Ed Case

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, each year our country recognizes October as Filipino American History Month, a time for all Americans to celebrate the incredible past, present and future of our fellow citizens whose heritage lies in the great country of the Philippines. I am especially humbled to do so as the Representative of Hawai`i's First Congressional District, where some 190,000 Filipino Americans live, more than any other of our 435 districts throughout the country. With Hawai`i's Second Congressional District that has the second largest Filipino Americans population at about 180,000, our Fil-Am community in Hawai`i stands at 370,000. In total, fully a quarter of all Hawai`i residents are Filipino Americans, by far the largest percentage of any state or territory. We observe Filipino American History Month in October because the first recorded arrival of Filipinos in the continental United States took place on October 18, 1587, when the ``Luzones Indios'' came ashore from the Manila-built galleon Nuestra Senora de Esperanza in Morro Bay, California. Today, across the country Filipino Americans have a population of approximately 4,400,000 and are the third largest Asian American and Pacific Islander group in the United States. Many of the early Filipino immigrants were young men who came to the United States seeking a better life. Most found work in Hawai`i, California, Washington, and Alaska. This first generation of Filipino immigrants are commonly referred to as the Manong generation (Ilocano for first-born male). They worked mostly physically demanding jobs in tough conditions for very little pay. Over the years, they fought against discrimination, found a way forward and made a better future for themselves and their future generations. They became respected members of communities throughout our nation. The history of the Fil-Am community in Hawai`i is particularly rich and echoes the national story. In 1906, the first fifteen sakada contract laborers arrived in Honolulu from the Philippines aboard the SS Doric, marking the first sustained immigration into our country and the humble beginnings of Fil-Ams in Hawai`i. These first immigrants, those that followed and the subsequent generations eventually became trailblazers in politics and government, the military, business and entrepreneurship, journalism, popular culture, music and the arts and more. 1. Domingo Los Banos was Hawai`i's first Filipino American school principal and a loyal veteran of the 1st Filipino Infantry Regiment that fought in the Philippines during World War II. 2. Carolina Dizon Wong broke a glass ceiling when she obtained an M.D. degree and became the first Filipino American to start a medical practice in Hawai`i in 1952. 3. Peter Aduja became the first Fil-Am elected to public office in the United States when he was elected to the Hawai`i Territorial House of Representatives in 1954. 4. Ines Cayaban was the first Filipino American graduate of the School of Public Health, Nursing and Social Work at the University of Hawai`i. She received the prestigious Jefferson Award in 1986 for her service. 5. In 1994, Ben Cayetano was elected the Governor of Hawai`i, becoming the first Filipino American governor of a state in our union. 6. In 2019, Roy Macaraeg became the first Fil-Am to become a general officer in the history of Hawai`i's citizen soldier ranks. In Hawai`i, we also regularly honor the over 250,000 Filipinos who answered the call to protect and defend America and the Philippines in the Pacific theater. In 2016, President Obama signed into law the Filipino Veterans of World War II Congressional Gold Medal Act to bestow Congress's highest honor upon those veterans. With my colleagues in the House, I have introduced our Filipino Veterans Family Reunification Act, which seeks to reunite World War II Filipino soldiers with their children, so that we can honor those living in our community who fought to protect the free and open Indo-Pacific that we have today. Each and all of these lives of achievement are but a small sampling of a broader community that has achieved so much and contributed so much to the rich fabric of our country. And the story of Filipino Americans is still in its early chapters. This is why it is important that we take the time to recognize groups like Filipino Americans. The story of Filipino Americans, and to an extent, the stories of all of our various ethnic groups, is the story of America. From very humble beginnings, they have risen through hard work, sacrifice, commitment to advancing the next generations and mutual support to achieve so much already. That well describes Filipino Americans overall--embracing the responsibilities and opportunities of America while honoring and treasuring the rich heritage of their ancestral homeland. All of this is why I joined my friends and colleagues Congresswoman Young Kim, Congressman Bobby Scott, Congresswoman Michelle Steel and others in introducing this bipartisan resolution to express support for the designation of October as Filipino American History Month. We urge our colleagues' support to promote an ongoing appreciation of the contributions of Filipino Americans to our country and the rich diversity of our Nation. To Fil-Ams everywhere, ``Maraming Salamat Po'' and ``Dios ti Agngina''--congratulations. I truly look forward to partnering with them on their next proud chapters.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 6965, the Visit America Act. U.S. travel and tourism is one of our country's core industries. Pre- COVID, it generated some $2.6 trillion in annual economic output, was one of our largest export and service industries, and supported fully 1 in 10 U.S. jobs. In many States, my own Hawaii being a prime example, it is our leading industry. But COVID taught us in spades how fragile this economic and jobs generator can be. Very frankly, it has never earned full respect in terms of Federal Government attention, focus, and support, given its prominence. U.S. travel and tourism needs and deserves far more. This bill, in which I am joined by the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Titus), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis), our House Travel and Tourism Caucus, and other colleagues, in addition to all aspects of the industry, is a necessary start on a new chapter through a coordinated, high-level Federal effort, including a 10-year travel and tourism strategy and finally, finally, like other countries, an Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Travel and Tourism. Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge its passage.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the question that this bill addresses is whether the private, unregistered ownership and exploitation of big cats, meaning lions, tigers, leopards, jaguars, cougars, and hybrids of them should continue considering significant and real animal welfare, public safety, and law enforcement safety concerns. H.R. 263, the Big Cat Public Safety Act says no, and would end the ownership of big cats as private pets and prohibit exhibitors from allowing public contact with big cats, including cubs. This bill is a culmination of over a decade of bipartisan effort. The Big Cat Public Safety Act, in one form or another, has been introduced by, cosponsored by, and generally supported by Republicans and Democrats alike for well over a decade. Since the 112th Congress, Big Cats have garnered 933 bipartisan cosponsors. It was initially introduced by three different Republicans over a number of Congresses, as well as the current Democratic sponsor. We have continued to refine the bill in the decade since its first introduction. We passed it by suspension last Congress, and I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support it again now. The Big Cat Public Safety Act is endorsed not