Ed Case

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2662, the IG Independence and Empowerment Act, of which I am a cosponsor. The work of our Inspectors General throughout government in providing an independent, objective and professional review and assessment of legal compliance and waste, fraud and abuse is critical to the overall functioning of government and to ensuring public trust and confidence in government. Equally, efforts to weaken, politicize, influence and cow our Inspectors Generals are direct threats to smooth government functioning, efficient and effective use of taxpayer dollars and the public trust and cannot be tolerated. Chair Maloney's bill takes some of the best recommendations from the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency to ensure Inspectors General independence, increase transparency and improve the effectiveness of one of our government's major checks mechanisms. This much-needed bill will improve the work of our Inspectors General community, which is even more critical now as we expend literally trillions of dollars in emergency COVID-19 relief. I especially appreciate that this bill includes elements of Congressman Cooper's Inspectors General Independence Act, which I also cosponsored and which was endorsed by my Blue Dog Coalition last Congress because of its focus on issues related to fiscal responsibility, good governance and national security. I also appreciate the Committee's support of the amendment submitted by Congresswoman Bourdeaux, Chair of the Blue Dogs Task Force on Fiscal Responsibility and Government Reform, which ensures that Inspectors General and their staffs receive sufficient training on the remedies available to them, specifically suspension or debarment, to fully address identified private sector government contracting waste, fraud or abuse. This is a solid and much-needed improvement for one of our federal government's most valuable communities, and I urge its passage.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, I rise today with my colleagues to recognize and honor . . . a stamp. A stamp just issued by the U.S. Postal Service that, with stunning simplicity, remembers, recognizes and honors one of the most remarkable and inspirational stories in the whole of our country's history. A story of tragedy, perseverance and triumph that is so quintessentially American, that goes so deeply to our essence, that offers the most fundamental lessons that we must never forget. And that is the point of this stamp: that we never forget the story of the Japanese American soldiers of World War Two and their famous motto which is its own lesson: Go For Broke. For many of us, the story is well known and has instructed and inspired our own lives. But for a growing number of our fellow citizens of our country and world it is not, and so permit me a brief retelling. The story originates in Japan in the late 1800s when largely rural poverty and lack of opportunity drove emigration to the United States, mainly Hawaii and the West Coast, until the Exclusion Act of 1924 ended any substantial further immigration. This first generation, or lssei, were excluded by reason of their race and origin from citizenship, yet they worked and sacrificed and persevered to provide a better life for their children, the second generation, or Nisei, born American citizens. As World War Two loomed, Americans of Japanese Ancestry were beginning their third generation, or Sansei, in substantial communities, yet they remained largely marginalized because of race. In my Hawaii, they constituted over one third of our population, yet largely still labored on plantations or worked in small businesses. The same was true on the West Coast, from Washington through Oregon to San Diego. Some Nisei saw war with Japan coming and sought to enlist in our armed services, but they were largely denied out of race and suspicion and sought to prove themselves through service in the guard or, in Hawaii, the Varsity Victory Volunteers. Pearl Harbor changed everything. Infamously, over one hundred thousand Japanese were interned for their race, an indelible stain on our national fabric. And after years of Japanese Americans pushing to be allowed to prove their loyalty by enlisting and fighting, the military finally relented with the 100th Infantry Battalion (the One- Puka-Puka), the 442nd regimental Combat Team (``Go For Broke''), the Military Intelligence Service and the 1399th Engineer Construction Battalion. The rest, as they say, is legend. The 100th and 442nd, after enduring great discrimination and great kindness in mainland training camps where Jim Crow was still very much alive, and even as their parents and brothers and sisters were incarcerated by their government, shipped out and fought their way with the U.S. Army from Africa up through Sicily and Italy and the Rhone and into France and the famous Battles of the Yosges and the Bulge and then into German itself where they liberated the concentration camps of the Third Reich. When it was all over, they had lost so many comrades and had become the most decorated unit for its size and length of service in our nation's history. But it was not just for their wartime service that they are remembered, but their faith in and dedication to their country upon their return, itself marked even after all that by racism and discrimination. Many of them went on to careers in public service, like U.S. Senator and Medal Of Honor winner Daniel Inouye and U.S. Senator Spark Matsunaga, and many more in other professions and careers and back in their communities where they quietly fought for the principle that the American dream belonged to all Americans. What an American story, and for all this we honored them in 2010 with our Congressional Gold Medal. But was that enough; would it all be remembered? Three Japanese American women in California who themselves had been incarcerated--Fusa Takahashi, Chiz Ohira and Aiko King--thought not, and in 2005 they launched Stamp Our Story to convince the U.S. Postal Service to issue a stamp in honor and remembrance of the Japanese American soldiers of World War Two. Sixteen long years later, through continued advocacy led in Congress by my Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus and my colleagues here now and before--especially U.S. Congressman Mark Takai, himself a Japanese American veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom, tragically lost to us--this beautiful and moving stamp, impeccably designed by Antonio Alcala, was issued just weeks ago. The design is taken from a 1944 photograph in the field of 442nd Private First Class Shiroku `Whitey' Yamamoto, a Nisei born and raise in the plantation village of Ninole on the Hamakua Coast of my home island of Hawaii. His service included the famous rescue of the Texas Lost Battalion in the Vosges, when the 442nd's casualties far exceeded the number of their mostly white comrades rescued. Legend has it that the motto ``Go For Broke''--or in our pidgin go fo broke--originated in Hawaii gambling slang for going big against all odds. The soldier's face speaks of fatigue, of questions, but above all of Gaman, of perseverance through great adversity to a better place. Such a fitting tribute, so appropriate. And made possible by so many, including colleagues who are here with me today to contribute their own thoughts. Mdam Speaker, we are all grateful for the opportunity to remember and retell the American story of the Japanese American soldiers of World War II and to celebrate the lessons of their service and lives through their stamp. To close, I'd like to recite the 442nd's special song: Four Forty Second Infantry We are the boys of Hawai`i nei We will fight for you And the red, white and blue And will go to the front And back to Honolulu-lu-lu Fighting for dear old Uncle Sam Go for broke we don't give a damn! We will round up the huns At the point of a gun And the victory will be ours! Go for broke! Four Four Two! Go for broke! Four Four Two! And victory will be ours. Mahalo.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of this Special Order.

