Kathy Castor

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1949. It is a harmful bill that demonstrates how Republicans in Congress continue to ignore the rising cost of living and inflation that is crushing American families and that they are willing to sell out American energy to our adversaries like the Chinese Community Party. I know it wasn't even 2 weeks ago that President Trump said: I don't want to talk about affordability. Well, we are going to talk about it, and we are going to stand up for people's pocketbooks at home. This bill is just another example of how Republicans have not brought one single bill to the House floor that would lower energy costs for hardworking families. Electricity bills are skyrocketing. It is getting harder and harder for people to pay their utility bills. Now Republicans and the Trump administration are making it worse. They have passed the big, ugly bill to rip away savings and rebates for cleaner, cheaper energy a few months ago and energy efficiency that keeps bills lower, all to pay for tax breaks for the wealthy and the well-connected. Now they want to ramp up gas exports that will make life even more expensive. It wasn't even 1 year ago that the Department of Energy released its study that made it clear, continuing to approve gas exports would raise costs on U.S. households and businesses. Don't just take it from me, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from the Industrial Energy Consumers of America dated November 17, 2025. Industrial Energy Consumers of America, Washington, DC, November 17, 2025. Re H.R. 1949 the ``Unlocking our Domestic LNG Potential Act of 2025'' is Inconsistent with President Trump's Pledge to Put America First Hon. Mike Johnson, Speaker of the House, House of Representatives, Washington,

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. They say this bill is inconsistent with the President's pledge to put America first, and it prioritizes gas exports over U.S. consumers by removing longstanding consumer protections. They urge everyone to oppose this bill and preserve those consumer protections. Mr. Speaker, when you export more gas, that raises domestic gas prices, electricity prices, and the cost of manufactured goods. A vote for this bill is a vote to raise utility bills. That is particularly problematic to the neighbors back home I represent in the State of Florida. The State of Florida, the Sunshine State, you would think would be powered by the sun, Mr. Speaker, but we are 75 percent reliant on gas to generate electricity. Now, Mr. Speaker, you are saying: Okay, Floridians, you are already being crushed by utility bills, and now Republicans are going to make it worse. It is raising costs on all of us in more insidious ways too because we do have a climate crisis across the world. Mr. Speaker, when you are paying more to address climate-fueled disasters caused by hurricanes, such as repairing your home, emergency response, and property insurance, then that is an additional cost. Given that large methane and carbon dioxide emissions are emitted during fracking, pipeline transport, liquefaction, overseas shipping, and combustion, costs go up, and so do pollution and health risks, especially along the Gulf Coast. Now, let's talk about point number two. Mr. Speaker, if higher costs in electric bills are not going to convince you to vote against this bill, then I hope that America's national security will. Republicans and the gas industry and their lobbyists want carte blanche to export gas to anyone, even our foreign adversaries. Now, under current law, the U.S. Department of Energy is responsible for authorizing exports of domestically produced gas to foreign countries. In doing so, DOE makes a determination whether or not that export is consistent with the public interest. Republicans and the industry want to eliminate that important review, that even if the gas goes to the Chinese Communist Party and other foreign adversaries that is okay, there is no need to look and no need to review that. That is wrong and dangerous. Aren't Republicans in Congress concerned that shipping American energy overseas to China to power their AI data centers and their manufacturing is a risk, an economic risk, and a military risk? I also serve on the House Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party. On that committee, we have heard over and over about the dangers of Chinese industrial dominance. They want to just kind of sweep up all natural resources across the globe for their economic and military advantage. Why would Republicans in Congress be party to that? Through this bill, House Republicans want to make it easier for China to import U.S. energy to power their industrial and military sectors. Republicans have also enacted policies that wave a white flag to China on cleaner and cheaper energy, on electric vehicles, and on the next generation of energy manufacturing and technology, all evidenced by what they have done in gutting clean energy tax credits in manufacturing, in jobs, and in cost savings in their big, ugly bill.