only by numerous environmental, animal welfare, and other organizations, but by countless law enforcement agencies and associations, including the National Sheriffs' Association, the Fraternal Order of Police, State- specific sheriffs' associations, and individual law enforcement officers. We need to look no further than the compelling testimony from Sheriff Matt Lutz before our Natural Resources Committee to understand the broad concerns with the status quo. In 2011, specifically, more than 50 exotic animals, including 38 lions, tigers, and cougars were released into the public from a private residence in Zanesville, Ohio, shutting down a highway and terrifying the neighbors. Sheriff Lutz led the law enforcement response to the crisis. He testified at our hearing this year that his department didn't have any inventory of how many animals there were, they barely even knew that they were there to start with, and his officers weren't trained, obviously, to deal with big cats and other exotic animals released into a public setting en masse. Incredibly, no one was killed or seriously injured in Zanesville that day, but as Sheriff Lutz testified: ``The outcome could have been much worse if any single condition had been just slightly different, and it could be far worse the next time.'' Precisely because private ownership is unregulated and largely unknown, we don't know how many big cats are currently kept in private ownership in the U.S., but estimates are as high as 20,000. Privately owned big cats are often purchased or bred as cubs for photo ops, and as they grow larger, they are sold into the exotic pet trade or on the black market for wildlife parts. Adult big cats in private ownership typically live in inhumane conditions that threaten public safety. Since 1990, around 300 dangerous incidents involving big cats have resulted in human injuries, mauling, and death. In many cases, the animals are shot and killed, as first responders are not equipped for these situations. In 2003, Congress unanimously passed the Captive Wildlife Safety Act, which amended the Lacey Act to prohibit importing, exporting, buying, selling, transporting, receiving, or acquiring big cats across States and the U.S. border. Though State laws vary, there is no Federal policy regarding the private possession or use of big cats, and one is critically needed. This bill narrowly focuses on privately owned animals. It includes exemptions for exhibitors with U.S. Department of Agriculture, or USDA, Class C licenses, and current owners are grandfathered in as long as they register with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and abide by listed regulations. H.R. 263 will protect first responders and the public, as well as the animals themselves. In addition to public safety concerns, the exotic cat trade fuels other criminal behavior that we in Congress should not be supporting. As just one example, the TV series ``Tiger King'' showed us that there is a dark and dangerous side to keeping lions, tigers, and other big cats in captivity. In fact, Joe Exotic from that series is in jail for violating the Lacey Act and the Endangered Species Act. Now, some opponents of this bill argue that we need to make changes to the bill to help small zoos stay in business. This bill would not affect small zoos. The reality is that most zoos, whether they are big or small, already have policies in place that reflect the Big Cat Public Safety Act standards. They are not going to be asked to do anything that they are not doing already. They don't allow public contact or cub petting, and they already keep cats at a safe distance away from the public. There are only a small few who still allow it, and they shouldn't. Now, we may hear claims from my colleague on the other side this is a USDA, U.S. Department of Agriculture issue, not a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issue. The fact is that the USDA does not regulate private ownership of animals like big cats. The Fish and Wildlife Service has long been responsible for regulating big cats' interstate transfer and commerce under the Lacey Act and has the authority to regulate the possession and breeding of endangered species, including big cats. While the USDA provides basic requirements for preventing cruelty to exhibited animals, the Fish and Wildlife Service is the one that must provide stringent standards to ensure that threatened and endangered species are managed to actively promote conservation, regardless of whether the animals are exhibited to the public. The Big Cat Public Safety Act merely strengthens and expands an already existing framework under the Lacey Act. It is a commonsense, and, again, uniquely bipartisan solution to address public safety and animal abuse concerns. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a July 26, 2022, letter from the Congressional Budget Office. Congressional Budget Office, U.S. Congress, Washington, DC, July 26, 2022. Hon. Raul M. Grijalva, Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 263, the Big Cat Public Safety Act. If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Lilia Ledezma. Sincerely, Phillip L. Swagel. Enclosure. H.R. 263, Big Cat Public Safety Act--July 22, 2022 [By fiscal year, millions of dollars] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2022 2022-2027 2022-2032 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Direct Spending (Outlays)........... 0 * * Revenues............................ 0 * * Increase or Decrease (-) in the 0 * * Deficit............................ Spending Subject to Appropriation * 3 ** (Outlays).......................... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ * = between -$500,000 and $500,000. ** = not estimated. Statutory pay-as-you-go procedures apply? Yes. Increases on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2033? No. Mandate Effects: Contains intergovernmental mandate? Yes, Under Threshold. Contains private-sector mandate? Yes, Under Threshold. Current law prohibits the import, export, purchase, sale, transport, or acquisition of big cats, such as lions and tigers, across state lines or the national border. H.R. 263 would generally prohibit the breeding and possession of those animals, although wildlife sanctuaries, veterinarians, colleges and universities, zoos, exhibitions, and other entities that meet certain requirements would be exempt. In addition, people who already own such animals would be permitted to keep them if they register with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). For this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R. 263 will be enacted late in fiscal year 2022. The bill would direct USFWS to issue regulations to implement the prohibition on breeding and possession. In addition, CBO expects that under the bill, the Department of Agriculture (USDA) could revise existing regulations on the licensing of entities that possess, exhibit, and breed big cats. Based on the costs of similar tasks, we estimate that developing those regulations would cost $1 million over the 2022-2023 period. Many states already prohibit ownership of the affected species and CBO expects that people who currently own such animals would register with USFWS. Thus, violations under the bill would probably occur infrequently. On that basis, CBO estimates that USFWS would incur costs of less than $500,000 annually after 2023 to maintain the registry and conduct enforcement. In total, we estimate that implementing H.R. 263 would cost about $3 million over the 2022-2027 period; such spending would be subject to the availability of appropriated funds. Under H.R. 263, violators would be subject to criminal and civil penalties, which are recorded in the budget as revenues; some of those penalties could be spent without further appropriation. Thus, enacting the bill would increase revenues and direct spending, but CBO