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with my colleagues for so many to recognize and honor a stamp just issued by the U.S. Postal Service that, with stunning simplicity, remembers, recognizes, and honors one of the most remarkable and inspirational stories in the whole of our country's history. It is a story of tragedy, perseverance, and triumph that is so quintessentially American, that goes so deeply to our essence, and that offers the most fundamental lessons that we must never forget. And that is the point of this stamp, that we never forget the story of the Japanese-American soldiers of World War II and their famous motto, which is its own lesson: ``Go for broke.'' For many of us, the story is well-known and has instructed and inspired our own lives. But for a growing number of our fellow citizens of our country and world it is not. So permit me just a brief retelling. As World War II loomed, Americans of Japanese ancestry were beginning their third generation, or nisei, in substantial communities, yet they remained largely marginalized because of their race. In Hawaii, they constituted over one-third of our population, yet largely still labored on plantations or worked in small businesses. The same was true on the West Coast, from Washington through Oregon to San Diego. Some nisei saw war with Japan coming and sought to enlist in our armed services, but they were largely denied out of race and suspicion, and sought to prove themselves through service in the Guard or in Hawaii, the Varsity Victory Volunteers. Pearl Harbor changed everything. Infamously, over 100,000 Japanese were interned for their race, an indelible stain on our national fabric. After years of Japanese Americans pushing to be allowed to prove their loyalty by enlisting and fighting, the military finally relented with the 100th Infantry Battalion; the 442nd in the military intelligence service; and the 1399th Engineer Construction Battalion. The rest, as they say, is legend. The 100th and 442nd fought their way through Sicily, through France and Italy, and ended up with the highest number of decorations for their length of service in the history of our military. We honored them in 2010 with our Congressional Gold Medal. But was that enough? Would it all be remembered? Three Japanese-American women in California, who themselves had been incarcerated--Fusa Takahashi, Chiz Ohira, and Aiko King--thought not, and they fought a 16-year effort to gain approval of this beautiful stamp from the U.S. Postal Service, impeccably designed by Antonio Alcala. It was issued just weeks ago. The design is taken from a 1944 photo in the field of 442nd Private First Class Shiroku ``Whitey'' Yamamoto, a nisei born and raised in the plantation village of Ninole on the Hamakua coast of my home island of Hawaii. It is such a fitting tribute, so appropriate. To look into his eyes, Mr. Speaker, you see fatigue; you see commitment; but most of all, you see gaman, perseverance through great adversity to a better place. No better fitting tribute could be issued at this point than this stamp. I am so honored to stand with my colleagues to honor the issuance of this stamp in memory of the Japanese-American soldiers of World War II. I am honored to be joined by my colleagues here today who will speak also, many of whom labored long and hard with the rest of us towards the issuance of this stamp. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Takano), who is the second vice chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus and chair of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee.

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Kahele).

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

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, each year we come together to recognize May as Asian American and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander Month, in celebration of the critical participation of our Asian American, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) communities in our national story. Over the past year, the pandemic has highlighted the harsh disparities that too many in the AANHPI community face across several issues, including access to health care, education and more. Our nation has also seen an unprecedented rise in hate-driven violence against Asian Americans. As Congressman from Hawai'i, the state with the highest percentage of Asian Americans in our country, I stand in full solidarity with all in the AANHPI community in confronting, condemning and overcoming this desecration of that story. My own mentor, U.S. Congressman and Senator Spark Matsunaga, understood that the way forward amongst all peoples was not through violence or discrimination, but through peace, education and understanding. He and his generation of Asian Americans in the World War II era prevailed through extreme hardship to live the belief that peace and equality are not just ideas and aspirations but achievable reality. In my home state of Hawai'i, we have been blessed with so many AANHPI leaders whose actions continue to guide us. Senator Matsunaga's legacy lives on in the U.S. Institute of Peace, which he created through an act of Congress in 1984. Congresswoman Patsy Mink's Title IX legislation is the foundation of equal opportunity in our schools. The songs Queen Lili'uokalani wrote are beloved memorials to the perseverance of Hawaiian culture. This July, we will celebrate the 100th anniversary of the enactment of Prince Jonah Kuhio Kalaniana`ole's Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, which helped return the Native Hawaiian people to the land that holds such deep ancestral, cultural and spiritual significance. Through these leaders and their successors, we see that despite generations of hardship and trial, AANHPI communities are standing strong and have led the charge to make our country better. To AANHPIs everywhere and especially the close to 80 percent of my own constituents whose heritage lies in Asia and the Pacific, I am truly honored to elevate your voices in the halls of Congress and understand that a single month of remembrance is not enough. There is far more to be done, as a community, as a state and as a nation. This May, in our 29th year of observing AANHPI month, I urge all of my fellow Americans to listen to the lessons of our past so we may act in the present to pave the way for our future.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor each and every person who wears a uniform or has served in our country's Armed Forces and celebrate National Military Appreciation Month. My home state of Hawaii is home to over 142,000 military members, family and support personnel, making it the largest and most important multi-service military `ohana in the IndoPacific. We are deeply grateful to those who are regularly deployed to protect our Hawaii, along with the many more who are proud to volunteer their time, skills and abilities to the task of making our country and our world a better place for all. Just as crucial to the fabric of Hawaii's military community is the more than 108,000 veterans who call Hawaii home. These men and women served with honor, and we must always ensure they are provided with the benefits they so rightfully earned and deserve. I also want to extend my enduring gratitude to the families of our soldiers, sailors, marines, airmen and guardsmen who made the ultimate sacrifice for our nation. Freedom, justice equality--these are the values that the men and women of our Armed Forces are charged to preserve and protect. Each of us owes our very best efforts to ensure that America's servicemembers can defend our values. We must make sure they are mission-ready, with the training and equipment necessary to carry out their duties here in our country and overseas. As a member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies, I am dedicated to properly supporting our present military members and their families and fulfilling the promises made to our veterans. Their service deserves our nation's respect and recognition not just for this month--but every day. Move forward with strength (Imua).

