatory Clarity Act of 2024. I intended to vote Nay. I regret the error.

I oppose H.R. 2925 and I voted against this legislation on February 6, 2024 in the House Natural Resources Committee.

Mr. Speaker, on Monday, April 15, I will vote No on H.R. 5921, the No Financing for Iran Act. While I agree with the bill's stated goal of preventing the Iranian government from accessing the U.S. financial system, the bill goes much further than that and has several issues.

Unfortunately, H.R. 5921 as written would likely inflict significant harm on small businesses in Oregon and across the country. The bill includes provisions to prevent the Export-Import Bank of the U.S. (Exlm Bank) from financing projects associated with Iran's government. However, under current U.S. policy, Exlm is already prohibited from doing business with the government of Iran and Iran-related sanctioned persons (as are all U.S. government entities and U.S. persons).

As Ranking Member Waters has noted, H.R. 5921's duplicative provisions will impose overly burdensome requirements on the Exlm Bank, which would dramatically increase the cost, processing time, and resources needed to review transactions and help American small businesses. The bill would also put American small businesses at a disadvantage to foreign competitors when exporting their goods abroad.

Given my own work with the Exlm Bank before holding elected office, I know how reliant small businesses engaging in international trade in Oregon and across the country are on the services provided. I cannot support legislation that undermines the Exlm Bank's ability to serve American businesses.

In addition, the bill seeks to prevent Iran from accessing Special Drawing Rights (SDRs)--an international reserve asset that many developing countries around the world rely on--through the International Monetary Fund (IMF). However, Iran is already prevented from having access to SDRs thanks to current U.S. sanctions, meaning this bill is unnecessary.

In practice, the bill would actually prevent increases of SDRs to all countries. This is because the IMF process for approving SDR distributions is a simple up-or-down vote on whether there should be a distribution of SDRs to all IMF member countries--there is no avenue at the IMF for SDR votes on individual member countries. As a result, this bill would likely cause significant hardship for many developing IMF member countries around the world.

The U.S. Treasury Department is also opposed to these provisions, stating that this bill would deny the IMF and U.S. Treasury ``a tool for promptly responding to global economic crises and preventing spillovers to the U.S. economy.''

Mr. Speaker, I will vote in support of H. Res. 883, a non-binding resolution that condemns the use of a slogan that has been used by some individuals and groups for antisemitic purposes, including as a rallying cry to deny the right to self-determination of the Jewish people or even to eliminate the State of Israel from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.

I believe the antisemitic use of this slogan should rightfully be condemned. For example, this slogan has been widely used by terrorist entities--including Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah--to encourage future attacks on Israel, the Jewish community and Jewish institutions. With antisemitism and antisemitic attacks on the rise in the U.S. and around the world, we must swiftly condemn antisemitism in all its forms.

However, this resolution should have been written better. For example, H. Res. 883, fails to acknowledge that some who use the phrase do so to advocate for Palestinian liberation and equality, and others-- including some members of the Jewish community--use the phrase to advocate for an end to the Israeli control and annexation of the West Bank and Gaza. The resolution should have noted that this slogan is not always intended to be used as antisemitic and not all who use the phrase are antisemitic.

As with other resolutions this Congress, H. Res. 883 also fails to condemn antisemitic acts from those on the far-right, including white nationalists who have increasingly promoted antisemitic conspiracy theories and have threatened the lives and livelihoods of Jewish Americans.

H. Res. 883 also treats the slogan ``from the river to the sea'' as one-sided. However, this phrase has also been used by right-wing Israelis--including by Prime Minister Netanyahu himself in January--to deny the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people.

Let me be clear: I believe that both Israelis and Palestinians have a right to their own state. That's why I strongly support a two-state solution where Israelis and Palestinians recognize each other's right to live in peace and have prosperity.

I also unequivocally condemn all forms of antisemitism, and I am appalled by the significant rise in antisemitism we've seen in recent years and especially after Hamas's October 7th terrorist attacks on Israel. If the House Republican majority were serious about tackling antisemitism, they would support President Biden's National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism, would quit trying to defund the Office of Civil Rights for Title VI enforcement which protects Jewish students, and would increase funding for the High-Risk Nonprofit Grant Program to secure Jewish institutions as a start. I urge House Republicans to prioritize real action to combat hate, rather than continue to waste time and resources on non-binding resolutions.

That's why I've cosponsored legislation that thoughtfully and powerfully condemns the rise of antisemitism in the United States and calls on Congress to support the above substantive actions to tackle antisemitism, which congressional Republicans have so far refused to do.

Mr. Speaker, I will vote in opposition to H.R. 7521, the so-called ``Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act.'' This bill would force the sale of the social media application TikTok, whose parent company ByteDance is based in China.

Let me be clear: I share the national security concerns of many that the Chinese government is collecting Americans' personal data via TikTok. However, I believe H.R. 7521 is an inadequate proposal that unconstitutionally singles out a specific company, setting a dangerous precedent. Additionally, by restricting access to a social media application, I believe this bill threatens Americans' constitutional rights to free speech, expression and a free press.