estimates that those increases would be insignificant over the 2022-2032 period because we expect the number of violations would be small. Because H.R. 263 would either prohibit the possession and breeding of big cats or require owners, exhibitors, and breeders to take actions that would exempt them from the prohibitions, the bill contains intergovernmental and private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). Although CBO cannot estimate the cost to comply with some of the bill's mandates, we expect the aggregate cost of the mandates, which would include both lost income and additional expenses to comply with the bill's requirements, would not exceed the annual threshold established in UMRA for intergovernmental and private-sector mandates ($92 million and $184 million respectively, in 2022, adjusted annually for inflation). The bill would establish different requirements for entities licensed by USDA to possess, exhibit, and breed big cats; for wildlife sanctuaries; and for all other owners to be eligible for an exemption from the prohibitions. Approximately 340 facilities, both public and private, are licensed by USDA to possess, exhibit, and breed big cats. To qualify for an exemption from the bill's prohibitions, exhibitors would be required to: Prohibit public contact, with limited exceptions, with the big cats; and Maintain a 15-foot gap between the public and the animals or erect a permanent barrier. Approximately 30 exhibitors, including public zoos, allow physical contact with big cats through seasonal encounters with the animals, and about 150 mostly privately-owned facilities host or participate in special fundraising events that allow some form of encounter with the animals. CBO expects that prohibiting contact with the cats (or keeping the 15-foot gap) would decrease the financial success of these events. Using information provided by conservation groups and industry sources, CBO estimates that the cost of prohibiting or limiting these activities, in the form of foregone income, would be about $80 million each year. CBO has no data about the physical characteristics of exhibition settings or the ability of licensed exhibitors who wish to continue public exposure to the big cats to meet the new setback and barrier requirements. Thus, CBO cannot estimate the cost to comply with the exemption. H.R. 263 would prohibit wildlife sanctuaries from transporting and displaying their big cats off site. CBO has no data on the number of sanctuaries that transport and display big cats, or the income stemming from that activity, and thus cannot estimate the cost of this prohibition. The bill would require all other entities that possess big cats born before enactment to register the animals with USFWS if they want to be exempted from the bill's prohibitions. CBO cannot precisely estimate the cost of this mandate because regulations implementing the bill, including the cost to register the animals, have not been developed and the number of animals that would need to be registered is unknown. But based on information from animal welfare organizations, CBO expects the aggregate costs to be small. Finally, to be eligible for the exemption, those owners also would be prohibited from breeding or selling their cats. Approximately 200 cubs are traded or sold each year at value of roughly $8,000 per animal, according to industry sources; many of those cubs are born in facilities that would be unable to continue breeding big cats. CBO estimates the cost of the breeding prohibition would be less than $1.6 million per year. The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Lilia Ledezma (for federal costs) and Fiona Forrester (for mandates). The estimate was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Director of Budget Analysis.

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I commend my colleague from Illinois, Mr. Quigley, on his work on this bill, and I urge all Members to vote ``yes.'' Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1256, I call up the bill (H.R. 263) to amend the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 to clarify provisions enacted by the Captive Wildlife Safety Act, to further the conservation of certain wildlife species, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to insert extraneous material on H.R. 263.

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, first of all, to my colleague's initial comments as to energy and the economy, nobody denies the critical importance of those issues, and, yes, of course, we all should be working collectively on those particular issues. But by that measure, frankly, I would have wished that more of my colleagues on the other side would have voted for the bill immediately prior to this, which is a major issue and initiative to solve our supply chains and to take care of our national defense in terms of our chips. Also, by the measure that he outlines, we should not have addressed other critical issues in our country--for example, gun violence, women's rights, and civil rights. Of course, we should have done that. The fact of the matter is that this Congress must and can address the many challenges of our country, and, yes, those challenges include, for this particular hour, the danger posed to our public and our law enforcement communities by unregulated big cats. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Quigley), the author of this legislation.

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, first of all, to the comments of my colleague and friend from California, he says that this situation of private possession of big cats is already covered by current law. That is incorrect. They are not regulated under Federal law. The private possession is not regulated, nor is the private utilization and exploitation covered by current law. He complains that this would set up a duplicative environment. Neither USDA nor the Fish and Wildlife Service is regulating in this area right now. So, it is a question, if one accepts the premise of which way you go in terms of who is best to regulate it, it is not going to duplicate anything that either of them does, but it will complement more accurately what the Fish and Wildlife Service is responsible for, which is, number one, enforcement of the Lacey Act, which this is a natural extension of, in which we focus on the trade and endangered species and the impact of that trade not only on the public safety but on the survival of those species around the world. Number one, the Fish and Wildlife Service does, in fact, deal with endangered species. In fact, it is our primary agency for doing so. So this is a judgment that the Fish and Wildlife Service is the appropriate agency as opposed to the USDA which has a different direction that it takes. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva), who is the chair of the full committee.

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, in response to my friend and colleague from Georgia, I simply want to read a list of some of the endorsers of this particular legislation. These are all members of law enforcement: The National Sheriffs' Association, the Fraternal Order of Police, the Sheriffs' Association of Texas, the Maine Sheriffs' Association, the West Virginia Sheriffs' Association, the Arkansas Sheriffs' Association, the Kansas Sheriffs' Association, the Louisiana Sheriffs' Association, the Buckeye State Sheriffs' Association of Ohio, the Vermont Sheriffs' Association, and the Iowa State Sheriffs' Association. I have gotten to four lines of a whole bunch of other endorsements from law enforcement. Clearly, they regard this as one of the areas that we should address for this country out of the many challenges that we face. So I do think it is appropriate that we devote just a little bit of time to what is concerning them. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor).