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to give voice, not just to the 80 percent of my constituents whose heritage lies in Asia and the Pacific, but to all I represent; that we join with our brothers and sisters across our country in solidarity; that hate against any of us based on our race, our ethnicity, our heritage, is hate against us all; that this must end here now. I rise today to recognize my Senator, Mazie Hirono, a pioneer in her own right, who brought this message to us in anger and in faith. I rise today for my granddaughter, 2-year-old, Cadence Masako Ansdell, and for millions like her for whom we must, today, make this choice, that when they come of age, they will know only the harsh lessons of their past and not the tragic reality of their present. Madam Speaker, I rise for us all.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 297, the bill that I have co-introduced with my colleague from Hawaii, Representative Kaiali'i Kahele. As Mr. Soto and the ranking member have noted, this legislation would require the Secretary of Agriculture, in consultation with the State of Hawaii, to conduct a study to identify lands in the State of Hawaii that merit inclusion in the National Forest System. This would be the first step in potentially establishing a national forest in one of the few parts of our country with no such system. As my friend and colleague, Mr. Soto, has noted, Hawaii is the most isolated island chain and one of the most ecologically diverse places in our world. Within our borders, we have 10 of the 13 world climate zones, ecosystems that range from the deserts to the tropics, where plants and animals that found their way to Hawaii evolved like nowhere else. A 2014 survey identified 9,975 endemic species in Hawaii, many of which are reliant on Hawaii's fragile ecosystem, including our forests, to survive. However, since the onset of human arrival just centuries ago, Hawaii has lost almost half of its unique native forest cover and countless fauna and flora species. Despite these threats to our unique biodiversity, Hawaii remains one of eight States that does not have a national forest or grassland. The study authorized by the bill would take steps to correct this oversight. It would consider how a Hawaii national forest could contribute to the conservation of this biodiversity not found elsewhere in our National Forest System while supporting the research mission of the Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry. It would help inventory where Hawaii's native koa, ohi'a, and sandalwood forests can be conserved and expanded for cultural and commercial practices. It would help identify where cultural sites could be better conserved and access expanded to the public and practitioners. And it would help provide the basis to bring together local stakeholders to advance the conservation of how to responsibly establish a national forest in Hawaii in a manner that will benefit both our island communities and the National Forest Service. Madam Speaker, I thank my colleagues in the Hawaii congressional delegation for their support. I thank the Committee on Natural Resources and Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands chairs, ranking members, members, and staff for their support and assistance in bringing this bill to the floor. I take my ranking member's comments to heart. I certainly hope that this study will not only evaluate and investigate how we can create a national forest in Hawaii but how we can make that a model for how national forests can and should be administered throughout our country. I endorse his concerns as to the administration of our national forests and, certainly, would look forward to working with him in our subcommittee and committee. As we continue to identify solutions to our climate and biodiversity crises, I hope we can all see the value in taking this step toward protecting our unique forest resources and their native species, along with providing important opportunities.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to express appreciation to my House colleagues who voted for my amendment to our recently passed Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act (VAWA) to ensure the full inclusion of American Indians, Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians in key parts of VAWA. My amendment requires key data for full implementation of VAWA about our nation's indigenous peoples that has previously been unavailable, especially relating to Native Hawaiians. To develop this data, the federal government will conduct a review of law enforcement and other crime prevention programs dealing with child sexual exploitation, child abuse, intimate partner violence, human trafficking, missing or murdered individuals and substance abuse. The review will result in recommendations directly affecting the social, educational, economic and other factors contributing to Native Hawaiians becoming missing or murdered. My amendment also calls for two additional reviews. The first one will examine programs that affect Native Hawaiians who are victims of criminal offenses. The second report will examine Native Hawaiians in the criminal justice system. This second report will also produce recommendations related to the social, educational, economic and other factors contributing to Native Hawaiians becoming involved in the criminal justice system. The need for these reports and data is critical. While data is available for individuals of Native American and Alaska Native descent, it does not exist for Native Hawaiians who suffer from high incidences of violence. This new data will guide future legislation and identify key areas in which additional assistance and resources are needed. Organizations that are centered around helping the Native Hawaiian community will benefit as well through availability of accurate data to direct their resources better. Mahalo nui loa (thank you very much) for your support for my amendment and for the inclusion of American Indian, Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian groups within VAWA.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the women of our nation and my home state of Hawaii past, present and future as we again celebrate Women's History Month. Each year during the month of March, we remember and honor the extraordinary American women who have made such lasting contributions to our culture, history and society. Long before they finally gained the right to vote in elections and before they broke through glass ceilings throughout our society, generations of women worked to expand the rights and opportunities previously denied to them. Women from all across America revolutionized their respective fields, setting the stage for the next generation, and the next, to pursue and attain equality. It is my honor to share with you today the stories of three remarkable women from Hawaii who made indelible contributions in education, science and politics. When Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop was born in 1831, the Native Hawaiian population in the islands numbered about 124,000. By the time she wrote her will in 1883, only 44,000 Native Hawaiians remained. In response to these dramatic changes facing Hawaii, she committed her life to those who were suffering and struggling in her homeland. She saw that education would allow her people to adapt to a changing world while preserving their language, culture and identity, so she dedicated her royal inheritance to establish Kamehameha Schools, with the mission of educating the children of Hawaii. Today, Kamehameha Schools is the largest independent school system in the U.S., with a current enrollment of 6,900 students within its Pre-K-12th grade program, and countless alumni who have bettered Hawai`i and our nation in countless ways. Born in remote Hana, Maui in 1919, Dr. Isabella Kauakea Tau Yung Aiona Abbott was the first Native Hawaiian woman to receive a PhD in science. Abbot spent much of her childhood at the seashore with her mother, collecting seaweed and algae. From her mother, as her mother from hers and on back, she learned to distinguish the different types of edible seaweed and how to use them in traditional Hawaiian cooking. These practices, passed from mother to daughter over generations, catalyzed Abbott's career in natural science. She went on to get her PhD in botany from the University of California at Berkeley. In 1960, she became a lecturer in the Biology Department at Stanford, and in 1971 she became the first woman on Stanford's biological sciences faculty. Abbot made unparalleled contributions to marine science, authoring eight books and over 150 research papers. She is credited with discovering over 200 different species of algae, many of which have been named after her, including a genus of the red algae family, which is called Abbottella, or ``little Abbott.'' Patsy Mink was the first Asian-American woman to be elected to the U.S. House of Representatives. Although her list of accomplishments is extensive, Mink faced many obstacles early in her career from those who did not believe in gender equality. After earning her bachelor's degree at the University of Hawaii, Mink applied to 12 medical schools and was rejected by all of them. She pivoted to study law at the University of Chicago. After graduating, she was denied the opportunity to take the bar examination in Hawaii due to her gender and marital status. She challenged the statute, won her case, and later passed the bar only to find that she could not get a job because she was married and had a child. She opened her own practice and focused on ending discriminatory laws. During her political career over the subsequent years, she broke many glass ceilings, winning positions in the State House of Representatives, the State Senate and eventually the U.S. House of Representatives, where she served for 12 terms. During her 24 years in Congress, she introduced and won passage of many impactful initiatives, most notably the Title IX amendment that ended discrimination in education due to gender, religion or race. In recognition of the tremendous impact Title IX has had for millions of girls and women over the past four decades, Congress renamed Title IX the Patsy T. Mink Equal Opportunity in Education Act following her passing. I could tell countless other stories of other women of Hawaii as we celebrate Women's History Month, stories that serve as an inspiration as we look to honor the tremendous contributions of the women who challenged the status quo and courageously fought for equality in every state of our nation. They truly paved the way for the equally inspiring women that we are privileged to witness advancing gender equity today. There is still so much work to be done for women in the U.S. and around the world. With the rest of my colleagues in Congress, I am inspired this month to continue the work that brings us closer each day to our nation's highest ideals of freedom and equality for all.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1, the For the People Act I am proud to have co-introduced, which includes my amendment to further facilitate voting by all eligible Americans through the best-practices expansion of vote-by-mail elections. Our For the People Act is a truly revolutionary bill that will implement many of the most critical government reform efforts we need to get government working for the people again, such as fighting voter suppression, simplifying voting, promoting election security, curbing special interest and dark money in politics, incentivizing smaller and broader donations, increasing transparency and fortifying ethics laws. While I applaud the efforts and amendments of my colleagues that incorporate lessons learned in this past election, like ensuring Americans with disabilities have access to voting and verification infrastructure, I believe more can and must be done to analyze the greatest possible utilization of mail-in voting throughout our nation. My amendment, which has been accepted by the House and added to the bill, is needed because we should know what went well and what needs improvement as we look to responsibly expand voter access by mail. Heading into the 2020 election, five states--Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Utah and my Hawaii--held universal vote-by-mail elections, with no-excuse absentee voting being an option in 34 states and the District of Columbia. The growing concerns over the safety of in-person voting during the COVID-19 pandemic prompted an additional 11 states to make it easier to vote by mail using absentee ballots. The prevalence and easy access to vote-by-mail led, in part, to record voter turnout in the last election. Roughly two-thirds of eligible voters cast a record 158.4 million ballots, with nearly 65 million ballots cast using the mail. This is a dramatic increase from the 2016 elections, where roughly 34 million Americans cast a ballot by mail. In my Hawaii, which performed its first universal vote-by-mail election in the 2020 primary elections, vote-by-mail increased election accessibility across-the-board, especially for our kupuna (elders) and those in underserved communities for whom in-person voting is problematic, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Hawaii's most recent primary election resulted in the highest voter turnout percentage for a primary election in our state's history, and more people voted in Hawaii's general election than ever before. We demonstrated to ourselves and the rest of the country that we can hold an all-mail election with virtually no fraud claims or disputed election results. Despite Hawaii's success, I am sure we can do even better, and there are best practices that can be shared amongst the states across our nation to encourage the even more widespread adoption of vote-by-mail. Thus, my amendment simply directs the Election Assistance Commission to conduct a study on vote-by-mail efforts in 2020 elections and develop recommendations to help states better administer their elections in the future. My study and the recommendations that will come from it can help improve vote-by-mail procedures and systems to ensure the right to vote to all eligible Americans while protecting the integrity and security of our elections. I thank this House for supporting my amendment, and urge this body to support final passage of the underlying bill. The For the People Act will truly deliver on our obligation to help renew Americans' faith in government by making sure it is of and for the people. Mahala (thank you).