I also believe the bill's provisions to force ByteDance to divest from TikTok within 180 days are unrealistic. In reality, a sale of this magnitude could trigger an antitrust acquisition review in the United States--a process that could take up to a year or longer. During this period, TikTok users in the U.S. could lose access to the app.

This bill also ignores the fact that the Chinese government and other public and private entities around the world--including the U.S. government--are still able to purchase Americans' private information from third-party brokers. That's why I support comprehensive privacy reforms to protect Americans' constitutional right to privacy and close the data broker loophole.

The United States has rightfully criticized other countries for infringing on the rights of their own citizens by restricting free speech and censoring access to the internet. However, H.R. 7521's restriction of Americans' free speech and singling out of one company makes us no better than our adversaries, and it invites reciprocal attacks from other countries on U.S.-based companies.

We must not forget that the U.S. government also engages in what I strongly believe to be unconstitutional surveillance and collection of Americans' personal data and communications. If TikTok were sold to a U.S.-based company, I'm not convinced that American users' private data would be secure.

Instead of rushing a vote on a bill that was written behind closed doors without proper debate, Congress should pass comprehensive data privacy and security reform legislation that protects Americans from unconstitutional data collection by all companies, governments, and digital applications--not just one.

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, on Friday, March 8, 2024, I was unavoidably detained and missed a Roll Call vote. Had I been present, I would have voted: YEA on Roll Call No. 73.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to mark the retirement of the National Transportation Safety Board's (NTSB's) ``Most Wanted List'' of Transportation Safety Improvements.

Many of us have interacted with the NTSB in our own communities in the wake of transportation tragedies and know they are well-regarded for their world-class crash and accident investigations.

Since 1990, the Most Wanted List has put a focus on needed transportation safety improvements across all modes of transportation, impacting communities across the country. It was introduced as a communications tool--before today's 24-hour news cycle and relentless social media--helping the NTSB focus its advocacy messages to policymakers. In its time, it was phenomenally effective.

Since the creation of the List in 1990, the NTSB successfully promoted and saw significant policy changes that led to several transportation safety wins, including:

Positive Train Control: legislation requiring full implementation of PTC on tracks with regularly scheduled intercity or commuter passenger rail service and Class I railroad main lines carrying poison- or toxic- by-inhalation hazardous materials.

Fuel Tank Safety: implementation of safety recommendations on fuel tank inerting systems and enactment of a related FAA final rule.

Occupant Protection:

Child passenger safety laws requiring booster seat use and requiring that children ride, properly restrained by a child car seat or seat belt, in the back seat.

Crashworthiness improvements across all modes, including the adoption of crash-resistant fuel tanks in helicopters.

Seat belt laws--requiring that all occupants in all vehicles equipped with safety belts use them.

Recreational Boating: implementation of alcohol-impaired boating laws, requirements for personal flotation devices, and requirements for boater education.

Additional areas of safety improvement that the Most Wanted List addressed include human fatigue, runway safety, alcohol and drug impairment, the shipment of hazardous materials, rail tank car safety, as well as pipeline leak detection and mitigation.

I also want to take a moment to acknowledge the agency's thorough and professional investigations that have led to safety recommendations which prevented future tragedies.

America's transportation industry is among the safest in the world, and the NTSB is its conscience. But unlike Congress, the agency can only recommend, not require or implement these changes. For almost 35 years, the ``Most Wanted List'' focused the agency's advocacy efforts that led to the enactment of new safety policies.

The NTSB feels now is the moment to change with the times. Its Board is calling for a more nimble safety advocacy program, freed from the structure of a formal list.

As they embark on that change, I want to join the Board and the agency in celebrating the legacy of the ``Most Wanted List'' on the occasion of its retirement. It has served the nation well, and it has helped save many American lives.

Madam Speaker, today I rise in strong opposition to H.J. Res. 98 which would repeal the National Labor Relations Board joint employer standard.

Under President Biden, this rule was issued to protect workers' rights. Unfortunately, House Republicans want to repeal this strong standard. Today, I have heard a lot of misleading claims about this joint employer standard.

Simply put, this issue is about whether or not employers have to come to the bargaining table where the employer controls the means and manner of the workers' employment.

As a member of the Congressional Labor Caucus and someone who has spent 25 years in the private sector putting food on the table for my family, I believe that when workers come to bargain over their wages and working conditions, then those employers who do control the means and manner of workers' employment--and that is a standard by which we determine whether someone is a direct employee or an independent contractor--should be at the bargaining table as required by law.

When workers do better, employers do better, and our country does better.

This is exactly what the Biden administration's joint employer rule does.

What it doesn't do is impact the ability to utilize independent contractors when appropriate, and, as has been mentioned today, no franchisee has ever been categorized as a joint employer. This is more misinformation used to undermine the ability of workers to organize and bargain for better wages, hours, and working conditions.

This strong standard overturns the Trump administration's rule, and it cracks down on corporations that outsource jobs and use independent contractors to walk away from their duties as an employer creating an unlevel playing field and unfair competition for those employers who are willing to provide fair wages, hours, and safe working conditions for their workers as per the letter of the law.