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, first of all, to the ranking member's comments, this is an informed judgment about which of two existing Federal agencies is more appropriate to manage and administer what, I believe, if I hear the ranking member correctly, is our common goal, our common goal of ending the status quo as to the private possession and exploitation of big cats. So this is a judgment that we disagree on. I have articulated our reasons why Fish and Wildlife is the better one. He has his view of USDA. It is a policy call for us to make. But we are not disagreeing with the overall goal, I don't believe. His amendment, by the way, not only--his proposed amendment not only proposed to put it in USDA, but also to essentially preempt the preemption of Federal law. So, in other words, there is a jumble of State laws out there, ranging from good, solid State laws, to no State laws; and that creates a real complicated and very confusing puzzle for all kinds of people, again, including law enforcement. So you cannot apply a Federal standard across the country with one sentence, and then, in the next sentence say, oh, by the way, any State can do anything it wants. That doesn't make any sense at all. So either we go in with the Federal standard, or we don't go there at all. Our judgment under this law is that we need to go there with a Federal standard. As to my colleague's comments on priorities, I would, again, refer to my earlier comments. Those are critical priorities that we are all trying to address. Certainly, I haven't checked the roll call vote on the bill that we just passed, CHIPS, but I hope, if they are truly interested and focused on inflation, on energy, on self-sufficiency in our country, then I would hope that I saw a ``yes'' vote for them on one of the most major pieces of legislation that we will be passing and the President will be signing shortly to end our supply chain reliance on places like China. My colleague also knows that we have coming up a major wildfire bill to address that challenge that we all agree is a critical challenge for our country, and I certainly hope that he will view that bill favorably as well, if, in fact, we all have that shared goal. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time. I am prepared to close. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. First of all, I do want to thank my colleague, the ranking member of the full committee. He is a very good ranking member and a very good person to work with on many challenges on our Natural Resources Committee. I appreciate his comments at the outset of this debate which, I believe, reflected an agreement as to the problem and as to the goal. We may be sitting here debating some of the implementation, but in this Congress, if we can agree on the problem and the goal, that is a step forward, and I appreciate at least that we have that common agreement. Yes, we do have disagreements in terms of the exact way to approach this; specifically, which Federal agency should actually have the con on this. We have outlined our arguments here and elsewhere, and we have a disagreement, and that is part of the democratic process. We believe we have the better view of that, given the Fish and Wildlife Service's focus. I do want to take issue with his comment that it took 2 days to debate this bill in the Natural Resources Committee. Actually, the debate having to do with this particular issue in the Natural Resources Committee was far less than 2 days. In fact, I didn't add it up. It probably amounted to 2 hours of those 2 days. The rest of it was really debating other issues in the context of this bill. So this is not a particularly complicated problem to grasp from the law enforcement, from public safety, from an animal welfare perspective, and it is not a particularly difficult problem to identify very concise options and to make a decision on those. Those things were vetted in the Natural Resources Committee and are being vetted on the floor here. But to say that this took 2 days, in all due respect, is not accurate. I do want to comment briefly on the comment having to do with State laws are already handling this. Yes, of course, this is always an issue that we have in determining whether, in the context of our work here, we should have the Federal Government apply standards or leave it to the States. In this particular case, we have the worst of all worlds. We have differing State laws in terms of the private ownership and exploitation of big cats; and we also have both Federal and State laws that both preempt and leave it to the States. But I would submit that the Captive Wildlife Safety Act, which is where we started on this almost 20 years ago, a Federal law that said that we were going to, as a country, state that you can no longer import these big cats from their homes; thus, decimating their populations where they came from, and encouraging a trade that has led them to the brink of extinction in most cases. We said that that is a Federal matter, and that is what we are trying to follow. This is only an extension of that particular act. So I think it is a particularly worthwhile area for us to develop Federal standards and end a lot of doubt among the States and among the Federal Government and the States collectively and get on with the goal of protecting our people, protecting our animals, and protecting our law enforcement. I urge adoption of this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to join so many others in honoring the life and legacy of U.S. Congresswoman Patsy Takemoto Mink and the 50th Anniversary of her signature stamp on our nation, Title IX. Born in Paia, Hawaii, Congresswoman Mink was a true pioneer in so many areas: the first female elected class president at Maui High School, the first Japanese-American woman admitted to the Hawaii bar in 1953, and the first woman of color ever elected to this body. She experienced many firsts throughout her life but spent her career ensuring that she would not be the last. She is best remembered as the principal author of Title IX, where she fought successfully to end the gender discrimination in academics and athletics in federally funded education that she and so many others had endured. A half century later, we see the results of her labor with nearly three million young women participating in high school sports across the country and 1.1 million female college graduates every year. For this, we owe her an immense amount of gratitude. But it would be a true mistake to remember her only for this one singular accomplishment, for over her long and productive career she fought endlessly on so many fronts to end poverty, discrimination and injustice, advance the inherent right of all peoples and realize a more perfect union. And, as a true keiki o ka aina, child of the land, she always stayed true to her roots and her Hawaii home. Mahalo nui loa, or thank you very much, on behalf of a grateful Nation and home.