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Plus, it is hypocritical for Republicans to condemn Chinese forced labor, subsidies, and intellectual property theft on the one hand and then allow massive amounts of U.S. resources to flow to Chinese factories on the other hand. These are not hypothetical concerns. In June, the President posted that hopefully China will be purchasing plenty of oil from the U.S. Then, after meeting with President Xi in October, the President said that a very large-scale transaction may take place concerning the purchase of oil and gas from the great State of Alaska. This is all too much. If these projects come online, then U.S. LNG would represent up to one-quarter of all of China's contracted LNG under the contracts that have already been entered into. I urge my colleagues now to do the patriotic thing. Really, go ahead, and put America first for a change. It is vitally important that energy export decisions benefit the American people, not our foreign adversaries. Exporting more LNG without guardrails does nothing to lower energy bills for hardworking families. In fact, it will make it worse, and people deserve better.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate Roosevelt Elementary School, celebrating its 100th year of educating the children of the Tampa Bay region. Roosevelt Elementary has not only been a champion for education but a fixture of the Tampa community, supporting academic excellence, character building, and community engagement. The Tampa Bay Community is forever grateful to have caring educators and a school like Roosevelt Elementary to teach the next generation of Floridians and bring together my neighbors across Tampa Bay. The history of Roosevelt Elementary is the history of the City of Tampa. Theodore Roosevelt was Assistant Secretary of the Navy when the U.S.S. Maine was sunk in Havana Harbor. When the Spanish-American War began, Roosevelt resigned his position and joined the military. Lieutenant Colonel Roosevelt recruited volunteers to serve in the 1st United States Volunteer Cavalry, which soon became known as the Rough Riders. In June of 1898, Roosevelt and the Rough Riders camped in Tampa for two weeks before they headed south to Cuba and became famous for their charge up Cuba's San Juan Hill. The Rough Riders were brave men fighting to achieve an independent Cuba, something Tampa's large Cuban immigrant population had sought for so long. Roosevelt Elementary was constructed in 1925 and carries with it the ambitious spirit of the Rough Riders. It promotes academic excellence and works closely with the Tampa Bay Rough Riders, a nonprofit organization that celebrates the regiment and Tampa's contribution to the Spanish-American War through patriotic and civic activities throughout the Tampa Bay Region. Roosevelt Elementary partners regularly with the Rough Riders to foster a love and understanding of community service in students. Roosevelt Elementary is listed in the U.S. National Register of Historic Places, honoring the cornerstone Roosevelt has become to our community and its place in the history of Tampa. Roosevelt Elementary is a Grade A school, a success that is a collective achievement, says Principal Denise Wheatley. It is the dedication by both students and teachers, and the investment by families and community partners, that make Roosevelt the thriving educational institution it is to this day. Principal Wheatley calls on all to ``continue to embody the spirit of the Rough Riders.'' Through this collaboration of partners inside and outside of the classroom, Roosevelt will continue to thrive as a place where every student feels valued, supported, and inspired to achieve their fullest potential. Mr. Speaker, I am incredibly proud to support the high-quality public schools and talented teachers found in Hillsborough County. On behalf of my neighbors in Tampa Bay, I am proud to congratulate Roosevelt Elementary on 100 years of educating Florida's youngest generation. It is dedicated educators like those at Roosevelt, and the committed community that foster the Rough Rider spirit, that make our Tampa Bay community the welcoming place it is today. Our community is so proud of institutions like Roosevelt, and I applaud them on this tremendous milestone of a century of learning, service, and school spirit.