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to join my colleague, Representative Kahele, in introducing our bill to protect one of the most unique and fragile environments on Earth, our Hawaii, from devastating invasive species. Invasive species pose an especially grave threat to Hawaii's unique ecosystems, natural resources and agricultural communities, in part due to Hawaii's unique geography. Hawaii is the most isolated island chain and one of the most ecologically diverse places in the world. We are 2,282 miles from the Continental United States, 2,952 miles from Japan and 4,772 miles from Washington, DC, with no other islands in close proximity. We have within our constrained borders ten of the thirteen world climate zones, with ecosystems ranging from desert to tropical, where plants and animals that found their way to Hawaii evolved like nowhere else. A 2014 survey identified fully 9,975 endemic species in Hawaii. These species include the Hawaiian scarlet honeycreeper, the `i`iwi; the flowering evergreen; and the state mammal of Hawaii, the `Ilioholoikauaua (Hawaiian monk seal). However, tragically, in large part due to invasive species, Hawaii has become the endangered species and extinction capital of the world. Hawaii currently has 502 species listed as endangered, more than any other state and almost half of the total endangered species nationwide. Many of these species are critically endangered and face an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild. Although we will never know the true number of species that have gone extinct in Hawaii, best estimates are that in the last 200 years alone, 28 bird, 72 snail, 74 insect and 97 plant species have gone extinct. As one particularly poignant example, two years ago the Atlantic published an article, The Last of Its Kind, which chronicled the death of George the snail. He was the last achatinella apexfulva, a species of tree snail that is endemic to the island of O`ahu. This article calls attention to the alarming fact that snails in Hawaii are disappearing at an alarming rate, perhaps faster any animal on Earth right now, victims of various factors in part linked to invasive species. The threat to our state tree, the `ohi`a lehua, is also illustrative of our growing crisis. Used for poi boards and outrigger canoes, the `ohi`a lehua is important to Hawaiian culture and the islands' watersheds. As the first tree to grow in new Hawaii lava flows, `ohi`a grows throughout the watershed creating new soil, stabilizing steep mountain ridges and comprises approximately 80 percent of Hawaii's native forests. However, rapid `ohi`a death, or ROD, caused by an invasive fungal pathogen, kills `ohi`a trees quickly, and threatens the stability of Hawaii's native forests. Since its discovery on the Big Island in 2014, ROD has spread to Kaua`i, Maui and O`ahu, and has killed hundreds of thousands of trees. Hawaii's unique circumstances also have given rise to one of our nation's most diverse and productive agricultural communities. With a year-round growing cycle, our crops have ranged throughout our history from the highest quality sugar and pineapple and cattle to tropical specialty crops like fruit and cut flowers in the highest demand worldwide. Yet it is exactly because these crops like our natural resources have adapted to Hawaii's uniqueness that they are the most susceptible to devastation from external species against which they have no natural defenses. Invasive species have drastically impacted agriculture in Hawaii, threatening some of the island's most valuable crops in the state's third-largest industry. Hawaii's third most valuable crop, the macadamia nut, is under threat from the macadamia felted coccid. Macadamia felted coccid has been found in all of Hawaii Island's macadamia growing regions. The felted coccid reduces macadamia tree output by draining nutrients from the tree. Invasive species coupled with increased rain led to a 22 percent decline in the macadamia nut harvest this year compared to last year. The cattle industry, which is one of Hawaii's most important agricultural commodities, has been dramatically affected by the introduction of the invasive two-lined spittlebug. Since being detected in 2016, the pest now infects more than 125,900 acres of grassland and is clearing lands for invasives grasses that further affect Hawaii's ecosystems. Yet despite these incontrovertible and growing impacts of external species on Hawaii's natural resources and economy, existing federal law leaves Hawaii largely defenseless against increasingly destructive invasives. Imports by air and sea, the only means of in-bound transportation to our island state, lack any effective regulation to screen out invasives. This is despite a fairly robust screening of exports from Hawaii to the Continental United States to screen out invasives from Hawaii viewed as harmful to mainland agriculture (invasives that, ironically, were invasives into Hawaii to start with). I sought to crack down on this lax regime to prevent and curb invasives with my introduction in 2005 of H.R. 3468, modeled after New Zealand and other isolated jurisdictions with then like now the most stringent invasive species prevention regimes in the world. Since the introduction of that bill, the threats from invasives have only grown. Since 2005, 195 invasive species have been introduced to Hawaii. That is in addition to the roughly 5,000 invasive species that have been introduced to Hawaii throughout its history. Our bill, the Hawaii Invasive Species Protection Act, will require the U.S Department of Agriculture (USDA) Animal and Plant Inspection Service (APHIS), in cooperation with other federal departments and the State of Hawaii, to conduct visual, x-ray and canine inspections, as appropriate, on person, baggage, cargo and any other article destined for direct movement to the State of Hawaii. The inspections will search for high-risk invasive species and agricultural materials. The inspections will be conducted at airports, ports and postal sorting facilities prior to direct travel to the State of Hawaii. Our bill further requires APHIS to work with the State of Hawaii to develop and publish a list of the high-risk invasive species and agricultural materials for the State of Hawaii. It pays for these inspections by increasing Agriculture Quarantine Inspection fees to cover the full cost of inspection. Inaction is not an option. Since my re-introduction of this bill last Congress, the coffee berry borer, which was discovered in Kona on Hawaii Island in 2010, now infects all of the coffee growing islands in Hawaii. The coffee berry borer can cause yield losses of between 30 and 35 percent and affects the quality of the coffee beans, directly impacting the income of growers. Had this bill been implemented, it may have helped prevent coffee leaf rust from entering Hawaii late last year. The confirmed presence of this fungal disease, which can lead to yield losses of between 50 and 80 percent, on multiple Hawaiian islands could leave one of Hawaii's most iconic industries devastated. If we truly care about the threat that continued and escalating invasive species pose to one of the most invaluable and unique ecosystems on earth, in addition to our unique economy and way of life, then the stark reality is that this bill is what it will take. Again, it is not revolutionary when compared to other countries that have not only recognized this threat but actually done something about it. And it is certainly not revolutionary when compared to longstanding domestic restrictions on exports from Hawaii, leading to the basic point that if these invasive species prevention requirements are good enough for the rest of the country and much of the world then they're good enough for Hawaii. Madam Speaker, I am grateful to this House for your understanding and careful consideration of Hawaii's challenge and opportunity, and ask for our bill's expeditious passage. Mahalo (thank you).