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2773, the Recovering America's Wildlife Act. I thank the gentlewoman from Michigan, Congresswoman Dingell, and Chairman Grijalva for their leadership in moving this critical legislation through our Natural Resources Committee and to the Floor. The world is in the middle of an extinction crisis and, unfortunately, my state is at its center. As a result of climate change, invasive species and other environmental stressors, our islands have earned the unfortunate distinction of becoming the endangered species capitol of the world. Of the 1,225 endangered species listed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, nearly 500 are found in Hawaii. Just last year, nine more of Hawaii's endemic species were officially reclassified as extinct. The Recovering America's Wildlife Act will provide $1.3 billion in support to states, territories and tribes to address wildlife conservation. The estimated $60 million in annual funding to Hawaii will be essential to my state's ability to save our imperiled biodiversity and will increase the chance that species like the `l`iwi (a Hawaiian Honeycreeper), `Ope`ape`a (the Hawaiian Hoary Bat) and Kahuli (Hawaiian tree snail) survive. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this legislation. Mahalo.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, I rise today with my colleagues to recognize and honor the selfless service of the Japanese Americans who served our country in World War II with the famed 100th Infantry Battalion of Hawaii, or the One Puka Puka. This year, the fabled 100th celebrates its 80th anniversary. The battalion was composed of 1,400 Americans of Japanese ancestry whose loyalty was questioned by our government following the attacks on Pearl Harbor and much worse. Although much of the U.S. public looked upon them with disdain and skepticism, these soldiers simply persevered. Their story is one of patriotism, tenacity, and courage. Following the attacks on Pearl Harbor, and when anti-Japanese hysteria was at its peak, these young men raised their hands and demanded the right to defend America. With the support of U.S. military officers and others in Hawaii and elsewhere, the Federal Government eventually created an all-nisei, or second-generation Japanese-American Army unit, the 100th Infantry Battalion. Just before their deployment in August of 1943, the men of the One Puka Puka selected the motto ``Remember Pearl Harbor'' to reflect their anger at the attack on their country. Although the cloud of racism and underlying uncertainty hovered over these brave Americans, their performance was nothing less than exemplary. In September 1943, the 100th arrived in North Africa, but soon transferred to central Italy, where it faced heavy combat. It eventually became known as the Purple Heart Battalion because of its high casualty rate. One of its members and casualties was Captain Spark Matsunaga, who suffered grievous injuries in a mine field. He later became a Member of this hallowed House and, after that, a United States Senator, inspiring generations, including me, who was privileged to serve 3 years on his staff. His own story is just one of countless we can and should remember. In August, 1944, and after a year of combat, the battalion integrated with the Japanese Americans of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team. They then continued to fight through Italy and France. The men of the 100th spent 20 months in Europe and fought in six campaigns across Italy and France. They received six Distinguished Service Crosses and earned three Presidential Unit Citations. Along with the 442nd, the 100th Infantry Battalion is recognized as the most decorated American unit in our history for its size and length of service. The lineage and honors of the 100th and 442nd live on today and are preserved by the 100th Battalion, 442d Infantry, U.S. Army Reserve. Today, the unit is staffed with reservists from Hawaii, American Samoa, Guam, and Saipan. These men and women carry on the legacy of the soldiers that endured so much before them 80 years ago. We all owe a debt of gratitude to groups like the Nisei Veterans Legacy and the Military Intelligence Service Education Society of Hawaii, and others, for keeping the 100th Battalion's legacy alive. They have all been critical in recognizing the sacrifices of our Japanese Americans to defend a country that questioned their loyalty. On the walls of the National Japanese American Memorial, not far from our U.S. Capitol, the late Senator Spark Matsunaga's words still ring true today: ``We believed a threat to this Nation's democracy was a threat to the American Dream and to all free peoples of the world.'' Today, we renew our debt of gratitude to the Japanese Americans of the One Puka Puka. May they live forever in our hearts and minds.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join my colleagues, including my colleagues kindly speaking here today from Maryland and Illinois, in strong support of House passage of S. 1760, introduced by my colleague Senator Mazie Hirono, and passed unanimously by the Senate. This critical measure, companion legislation to H.R. 3406, which I co-introduced in the House with its principal sponsor, my colleague and partner, Congressman Kaiali'i Kahele, will designate the new community- based outpatient clinic of the Department of Veterans Affairs, now literally rising out of the ground at Kalaeloa in Hawaii, and known to date as the Advanced Leeward Outpatient Healthcare Access, or ALOHA project, as the Daniel Kahikina Akaka Department of Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic. Daniel K. Akaka was many things throughout his long and full 93 years of life: teacher, Member of this House from 1977 to 1991, the first U.S. Senator of Native Hawaiian ancestry from 1991 to 2012, beloved mentor to generations, and on and on. Of all of these, he was a deeply proud veteran, having served in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the Second World War, deploying to the Western Pacific in support of the critical island-hopping campaign, which won the Pacific war. Senator Akaka carried his pride and passion and commitment to our Nation's veterans into his work in Congress. As member and chair of the U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, he produced an unmatched record of progress on healthcare, compensation, and other benefits for veterans, including crafting the new veterans' GI Bill in Congress to ensure more education benefits for veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan. In this Asian-Pacific Heritage Month, it is fitting to recognize his work focusing on specific issues affecting our Asian-American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander veterans. The importance of the ALOHA project to our veteran `ohana, or family, throughout Hawaii and the Pacific cannot be overstated. On its projected completion in late 2023, it will bring our VA healthcare system to our veterans, relieving significant and growing pressure in Hawaii on that system, increasing healthcare access for Hawaii's over 110,000 veterans and more, and alleviating significant and growing logistical and capacity challenges at Tripler Army Medical Center and the Spark M. Matsunaga Medical Center. I cannot think of a more deserving and appropriate individual to grace this facility and those who work and are healed there with his name and his still living, breathing spirit, than Daniel Kahikina Akaka. Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of this measure so that it may be sent directly to the President for his consideration and enactment. ``Mahalo nui loa.'' ``Thank you very much.''