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey for yielding the time. Mr. Speaker, here we are 9 months into the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress, despite their promises, have done nothing to lower energy costs. In fact, costs keep going up, up, and up, and the GOP policies are making it worse. I have to say that Americans deserve a whole lot better. We understand that the impact of the big, ugly bill passed a couple months ago is going to raise the cost of living on hardworking families across the country. There has been a lot of attention on healthcare costs in the State of Florida because the Republicans would not reinstate the cost-saving and lifesaving tax credits. Millions of Floridians, like many more across America, are facing higher healthcare costs. What wasn't covered as much in the big, ugly bill and its impact is what it is going to do to drive up people's electric bill. Already, this year, household electricity prices are up 10 percent. One in three households is cutting back on necessities, like groceries, to afford their energy bills. Three in four Americans are concerned with their utility bills increasing, and they should be because at least 102 gas and electric utilities have either raised or proposed higher rates that will go into effect next year. Here is the proof. Here is a report from September of this year: ``Residents in at Least 41 States and Washington, D.C., Are Facing Increased Electric and Natural Gas Bills.'' ``Utilities are increasing prices for customers across the country.'' Including all the way through to 2028, monthly residential bill impacts are going to be rough. Here is another from PowerLines from July 2025: `` `Utility bills are rising.' Q2 2025 Update.'' ``Utility rate increases requested and approved totaled $9 billion in Q2 2025 and $29 billion in the first half of 2025, making 2025 a record year for utility rate increases.'' In my home State of Florida, the largest power provider has requested the largest rate hike in history--$10 billion for most of the counties in the State. Here is an article I will submit for the Record from this month from the Energy & Policy Institute: ``Key decisions loom in Florida Power and Light's historic bid to raise rates by $10 billion.'' I include the links to these three items in the Record: Https://powerlines.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/ 0709_PowerLines_Rising-Utility-Bills-Q2-Update-2.pdf Https://energyandpolicy.org/key-decisions-loom-in-fpl-historic-bid- to-raise-rates Https://www.americanprogress.org/ article/residents-in-at-least-41-states-and-washington-d-c-are-facing- increased-electric-and-natural-gas-bills Mr. Speaker, the big, ugly bill is having a very harsh impact on the bottom lines of hardworking families, and now Republicans want to offer a package of bills that is going to make it worse, add insult to injury. They just can't stop providing solace for polluters. They have already gutted a lot of the tools that make energy more affordable, like clean energy tax credits, like trying to save on energy efficiency and things like that. However, what also adds insult to injury is--and I don't know why, but if Republicans are talking about they believe in fairness, they believe in permitting, they believe that we need all of the power generation we possibly can make, why do they stand idly by while the Trump administration wages war on a clean energy power source? Many of them are already permitted and constructed. In April, the administration issued a stop-work order for the Empire Wind offshore wind project surrounding New York. Even though the order was lifted in May, that delay cost the developer $955 million. The President is actively trying to revoke permits for the Revolution Wind project, which was fully permitted and 80 percent complete, supporting more than 2,500 U.S. jobs across construction, operations, shipbuilding, manufacturing. The project was just steps away from powering more than 350,000 homes in Rhode Island and Connecticut, but now that is at risk, so they are facing much higher bills. Just last week, the Interior Department asked a judge to cancel approval of the Maryland Offshore Wind project, a project over a decade in the making that had received all of its final permits from multiple Federal agencies and was expected to power over 700,000 homes. This just doesn't make sense to bring a package of bills and say: Oh, we are really concerned. They are not concerned. Rates are going up. They are canceling projects. They are throwing wrenches into cleaner, cheaper energy. This is really a giveaway to the fossil fuel companies. What other explanation can there be to sock it to hardworking people who need a break? They need a break. Groceries are too high. Their healthcare is being taken away, and now they are raising the rates of their utility bills. Mr. Speaker, I am all for cutting red tape, but what is happening here is detrimental to the folks we represent back home. It is not fair. It is not right. We need to do everything we can. These bills, this bill doesn't meet the moment. It is going to keep electricity bills going up, up, and up. I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill and get back to work on serious solutions for people's pocketbooks.