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, today I am re-introducing my Safe and Quiet Skies Act from the 116th Congress to ensure that commercial air tour flights are adequately regulated to ensure in-air and on-ground safety and address widespread and accelerating community disruption. I extend a special thanks to my colleagues, Congressmembers Nadler, Neguse, Norton, Sherman, and Sires, for co-introducing this necessary measure. In 2019 alone, there were 17 sightseeing tour flight and skydiving accidents nationwide with 37 tragic deaths from six of those crashes. In my Hawaii alone, we saw three dead in the crash of a commercial air tour helicopter into a residential neighborhood, eleven more dead in the crash of a commercial skydiving plane, and then seven more dead in a commercial air tour helicopter crash in a remote mountain region. Many other areas of the country have been equally impacted, especially those with high commercial usage, more dense populations, valuable natural resources, significant defense installations and other factors. These tragedies occurred amidst a rapid increase in commercial helicopter and small plane overflights including residential, commercial, and industrial neighborhoods, cemeteries and memorials, land and marine parks and other recreation areas, and sensitive military installations. These have disrupted whole communities with excessive noise and other impacts, destroyed the peace and sanctity of special places, increased risk to not only passengers but those on the ground, and weakened security and management of defense operations. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) currently has virtually exclusive jurisdiction over these aircraft operations. Following these and other recent tragedies across the country, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), which is responsible for investigating accidents but not for direct safety regulation, strongly recommended to the FAA that safety-related regulation of commercial tour helicopters and small aircraft skydiving operations is generally insufficient. Regarding ground disruption and risk, the FAA takes the position that its responsibility is strictly operational safety and national airspace efficiency and does not extend to ground disruption and other negative impacts. As a result, the operators, aside from strict takeoff and approach, avoidance of established flight paths and other limited circumstances, are virtually free to fly wherever, whenever, and as often as they want. And they do, with little to no self-regulation. This situation is unacceptable for both safety and community impact concerns. It is also not limited to Hawaii, with growing concerns in other areas with high commercial tour usage, more dense populations, valuable natural resources, significant defense installations and other factors. This bill would first require the FAA to implement the NTSB's recommended enhanced safety regulations. It would also prohibit flights over federal property that requires privacy, dignity, and respect, to include military installations, national cemeteries and national parks, wildlife refuges and wilderness. It would further require the use of standard equipment to monitor the location of flights, apply the ``sterile cockpit rule'' to tour flights (meaning in part that the pilot could not also be the tour guide), prohibit flights lower than 1,500 feet over actual ground, and limit decibel levels to those commonly applied to operations in residential areas. Additionally, the bill would allow states, localities, and tribes to impose stricter regulations on tour flights in their jurisdictions with required public engagement. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this bill into law.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, today I introduce three bills to end a century of monopolistic closed market domestic cargo shipping to and from my isolated home state of Hawaii as well as the other island and separated jurisdictions of our country not part of the continental United States. In doing so, we will break the stranglehold on the peoples and economies of these exposed communities and their resulting sky-high costs of living which results from just a few domestic shipping companies controlling the lifeline of commerce upon which we absolutely depend. These bills all amend the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, also known as the Jones Act. That federal law mandates that all cargo shipping between U.S. ports occur exclusively on U.S., not foreign, flagged vessels. Additionally, the law requires that these vessels are built in the U.S. and owned and crewed by U.S. citizens. The Jones Act was enacted in a protectionist era under the guise of preserving a strong national merchant marine. But today it is just an anachronism: most of the world's shipping is by way of an international merchant marine functioning in an open, competitive market. And those few U.S. flag cargo lines that remain have maneuvered the Jones Act to develop virtual monopolies over domestic cargo shipping to, from and within our most isolated and exposed locales--our island and offshore states and territories--that have no alternative modes of transportation such as trucking or rail. My Hawaii is a classic example. Located almost 2,500 miles off the West Coast, we import well over 90 percent of our life necessities by ocean cargo. There are plenty of international cargo lines who could and would compete for a share of that market. Yet only two U.S. flag domestic cargo lines--Matson Navigation and Pasha Hawaii--operate a virtual duopoly over our lifeline. While they are nominally subject to federal regulation, the fact of the matter is that cargo prices have gone in only one direction--up, fast and repeatedly, despite a surplus of international shipping--and it is indisputable that there is no downward market pressure which would otherwise result from meaningful competition. These accelerating cargo prices are not absorbed by the shipping lines, but passed through all the way down the chain, to the transporters, wholesalers, retailers, small businesses, mom-n-pops and ultimately consumers, of all of the elementals of life, from food to medical supplies, clothes, housing and virtually all other goods. The result is a crippling drag on an already-challenged economy and the very quality of life in Hawaii. The broadest, deepest effects of the Jones Act on Hawaii result from its impact on westbound imports from the continental United States to Hawaii. But Hawaii is an export location as well, in key products such as agriculture and livestock. Here the Jones Act also effectively stifles meaningful competition in getting those products to their primary markets on the U.S. Mainland. Because the producers of these products and all that rely for their own livelihood on their successful export have to eat inflated shipping costs, these export industries, which any economist knows are the ultimate key to any economy's prosperity, are also crippled. Let's take a concrete example: Hawaii's once-prosperous ranching/ cattle industry, which is so key to the economic health and the very lifestyle of so much of areas like the rural Big Island, where I was born and raised. That industry depends on getting its product, young cattle, to West Coast pens and transportation hubs in a cost-efficient manner. There are foreign cargo carriers that specialize, through custom cattle ships and overall sensitivity and adjustment to rancher timetables and needs, in such transport, but the Jones Act outright excludes them from the Hawaii-Mainland market. As a result, Hawaii's ranchers are reduced to two crippling, cost magnifying options. The first is to ship their cargo by foreign carriers to Canada, where they have to go through a myriad of bureaucratic, cost-magnifying gyrations to get their product eventually to their U.S. markets. The second is to beg for the goodwill of the domestic carriers, to whom this is simply a hindrance rather than a major commitment, to ship directly to the West Coast. And it shows: most of the cattle are first shipped from Hawaii's Neighbor Islands, where the bulk of the cattle industry is located, to O`ahu, in small ``cow-tainers,'' where they sit for days in Honolulu Harbor awaiting the return to the Mainland of one of the massive cargo ships designed and utilized for quite another purpose. The result (besides associated higher costs) is in-harbor cattle waste disposal challenges, higher in-transit cattle mortality and lower-weight cattle delivery to market. That's what happens when you try to squeeze a square peg into a round hole. More broadly, there is much evidence about the direct impact of the Jones Act on shipping prices to noncontiguous areas. At a basic level, the everyday goods that we rely on in Hawaii cost much more than on the Mainland, a difference which largely cannot be attributed to anything other than shipping costs. Last year, the Grassroot