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commemorate the life of Richard Roy Kelley, M.D., a true ``keiki o ka aina,'' ``a child of the land,'' son of Hawaii, just lost to us at age 88. Doc Kelly was born to Hawaii's original hoteliers, Roy and Estelle Kelley, founders of Outrigger Hotels and Resorts. He grew up in their Waikiki hotels, graduated from Stanford and Harvard, and practiced in Honolulu before helming Outrigger through its second generation. On Doc's watch, Outrigger expanded throughout Hawaii and the Pacific into a world-famous iconic beach resort brand; success for any life. But Doc Kelley did far more. He pioneered true cultural tourism in ``Ke Ano Wa'a,'' or ``the Outrigger Way,'' through which the entire lifeblood of each property embraces and embodies its special values and place. He led the World Travel and Tourism Council and advised our own Travel and Tourism Council. And he endlessly loved Hawaii and his `` 'ohana,'' ``family,'' and never stopped giving back. Richard ``Doc'' Kelley, an amazing and unforgettable life. From all of us to you and yours, mahalo, and aloha.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1908, the Ka'ena Point National Heritage Area Act. I wish first to recognize and say ``mahalo,'' or thank you, to my partner in our Hawaii congressional delegation, Representative Kaiali'i Kahele, who co- introduced this bill with me. Our bill directs the U.S. Department of the Interior to study whether Ka'ena Point, a treasured wilderness area on the western tip of the island of O'ahu, should be designated as a national heritage area, or NHA. The 3-year study would evaluate whether Ka'ena Point holds invaluable resources that reflect our country's heritage and are worthy of conservation and special recognition nationally. Such a designation would also offer critical support to our local community in Hawaii to conserve the area for present and future use. I am certain that Ka'ena Point is a perfect candidate for NHA designation. It houses a rich cultural and environmental history. It is the location of one of Hawaii's most sacred places, a leina a ka `uhane, a leaping place of souls where, according to native Hawaiian tradition, the spirits of the recently deceased leap from this realm to the next. As one of the last few remaining and easily accessible wilderness areas on O'ahu, the sand dunes of Ka'ena Point are home to a number of endemic and endangered species, such as the Hawaiian monk seal, laysan albatross, and the ohai flower. Our bill will ensure the full collaboration of the local community in preserving the traditions and pristine nature of Ka'ena Point. The community, our local organizations, fishers, hikers, and neighborhood groups, will be fully engaged throughout the study process and, if the area is eventually designated as an NHA, will be integral partners in the area's management. Finally, I also thank the chairs and ranking members of my full Committee on Natural Resources and Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands, and our staffs for your understanding and support of our proposal. And yes, to the ranking member, I look forward to showing you Ka'ena Point as soon as you can come out. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this legislation.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1931, the Japanese American Confinement Education Act, as well as H.R. 6434, the Japanese American World War II History Network Act, which we will consider later today. I am honored and humbled to cosponsor these measures, and I sincerely thank my colleagues from California, Representatives Matsui and Obernolte, for their work in crafting both pieces of legislation to ensure that the inexcusable injustices faced by our Nation's Japanese American community during World War II are never forgotten. The memory of World War II evokes one of the darkest periods of our history as a country, the mass internment of Japanese Americans. Over the course of the war, our Federal Government forcibly relocated and incarcerated about 120,000 Japanese Americans, the majority of whom were U.S. citizens, in barbed wire enclosed camps. H.R. 1931 and H.R. 6434 both strengthen our ability, if not necessity, to tell what happened in these confinement sites, and to ensure that future generations learned what happened so it never occurs again. I urge my colleagues to honor and remember the Japanese Americans who were incarcerated at still-infamous sites like Manzanar, Tule Lake, where my wife's uncle and aunt, simple truck farmers from Sacramento, were interned, Heart Mountain, and the Honouliuli Internment Camp in Honolulu by voting ``yes'' on both H.R. 1931 and H.R. 6434.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, as a proud member of the Appropriations Committee, I rise in strong support of this measure. I especially highlight section 165, directing $403 million in emergency funding to the Department of Defense's urgent response to contamination of the city of Honolulu's drinking water from fuel leaks from our military's Red Hill bulk fuel storage facility at Pearl Harbor. Red Hill is a 250-million-gallon, World War II-era facility located only 100 feet directly above the major aquifer providing drinking water to some 500,000 residents, of which some 100,000 are military families served by the Navy's water system and are drawing from this aquifer. Obviously, contamination of this aquifer from Red Hill fuel leaks would be catastrophic, most directly to general public health, but also to fundamental military readiness. And yet, that is exactly what happened last November when likely tens of thousands of gallons of fuel did leak from Red Hill into the aquifer and then through the Navy water system to thousands of homes, businesses, and military operations. People got sick, pets died, lives were disrupted, schools and businesses closed, and some 3,500, mainly military, families remain displaced. Overall public confidence in our military remains shattered. Since then, our military, with their partners in State and Federal Government, has focused immediately on remediating contamination, restoring safe drinking water, and returning families to their homes. Our military has expended hundreds of millions on these efforts to date, with hundreds of millions more imminent and billions eventually required to implement Red Hill alternatives. This measure's $403 million of emergency funding is critical to sustain the immediate effort to stabilize and defuel Red Hill, return our families to their homes, and restore public confidence in safe drinking water. I deeply appreciate the commitment of my chair and committee; our Senate counterparts; the administration; and my Hawaii colleague, Senator Schatz, to the inclusion of this critical emergency funding. Mahalo.