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding the time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3015. This bears repeating again: Here we are, 9 months into the new administration and a new Congress, and Republicans have not brought one bill to the floor of the House that will help tackle the cost-of-living squeeze and the affordability crisis. Folks back home really need help. They are paying more on their groceries despite all the promises, more on their electricity, and now are facing huge increases to the cost of healthcare. It is really not fair. Now, let's get back to household electricity. Prices are up 10 percent this year. One in three households is cutting back on basic necessities just to pay their rising electric bill. People are very concerned, and they should be, because over 100 gas and electric utilities are proposing higher rates this year. Mr. Speaker, you know very well that we are grappling in Florida where the largest utility has requested what looks like the largest rate increase in the history of the country. I hear my good friend, the chairman of the committee, talk about this. They care a lot about consumer costs, but their rhetoric does not match their record. Example number one is the big, ugly bill. I will offer for the Record an analysis by Energy Innovation of the big, ugly bill where they say, ``The bill will reduce additions of new cost-effective electricity capacity, raising power prices for consumers, and decreasing U.S. GDP . . .'' which will hamper development of domestic electricity generation capacity, and by 2035, we forecast a 340 gigawatt decrease in generation capacity due to the bill. As a result, this bill will make it more expensive to meet growing demand in the next 5 critical years in the global artificial intelligence race damaging U.S. competitiveness. Mr. Speaker, the links for this analysis and two other analyses are as follows: Https://energyinnovation.org/wp- content/uploads/One-Big-Beautiful- Bill-Senate-Reconciliation- Analysis_July-2025.pdf Https://earthjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/grid- strategies_cost-of-federal-mandates-to-retain-fossil- burning-power-plants.pdf Https://energyinnovation.org/wp- content/uploads/Coal-Cost-Update.pdf Mr. Speaker, we cannot win the AI race of the 21st century with energy policies from the 20th century. Not only is it bad policy, but it is soul crushingly expensive to do so. Hardworking American families are just looking up here to Washington and saying: Can you all please focus on solutions and not cater to the polluters and the folks who have all too much power here in the Halls of Congress? It is not fair. This bill is an example of not only is it a waste of time, because here is the secret: This bill is asking for a coal council. I think the ranking member already went to it. The President has already established a coal council, so we don't really even need that. The real impact is going to be on the bottom line, and let's look at one example of why this is going to cost everybody more. In May, just days before the J.H. Campbell coal-fired power plant was set to close, the Trump administration issued a last-minute order to force the plant to stay open. We won't even talk about how the Trump administration has pulled permits of fully permitted and almost fully constructed offshore wind projects. We will put that aside. However, to keep the Campbell plant open, the administration cited a so-called grid reliability emergency, but they produced no actual evidence of any kind of emergency. Since their order, the Department hasn't appointed to a single instance where the plant was needed to keep the lights on. Remember, Mr. Speaker, nobody was asking for this. The company that owns and runs the plant wanted to close it and shift to a mix of energy sources. The plant is losing money, and the administration is now forcing the company to spend nearly $1 million a day to keep it open. Who will pay the cost of that? It will be these families across the Midwest, and the Trump administration looks to force the old, uneconomical fossil fuel plants to continue operating past their plan retirement dates nationwide. We estimate that this looks like the cost to the consumer could reach $3 billion a year by 2028. People can't afford that, and they don't deserve that. Don't forget, Mr. Speaker, the big, ugly bill. If you add what they are doing by enforcing uneconomical plants to stay online so consumers pay the cost, with the big, ugly bill, you are taking away clean energy incentives, cheaper and cheaper energy, and you are asking consumers to pay the cost of what utilities are. Everyone is grappling with these arbitrary Trump tariffs. This is not fair, and Republicans say we need to keep coal plants online so that the so-called dispatchable resources to meet growing electricity demands will help with the artificial intelligence race with China. However, they are clearly confused about the difference between reliable and dispatchable power. Reliability is not just about being dispatchable. It is about delivering performance under stress. Here is the truth: Coal-fired power plants are not reliable. They are inflexible. They are outdated. It is outdated technology that actually threatens grid reliability and resilience. Most of our coal fleet was built in the 1970s