Institute of Hawaii published a thorough and first-of-it-kind report, ``Quantifying the Cost of the Jones Act to Hawaii.'' The report found that: The median annual cost of the Jones Act to the Hawaii economy is $1.2 billion. The annual cost of shipping to Hawaii is estimated to be $654 million higher and prices $916 million higher. The Jones Act annually costs each Hawaii resident more than $645. Thanks to the Jones Act, Hawaii has approximately 9,100 fewer jobs, representing $404 million in wages. Hawaii families across all income groups would benefit from Jones Act reform. In the absence of Jones Act restrictions, those making between $15,000 and $70,000 annually would see an annual across-the-board economic benefit ranging from $78 million to $154 million. Annual tax revenues would be $148.2 million higher. Focusing solely on the Jones Act requirement that vessels be built in the United States, they found that the build provision results in a 1.2 percent shipping cost increase for Hawaii. This translates annually to an added cost of $531.7 million to the state's economy, or about $296 per resident. It also means a loss of 3,860 jobs, and $30.8 million less in state and local tax revenues. In 2012, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York studied Puerto Rico's economy and found that ``the high cost of shipping is a substantial burden on the Island's productivity.'' The New York Fed found that, ``[i]t costs an estimated $3,063 to ship a twenty-foot container of household and commercial goods from the East Coast of the United States to Puerto Rico; the same shipment costs $1,504 to nearby Santo Domingo (Dominican Republic) and $1,687 to Kingston (Jamaica)--destinations that are not subject to Jones Act restrictions.'' There is only one reason why costs are double to ship from the continental United States to a domestic port in Puerto Rico as compared to foreign ports in the Dominican Republic and Jamaica: there is international competition on the latter routes, none on the domestic route and the shipping companies take full advantage of that lack of competition. The three bills I introduce today say: enough is enough. If the continental U.S., wants to continue the Jones Act as to shipping between their locations, that's their business. But don't penalize us island and other noncontiguous locations by throwing us to the monopoly wolves you've created. The first bill, the Noncontiguous Shipping Relief Act, exempts all noncontiguous U.S. locations, including Hawaii, from the Jones Act. The second, the Noncontiguous Shipping Reasonable Rate Act, benchmarks the definition of a ``reasonable rate'' that Jones Act shipping can charge to within ten percent of analogous international shipping rates. And the third, the Noncontiguous Shipping Competition Act, prevents monopolies or duopolies in noncontiguous Jones Act shipping. Essentially, the bills are intended to lay out options for providing relief for our U.S. noncontiguous areas. We can resolve the issue in many ways, but we must change the status quo which has had such a deep, broad and negative impact on my state and the other jurisdictions beholden to the Jones Act. The Noncontiguous Shipping Relief Act would allow the noncontiguous jurisdictions to be serviced by non-Jones Act vessels and increase, or in some cases create any, competition in these critical shipping lanes. Again, this is a small portion of the total national Jones Act shipping where it is particularly destructive in application. Let me address directly the argument offered up by the domestic shippers in defense of the Jones Act: that it contains important labor and environmental protections that would be lost upon repeal. My bill would retain these important protections. Specifically, it provides that all foreign shippers operating under the bill's Jones Act exemptions must comply with the same labor, environmental, tax, documentation, U.S. locus and other laws as are applicable to non-U.S. flag ships and shippers transiting U.S. waters today. The Noncontiguous Shipping Reasonable Rate Act would define a ``reasonable rate'' for the noncontiguous domestic ocean trade as no more than ten percent above the rate set by a comparable international rate recognized by the Federal Maritime Commission. Currently, the Surface Transportation Board technically has the authority to adjudicate and set precedent on what a ``reasonable rate'' is for Jones Act shipping, but it has almost never been used and never to a clear conclusion on what is a reasonable rate. My bill would define reasonable to remove uncertainty. Current Jones Act shipping rates vary widely and there is no central compilation of these rates. The ten percent benchmark would allow for variance but also ensure that Americans in our noncontiguous areas are not forced to pay exorbitant rates way above shipping rates which would otherwise be provided through international competition were the Jones Act not applicable. The Noncontiguous Shipping Competition Act would exempt shipping routes to noncontiguous jurisdictions from the Jones Act requirements if a monopoly or duopoly exists on those routes. The Jones Act has resulted in the blossoming of monopolies and duopolies in our noncontiguous jurisdictions. To ensure that these communities, which are the most reliant in the country on shipping to receive necessities, are not held hostage to these dominant companies, my bill would give Jones Act exemptions to routes that are not serviced by at least three companies with separate ownership. In short, if a domestic route is in fact in a competitive environment, the Jones Act is less of a problem, but if there is no competition, then the route should be opened up to international competition by rescinding the Jones Act. Madam Speaker, these long-overdue bills are of the utmost importance to the localities which have long borne the unfair brunt of the Jones Act. It is often difficult to pierce the veil of longstanding custom and understanding to see the real negative impacts of a law and what should instead be. It is even more difficult to change a law which provides a federally-created and endorsed monopoly under which no competition exists to hold down prices. Yet clearly the time for these measures is overdue. I urge their passage.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, last year, I was proud to help create the first-ever Congressional Pacific Islands Caucus, which I co-chair along with four of my colleagues. When we launched the Caucus, I noted that our country's and world's future lie in the Indo-Pacific, and that the island nations of the Pacific are a key yet too-often overlooked part of that region and future. We have critical strategic interests and longstanding partnerships throughout the Pacific islands. Yet now our allies and friends and all other Pacific jurisdictions are increasingly under severe economic and environmental stress, and China is aggressively seeking to grow its influence. We cannot ignore these critical developments, and our new Caucus is dedicated to assuring that does not happen. Among these nations are three with which we have an especially close relationship under a unique status: the freely-associated Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia and the Republic of Palau. These are island countries with which we share a long history dating back to the Second World War and before and an enduring relationship built on decades of shared interests and like values. These countries, also collectively known as the Freely Associated States, span an expanse of the Pacific ranging from just southwest of my State of Hawaii to our territories of Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands in the western Pacific, an area the size of the forty-eight contiguous States. Under our Compacts of Free Association, our country can construct military bases on their soil and make decisions that affect our mutual security. In return, we provide financial assistance, access to some federal programs and enable free movement of their citizens to live and work in the United States. The role these islands play in our national defense cannot be understated. For example, Palau asked our country to increase its military presence in its islands, and the Marshall Islands are home to what the Army calls ``the premier missile test range in the world.'' In November, a Navy destroyer near Hawaii intercepted a mock ICBM launched from U.S. Army Garrison Kwajalein Atoll in an exercise viewed as an important accomplishment and critical milestone by our military. Vulnerable as this small island community is to COVID-19, it opened its closed borders to our citizens who needed to work at Kwajalein. Given the importance of the Compacts, we must always demonstrate to the Freely Associated States and the world that the U.S. can be trusted to uphold its commitments. For example, I am very pleased that the final Fiscal Year 2021 omnibus funding bill includes $5 million of a $20 million debt the U.S. owes to the Marshall Islands in response to unilateral changes made to the investment tax and trade incentives in the initial version of the Compact of Free Association. On the other hand, I was extremely disappointed that the outgoing Administration recommended providing $2 million less for Fiscal Year 2021 than was agreed to in compensation for amending various education programs back in 2003. This underfunding erodes the trust that our allies and partners have for our commitment to the Compacts. We must fulfill and take these obligations seriously, especially as we work to renew the economic provisions of these Compacts. I look forward to working closely with my colleagues in the coming Congress to remedy this error and address other issues that may arise relating to the Compacts. Our alliances and partnerships worldwide, powered by shared interests and values, are America's greatest strengths, especially in this era of great power competition. Trust in our country's ability and willingness to honor our commitments must be the unshakeable foundation of these crucial relationships. We can and must do better to protect that trust.