In seeking to overturn the NLRB's new and stronger joint employer standard, House Republicans are working to help bad employers avoid their responsibility to employees and are undermining workers across this country.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against this antiworker resolution.

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I was unavoidably detained and missed some Roll Call votes during the first session of the 118th Congress. Had I been present, I would have voted: YEA on Roll Call No. 127; YEA on Roll Call No. 144; YEA on Roll Call No. 299; NAY on Roll Call No. 593; NAY on Roll Call No. 632; NAY on Roll Call No. 633; NAY on Roll Call No. 634; and NAY on Roll Call No. 637.

Mr. Speaker, last week, I voted in favor of H.R. 1147, the Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act, which would allow schools the option of serving whole and 2% unflavored and flavored milk.

Under current federal regulations, schools that participate in the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) can only serve low-fat or fat-free milk. H.R. 1147 would amend current regulations to allow schools to offer a wider range of dairy milk options, helping to ensure that students have freedom of choice. It would also help reduce the likelihood of students throwing out milk and missing out on beneficial nutrients.

While I supported H.R. 1147, it was not perfect. I believe this legislation should have included options for children who cannot or choose not to drink dairy milk due to dietary, religious or personal reasons. Unfortunately, House Republican leadership did not allow for any amendments to be considered that would have extended freedom of choice for non-dairy beverage options.

That's why I'm a cosponsor of H.R. 1619, the Addressing Digestive Distress in Stomachs of Our Youth (ADD SOY) Act, which would require schools to provide non-dairy beverage substitutes upon request of a student or parent/guardian and allow the U.S. Department of Agriculture to reimburse schools for providing non-dairy options. This issue is especially important for students who experience lactose intolerance, which disproportionately affects communities of color.

Should the Senate take up H.R. 1147, I urge them to include the ADD SOY Act or similar provisions to allow for non-dairy options and broader freedom of choice for students. H.R. 1147 takes an important first step, but we must ensure that freedom of choice applies to all.

Mr. Speaker, last week I voted No on H. Res. 927, a resolution that purports to condemn antisemitism on college campuses. Several of my Jewish colleagues voted against this resolution as well.

I strongly agree that Congress must condemn all forms of antisemitism, including on college campuses. Since Hamas's horrific October 7th attacks on Israel, the U.S. House of Representatives has voted in favor of several resolutions condemning antisemitism on college campuses and throughout the world, multiple of which I've supported and cosponsored. However, this latest resolution, H. Res. 927, is yet another disingenuous resolution that weaponizes the real scourge of antisemitism, uses Jewish people as pawns to play partisan political games, and represents another attack in the extreme right- wing's war on higher education. For this reason, I could not support the resolution.

Among other items, H. Res. 927 calls on specific college presidents to resign, referencing a made-for-TV congressional hearing orchestrated by congressional Republicans last week. I believe it is inappropriate for Congress to inject itself into leadership and personnel decisions at colleges and universities. Doing so creates a slippery slope of Congress meddling in local decisions that the federal government should not be involved in.

H. Res. 927 also appears to be another attempt to police and silence the free speech of Americans on college campuses. Again, while some demonstrators on college campuses have disturbingly engaged in antisemitic actions that should rightfully be condemned. H. Res. 927 is too broad.

H. Res. 927 also fails to condemn antisemitic acts from those on the far right, including white nationalists who have increasingly promoted antisemitic conspiracy theories and have threatened the lives and livelihoods of Jewish Americans. The lead sponsor of H. Res. 927 has also publicly engaged in antisemitic tropes in the past, including the disgusting ``great replacement theory.'' This resolution appears to be an attempt to cover up extremist right-wing Republicans' flirtation with antisemitic ideology, as well as their support for antisemitic public figures.

Let me be clear: I unequivocally condemn all forms of antisemitism, and I am appalled by the significant rise in antisemitism we've seen on college campuses in recent weeks. Many Jewish college students and faculty do not feel safe on campus, and many Jewish Americans feel unsafe in public. This is absolutely unacceptable. The university presidents who participated in last week's congressional hearing gave insufficient and appalling answers relating to campus speech calling for the genocide of Jewish people. I'm glad that they've since apologized for their statements, and I encourage other colleges not to make the same mistake these presidents did.

However, if the House Republican majority were serious about tackling antisemitism, they would support President Biden's National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism, would quit trying to defund the Office of Civil Rights for Title VI enforcement which protects Jewish students and would increase funding for the High-Risk Nonprofit Grant Program to secure Jewish institutions as a start.

That's why I've cosponsored H. Res. 927, introduced by Representatives Nadler, Raskin, and Goldman. H. Res. 927 thoughtfully and powerfully condemns the rise of antisemitism in the United States-- including on college campuses--and calls on Congress to support the above substantive actions to tackle antisemitism, which congressional Republicans have so far refused to do. I call on my congressional Republican colleagues to put politics aside and work in a bipartisan way to substantively tackle antisemitism.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I voted in favor of H.R. 5378, the Lower Costs, More Transparency Act, which passed the House with a bipartisan vote of 320-71.

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I was unavoidably detained and missed rollcall No. 712 today. I strongly support S. 788, and had I been present I would have voted ``yea.''