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker. I rise today in support of H.R. 2930, the Safeguard Tribal Objects of Patrimony (STOP) Act, which I cosponsored, especially as it ensures we fully include Native Hawaiians in all aspects of cultural heritage repatriation. The STOP Act reauthorizes and makes important improvements to the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) to protect the cultural patrimony of our Indigenous communities, including Native Hawaiians, the indigenous peoples of our country who originate in Hawaii. This bipartisan effort, spearheaded by Chair Teresa Leger Fernandez and Ranking Member Don Young of our House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Indigenous Peoples, on which I also serve, will assist our efforts to ensure the survival of Native artifacts for generations to come. I also wish to memorialize for the record our committee discussions assuring that Native Hawaiians are directly involved in all cultural heritage repatriation processes mandated by Congress under NAGPRA, including full and direct presence on the NAGPRA Review Committee. Religious practices of American Indians, Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians are an integral part of their culture, tradition and heritage. They also serve as a basis of Native identity and value systems. Congress has established a long-standing policy under the American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA) of 1978 (Pub. L. No. 95- 341) and other legislation (25 U.S.C. Sec. 1996) to protect and preserve the inherent right of freedom to believe, express and exercise the traditional religions of American Indians, Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians. Under NAGPRA, a review committee that consists of seven members is appointed by the Secretary of the Interior and tasked with several responsibilities, including consultation with Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations, working with the Secretary to develop regulations to carry out NAGPRA and making recommendations regarding future care of repatriated cultural items. At least two of these members must be traditional Indian religious leaders. The use of ``traditional Indian religious leader'' in NAGPRA (25 U.S.C. 3006) is consistent with the policy described in AIRFA (42 U.S.C. Sec. 1996) and includes and should continue to include all traditional Native American religious leaders, including Native Hawaiians, as defined by the term ``Native American'' found at 25 U.S.C. Sec. 3001. Ensuring the eligibility of any American Indian, Alaska Native or Native Hawaiian traditional religious leader to be nominated to serve on the NAGPRA Review Committee is critical to full implementation of the letter and spirit of NAGPRA and the preservation and safe return of our precious indigenous cultural heritage. Mahalo.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Domestic Violence Awareness Month and to share our collective recommitment to end domestic violence. Each October, we remember all those lost to and scarred by domestic violence, a tragic continuing scourge that cuts across all boundaries. Long after we have said goodbyes, long after physical wounds have healed, the psychological and social consequences continue and magnify. Domestic violence truly touches each and all of us. Tragically, COVID-19 has magnified this challenge. In my home state of Hawaii, the Domestic Violence Action Center saw hotline calls increase by 188 percent from February 2020 to 2021. Survivors are further cut off from activities that allow them to escape an abusive environment, such as work or school, and domestic violence organizations face challenges in reaching survivors or providing services. I am incredibly grateful for the service of the domestic violence organizations in my Hawaii, such as the Hawaii State Coalition Against Domestic Violence and the some twenty other domestic violence organizations that provide services to survivors and their families, along with each and all of their dedicated workers and volunteers. I am also grateful for our local first responders and law enforcement, who have taken actions to better equip themselves to recognize and respond to domestic violence. There is so much work to be done still in raising awareness and educating our communities about domestic violence. But for now, for anyone experiencing, witnessing or suspecting domestic violence, please call or text a local or national helpline. They are not alone. Mahala and aloha.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, each year our country recognizes October as Filipino American History Month, a time for all Americans to celebrate the incredible past, present and future of our fellow citizens whose heritage lies in the great country of the Philippines. I am especially humbled to do so as the Representative of Hawaii's First Congressional District, where some 195,000 Filipino Americans live, more than any other of our 435 districts throughout the country. With Hawaii's Second Congressional District with the second largest Filipino Americans population, at about 175,000, our Fil-Am community in Hawaii stands at 370,000. In total, fully a quarter of all Hawaii residents are Filipino Americans, by far the largest percentage of any state or territory. We observe Filipino American History Month in October because the first recorded arrival of Filipinos in the continental United States took place on October 18, 1587, when the ``Luzones Indios'' came ashore from the Manila-built galleon Nuestra Senora de Esperanza in Morro Bay, California. And in 1906, 115 years ago, the first fifteen sakada (contract laborers) arrived in Honolulu from the Philippines aboard the SS Doric, marking the first sustained immigration into our country and the humble beginnings of Fil-Ams in Hawaii. Today our Fil-Am community numbers some four million throughout our country, now the second largest of our Asian American groups. Hawaii Fil-Ams in particular have been trailblazers in politics and government, the military, business and entrepreneurship, journalism, popular culture, music and the arts and more. Peter Aduja became the first Fil-Am elected to public office in the United States when he was elected to the Hawaii Territorial House of Representatives in 1954. Alfred Laureta became the first-ever federal judge of Filipino ancestry. He was born in `Ewa, graduated from the University of Hawaii at Manoa, and was later nominated and confirmed by our own Senator Daniel Inouye in July 1978. Benjamin Menor became the first Fil-Am higher court judge as associate justice of the Hawaii State Supreme Court. Ben Cayetano was the first Filipino American governor of a state in our union. Major General Antonio Taguba was the second Filipino American promoted to general officer rank in the United States Army. Eddie Flores Jr. bought the first L&L Drive-Inn on Liliha Street in Honolulu in 1976, turning it into a national franchise. Carolina Dizon Wong was the first Filipino American woman to obtain an M.D. degree. Ines Cayaban was the first Filipino American graduate of the School of Public Health, Nursing and Social Work at the University of Hawaii. She received the prestigious Jefferson Award in 1986 for her service to Hawaii. Francisco Flores Trinidad Jr., of Honolulu, better known by his pen name ``Corky,'' was an award-winning editorial cartoonist of the Honolulu Star-Bulletin who became the first Asian editorial cartoonist syndicated in the U.S. A loyal veteran of the 1st Filipino Infantry Regiment that fought alongside our troops in the Philippines during World War II, Domingo Los Banos was Hawaii's first Filipino American school principal. Roy Macaraeg became the first Fil-Am to become a general officer in the history of Hawaii's citizen soldier ranks. In Hawaii, we also regularly honor the over 250,000 Filipinos who answered the call to protect and defend America and the Philippines in the Pacific theater. In 