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6585 with deep reservations. I support the substance of the measure as addressing key concerns for American Indians and Alaska Natives. My grave concern is with the inexplicable omission of Native Hawaiians as indistinguishably indigenous peoples of this country to be treated and included the same. I spelled out my concerns at length in a submission to the record of my Committee on Natural Resources on this measure and I include in the Record my statement: U.S. House Committee on Natural Resources: July 29, 2020 Full Committee Markup on H.R. 6535: Additional Remarks for the Record: U.S. Congressman Ed Case: Chairman Grijalva, Ranking Member Bishop and fellow Committee members, I respectfully submit these additional remarks for the record on H.R. 6535, introduced by my friend and colleague on the Committee, Mr. Gallego, also Chair of the Committee's Subcommittee on Indigenous Peoples of the United States on which I am also honored to serve. H.R. 6535, considered and unanimously reported by this Committee on July 29, 2020, would extend federal tort claims coverage for certain personal injury claims to urban Indian organizations by deeming them part of the Public Health Service, similar to current coverage provided to Indian tribes, tribal organizations, Indian contractors and employees. I fully endorse this measure and was pleased to be able to support it in both Subcommittee and full Committee. However, I must register my deep concern that Native Hawaiian Health Care Systems (NHHCS) have not also been extended the same coverage in this measure or otherwise. Although there are legitimate procedural and related non- substantive reasons for not including them in this specific vehicle, I wish to affirm for the record that this is clearly unfinished business that should and must be remedied by this Committee and Congress at the earliest opportunity. The current federal tort claims coverage extends to many health care providers serving American Indian and Alaska Native individuals in the Indian Health Service (IHS) and tribal facilities as part of the undertakings and obligations of our country to our indigenous peoples. Whole segments of our indigenous populations depend on these providers for their health needs, in particular primary and preventive care. The practical effect of covering these critical organizations under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) is to simplify the processing and resolution of medical malpractice and other personal injury claims against the organization, which expedites settlement of legitimate claims and decreases administrative and related expense burdens, thus enabling providers to deliver more extensive and better service to their communities. FTCA coverage has extended for decades to the IHS and tribal organizations including indigenous-focused federally qualified health centers (to include Native Hawaiian Community Health Centers (NHCHC).) However, for reasons that reflect simple omission rather than any other explanation, urban Indian organizations and NHHCS, first established under the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act of 1988, are not currently covered under the FTCA. This bill would correct that as to urban Indian organizations but not NHHCS. There is no policy or functional differentiation among urban Indian organizations, NHHCS, tribal organizations and NHCHC in FTCA coverage, nor between NHHCS and urban Indian organizations. Both urban Indian organizations and NHHCS are devoted to the same needs for the same reasons as the others. In fact, in Hawai'i, where we have the largest population of Native Hawaiians of any state but relatively few Native Americans and Alaska Natives, our NHHCS actually contract with the IHS to provide our own and visiting Native Americans and Alaska Natives with reduced cost health care and payer of last resort services (and at actual costs that far exceed the contracted amounts). Moreover, in the public health context, there is every reason for Native Hawaiians to seek the same benefits as afforded to other indigenous organizations under FTCA coverage. Even aside from COVID-19, Native Hawaiians suffer from the shortest life expectancy of the major ethnic groups in Hawai'i due to underlying medical conditions such as diabetes, coronary heart disease and asthma. With higher unemployment rates, Native Hawaiians are in particular need of the culturally relevant, lower cost health care options offered by Native Hawaiian-focused organizations like NHHCS. All this has been worsened by COVID-19, which has inflicted some of the highest infection and mortality rates on Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander communities nationwide. The extension of FTCA to NHHCC is just one of many initiatives that can make a real difference in ensuring NHHCS can continue to serve their own populations in these times of great challenge and need. During my Subcommittee on the Indigenous Peoples of the United States' July 19, 2020 hearing on H.R. 6535, I asked IHS Director RADM Michael D. Weahkee whether there was any policy reason to differentiate between NHHCS, urban Indian organizations and other tribal health care providers in FTCA coverage. Director Weahkee responded: ``In one of my roles as Indian Health Service Director, I serve as the Vice Chair of the Interdepartmental Council on Native American Affairs at the Department of Health and Human Services, and that responsibility extends not only to our American Indian and Alaska Native populations, but also to our Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders, and so in that chair I would see the same advantage toward Native Hawaiian programs as I discussed here today for our American Indian urban Indian organizations.'' Further, the Congressional Budget Office previously reviewed similar legislation, the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Reauthorization Act of 2003, and determined there was no appreciable cost to the federal government. Aside from these bill specifics, I ask this Committee to understand and appreciate my Native Hawaiian community's goal of extending FTCA coverage to NHHCS, and its great concern at being excluded from H.R. 6535, as not just a policy inconsistency but in a much broader context. To repeat, Native Hawaiians are the indigenous peoples of our country to the same degree and extent as other indigenous peoples. As such, the United States has undertaken a similar special trust responsibility to Native Hawaiians dating back to Hawaii's entry into the United States as a territory in 1900, and continuing through the seminal century-old Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1920 and some 150-plus more Native Hawaiian federal statutes and equally if not more numerous specific regulations, administrative actions and other initiative since including the Native Hawaiian Education Act and Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act. This is not a new or questionable relationship in any way and has the same long and often difficult history as other indigenous peoples. Notwithstanding, Native Hawaiians have faced decades of being overlooked, ignored and excluded in our federal initiatives to fulfill our country's trust responsibilities to our indigenous peoples. It has proven too easy to ask Native Hawaiians to just wait while we take care of another indigenous concern first, while too often the wait has not materialized into any later action. So please understand that when Native Hawaiians express great concern over exclusion from a seemingly straightforward bill like H.R. 6535, their skepticism, apprehension and distrust has deep roots that transcend this specific bill. Chair, Ranking Member and Committee colleagues, I personally appreciate your consideration of my additional remarks on behalf of our country's vital Native Hawaiian community, and hope that I have provided you with some broader appreciation of why we believe that inclusion of NHHCS in FTCA coverage as is provided for virtually all other indigenous health care organizations is so important. I look forward to working with your and our like-minded colleagues to achieve such inclusion in other appropriate vehicles. Mahalo nui loa (thank you very much). I fully expect that further measures I am asked to support of benefit to American Indians and Alaska Natives will include Native Hawaiians. Thank you.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, as the Representative of the State with one of the largest exclusive economic zones in our country and as the Representative of the State that sits in the middle of the Pacific where we are seeing increasing overfishing, including the use of these techniques throughout our Pacific, I rise in very strong support of the Driftnet Modernization and Bycatch Reduction Act. This bipartisan legislation is necessary to transition fairly an important West Coast fishery away from the use of large mesh driftnets. I want to commend, in addition to Senator Feinstein and the Republican cosponsors, Congressman Lieu on our side for his work on the bill in the House. Yes, this fishery is small, with less than 20 participants, but it is one of the most destructive. The use of mile-long driftnets results in over 70 species caught in volume as bycatch. The problems with this practice are nothing new. Beginning in the 1980s, Congress and the Republican and first Bush administration recognized its destruction and worked together to reform the practice, culminating with the near complete global moratorium on the practice. Today, the large mesh driftnets that continue to be used in Federal waters along the West Coast are the last of their kind in the Nation. This bill closes that loophole and phases out the practice. Fortunately, new fishing technology has been developed that catches swordfish at a profitable level without the huge levels of bycatch associated with driftnets. That is good for fishermen, good for consumers, and good for the marine environment. All West Coast States have already acted to prohibit this type of fishing from their shores and their oceans. It is time we, at the Federal level, act to do the same to ensure the sustainability of this fishery and the sustainability of the bycatch fisheries. Transitioning away from large-mesh driftnets is supported by recreational fishermen, conservation groups, seafood purveyors, and consumers, and it just makes sense. Mr. Speaker, I urge support for this bipartisan, bicameral bill.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the alliance between the United States and Japan and celebrate the extraordinary contributions of Japanese Americans across our country, especially in my home state of Hawaii. Seventy-five years ago, the Second World War finally ended when Japanese and Allied representatives signed the Instrument of Surrender on the deck of the U.S.S. Missouri, the storied battleship that now rests in Pearl Harbor in my district. Three generations hence, Japan has become a crucial ally, economic power and trading partner to the United States and built a dynamic democratic society and vibrant popular culture. Our two countries and peoples stand united as anchors of peace, prosperity and the liberal international order in the Indo- Pacific region. On November 18, 2020, the House unanimously passed H. Res. 349, reaffirming the vital role of the United States-Japan alliance in promoting peace, stability and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region and beyond, a resolution that I also proudly cosponsored. Amidst this COVID-19 pandemic, renewed great power competition and a world in flux, the alliance and friendship between the United States and Japan remains a pillar of stability. Whatever challenges lie ahead, I am confident that our two countries will stand together and overcome them. The memory of World War II also evokes one of the most shameful periods of our history as a country: the mass internment of Japanese Americans. Through Executive Order 9066 and other orders, the federal government forcibly relocated and incarcerated about 120,000 Japanese Americans, the majority of whom were U.S. citizens, in concentration camps. The year 2020 marks 40 years since the appointment of the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians by President Jimmy Carter in 1980. That Commission's report, entitled Personal Justice Denied, affirmed what we already knew: that the mass internment of Japanese Americans was the product of racism and not driven by any actual national security risk. In 1988, Congress passed, and President Ronald Reagan signed into law, the Civil Liberties Act of 1988, which formally apologized and established restitution for the internment of Japanese Americans. Yet from this dark period in our history emerged great acts of courage and patriotism that helped make our country a more perfect union. Just months after President Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066, thousands of Japanese Americans volunteered to join the war effort to join their comrades who had served earlier in the Hawaii National Guard, leading to formation of the 100th Infantry Battalion and the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, later combined. Nicknamed the ``Purple Heart Battalion,'' the 100th/442nd became the single-most decorated unit of its size in U.S. military history. Thousands more Japanese Americans served in the all-Japanese American 552nd Field Artillery Battalion and Japanese American Unit of the Military Intelligence Service. Last year, I had the honor of traveling to the town of Bruyeres, France, liberated by the 100th/442nd in the fall of 1944 at terrible cost, to represent our Congress at the 75th anniversary of liberation. There, I was moved by the powerful memory of these Japanese American soldiers, which included my wife's uncle, PFC Sadao Hikida, their courage and ferocity in freeing this town from Nazi oppression and rescuing the ``Lost Battalion'' and the enduring friendships they built with the people of Bruyeres. In Bruyeres, I also recounted the personal impact that two veterans of the 100th/442nd had on my own life and career. It was Journey to Washington, the memoir of Medal of Honor recipient and U.S. Senator Daniel K. Inouye, that first inspired me to consider a career in elected office. After graduating from college, I worked three years for Congressman (and later Senator) Spark Matsunaga, another veteran of the 100th/442nd, who has served as a lifetime role model for me and so many others. The courage and patriotism of Japanese Americans also extended to the home front. Japanese American citizens fought against the injustice of Executive Order 9066 and challenged it in court, leading to the infamous Korematsu v. United States decision. That decision was only recently reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court. In the decades since, Japanese Americans have accomplished so much and contributed so greatly to our country through their service and achievements in government, the military, science and technology, arts and culture, business and more. I especially recognize the Japanese Americans of Hawaii who help make our home state the wonderfully rich and diverse place it is. I am proud to join my colleagues in this House in recognizing the U.S.-Japan alliance and commit myself to continued support for the historic friendship and amity between our peoples. And I am equally proud to represent and support the descendants of all those who came to this country from Japan in search of a better life, retaining the best of the rich cultural heritage of their ancestral country in generations of contribution and achievement since.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 199) to provide for the transfer of certain Federal land in the State of Minnesota for the benefit of the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe.

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 include extraneous material on the measure under consideration.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 914) to reauthorize the Integrated Coastal and Ocean Observation System Act of 2009, to clarify the authority of the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration with respect to post-storm assessments, and to require the establishment of a National Water Center, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. CASE

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 1342) to require the Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere to update periodically the environmental sensitivity index products of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for each coastal area of the Great Lakes, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), the co-introducer of this important legislation.