2016, President Obama signed into law the Filipino Veterans of World War II Congressional Gold Medal Act to bestow Congress's highest honor upon those veterans. Each and all of these lives of achievement are but a small sampling of a broader community that has achieved so much and contributed so much to the rich fabric of our country. And the story of Filipino Americans is still in its early chapters. Why, however, is it important that we take the time to recognize groups like Filipino Americans? To that, I respond that the story of Filipino Americans, and to an extent, the stories of all of our various ethnic groups, is the story of America. From very humble beginnings, they have risen through hard work, sacrifice, commitment to advancing the next generations and mutual support to achieve so much already. That well describes Filipino Americans overall, that and embracing the responsibilities and opportunities of America while honoring and treasuring the rich heritage of their ancestral homeland. In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have seen the ways that Asian Americans, including Filipino Americans, have been disproportionately affected by health and social situations. Filipino American nurses, despite making up just 4 percent of the nurse workforce, have accounted for about 25 percent of COVID-19 related deaths among all nurses. This is telling sign of the sacrifices they are making for our country. Sadly, this community is not receiving the respect it deserves and facing senseless discrimination. As of August of this year, more than 9,000 Anti-Asian incidents have been reported since the pandemic began, with many being Filipino America. All of us must work to stop this hatred. And yet, as always, we have seen a resilient community persevere through all. In my own district, I have joined my friends for community clean up days at the Filipino Community Center to help protect and promote their heritage. With my colleagues in the House, I have reintroduced our Filipino Veterans Family Reunification Act, which seeks to reunite Filipino soldiers with their children. All of this is why I recently joined my friend and colleague Congresswoman Young Kim in introducing H. Res. 724, a bipartisan resolution to express support for the designation of October as Filipino American History Month. We urge our colleagues' support to promote an ongoing appreciation of the contributions of Filipino Americans to our country and the rich diversity of our Nation. To Fil-Ams everywhere, Maraming Salamat Po and Dios Ti Agngina, congratulations. I truly look forward to partnering with them on their next proud chapters.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, last Friday, my colleague, Congressman Kaiali`i Kahele (Hawaii--Second), and I gathered here on Capitol Hill with leaders of our Native Hawaiian community and partners in the advancement of Native Hawaiians everywhere to recognize the centennial of the enactment, on July 9, 1921, of a truly revolutionary law, the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, to honor the times and memory of its author, Hawaii Delegate to Congress Prince Jonah Kuhio Kalani`anaole, and to reflect on and commit to the path still ahead. That afternoon, we came together on the East grounds of the Capitol, directly outside the House chamber where Kuhio served for almost two decades, to share our mana'o (thoughts) on this momentous day. I would like to share here my own remarks on behalf of all throughout our Hawaii who I am privileged to represent: To my colleague and friend, Congressman Kahele, our incredible guests that are here with us today, and our friends and `ohana watching everywhere, Aloha. As I stand with you today, I have so many conflicting thoughts and emotions. We are here on hallowed grounds that for centuries now have stood for the very best of humanity, and yet we are also on ground that at a bare minimum tolerated the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom. We are on grounds that have advanced equality, opportunity, compassion and justice, and yet have sanctioned so much trial and tragedy for our indigenous peoples. We are on grounds where just one year ago, we gathered to bid aloha to one of the great icons of the civil rights movement, my colleague John Lewis, and yet it is this very ground from which was launched an attack on our Capitol and democracy by our own fellow citizens. This land is riddled with contradictions. As it was when Prince Kuhio came to Congress as the first Native Hawaiian to serve almost 120 years ago. Kuhio spoke then of the urgency and despair of a people facing extinction in their own land. That was no idle concern. It had in fact happened to other indigenous peoples throughout our country and world; their peoples and cultures are simply no more. There were then just perhaps 40,000 Native Hawaiians. The life expectancy of Native Hawaiians was but thirty years. They were increasingly not living on the land as had dozens of generations before them, but in the tenements of Honolulu in dire circumstances. And yet, Kuhio entrusted his people to this still-new country, a country of promise but that had not shown it was deserving of that trust. And he devoted his next two decades toward advancing his people and to prove that his trust had not been misplaced. As Congressman Kahele has said, the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, signed one hundred years ago today, was his singular accomplishment. But what was Prince Kuhio's legacy? What did it all add up to? History is fickle. We're all judged by our successes and failures, our achievements and our shortcomings (of course always in hindsight and without the context of the times). But I would make these three observations about Kuhio, looking back from the distance of history and as someone who is not Native Hawaiian. First, he was exactly the right person for his time and place. Not just for Native Hawaiians, but for all of us whose ancestors and lifeblood lay then and now in Hawaii. Second, the Kanaka Maoli did not, unlike many of their brothers and sisters, fade from this Earth. Native Hawaiians now number in the hundreds of thousands throughout our country and world, proudly reclaiming and perpetuating their history and culture and contributing alongside all others who seek a better path forward. Third, Kuhio, as the first Native Hawaiian leader to step forward onto the national stage, exemplified what proud, principled and capable Hawaiian leadership is, setting the standard for so many of us who followed down the road he paved. But history is never complete, and the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act is a perfect example. As one Kanaka Maoli leader noted recently, the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act was beautifully conceived but did not deliver in its implementation. In that the Act is its own story, and now we must turn the page toward better chapters. Today, I follow and support Congressman Kahele in finding and forging that next chapter. For yesterday's achievements are just tomorrow's foundations, and yesterday's failures are just tomorrow's opportunities. I am so deeply humbled with the responsibility--for all of us wherever we are for whom Hawaii is and always will be our true home--to partner with you in these next chapters of renewed opportunity and hope. Thank you. Mahalo.