and eighties, and years of use has led to a rise in unplanned outages. PJM has capacity accreditation of coal plants at just 83 percent. The Colstrip Coal Mine in Montana is accredited at only 54 percent. That means it is effectively unavailable nearly one-half of the time that it is needed. As noted by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation, large voltage-sensitive loads like data centers require flexible, responsible grid solutions, not slow-ramping generators that can take up to 12 or more hours to come online. Coal plants are inherently inflexible, and that worsens grid congestion. By forcing coal plants to stay online, we are occupying our limited transmission capacity with inflexible generation. That prevents cheaper and cleaner resources from being delivered. This is a real concern. Independent market monitors in the Midwest have found that congestion-related market distortions have cost customers over $1 billion a year. That is not fair. This is the United States of America. We are about innovation. We are about modern technology. We are not about looking backwards. If Republicans were serious about meeting energy demand and keeping customer bills low, empowering artificial intelligence, then they would look to real solutions, energy efficiency, virtual power plants, grid-enhancing technologies, batteries, and more. However, Mr. Speaker, if you keep looking backwards, then we simply will not be able to meet the moment and meet the growing demand that is forecast. American businesses should not be left holding the bag with higher bills because the majority refuses to march forward in the 21st century on what we need to do on power production and tapping the great innovators across this country. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against this very costly bill. This entire package is another cost raiser for families back home that they don't deserve. Please vote ``no.''

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding the time. I rise in opposition to H.R. 1047. It is a bill that will give polluting gas plants an unfair and costly shortcut to the electric grid while doing nothing to protect working families from rising energy costs. This is an unfortunate theme this Congress. Despite the promises of the President and my Republican colleagues in Congress, they haven't brought any bill that will help address the affordability squeeze. Right now, as we debate this package of energy bills, there is a big discussion going on about the Republican budget that is coming to the floor likely tomorrow, and Democrats are here to say we are going to fight to protect Americans' pocketbooks. We want lower costs. We know the impact of the big, ugly bill was to raise healthcare costs and to raise energy bills. It is really time that the average working American get a break for a change. We want to cancel the cuts of the ACA. The Affordable Care Act tax credits are a pathway to affordability and lifesaving care, and it appears that the Republicans are going to refuse to reinstate those tax credits. We want to fight to lower costs, to protect Medicaid, to save healthcare. This is the larger context of this debate on energy bills, as well. This bill is a good example. You can peer into Congress and say, okay, who is fighting for me. This GRID Power Act is unnecessary. What has been happening is that cleaner, cheaper sources of energy are waiting to come onto the grid, and the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress now are throwing up as many barriers as possible because they are on the side of the polluters. You can see, we had a coal bill. This is a gas bill. What about the cleaner, cheaper energy that is waiting right now to come onto the queue? They are throwing barriers up to getting those cost savings to hardworking families. This does nothing to ensure a reliable grid, which is so vitally important at a time of more extreme events. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has the power already to approve changes to the interconnection queue process. That is a funny term for how we bring sources of energy onto the grid, this disjointed grid across the country. FERC can prioritize what power sources come onto the grid when it deems necessary. You don't need to give an unfair costly shortcut to gas plants. These kind of decisions on how we are going to power our lives and connect resources to the grid, these are very complex decisions, and you want robust analysis. You want an independent FERC fully staffed with experts to make these decisions in partnership with local grid operators, clearly, because FERC already has the authority to do a lot of this as long as it is supported by evidence. This Republican bill says: Forget the evidence. We are just going to give this fast-pass to gas companies. It allows them to cut in line, and that is unfair. What they should be doing is speeding the cleaner, cheaper resources to the grid, giving them a fair shot to do it. We had a committee meeting in the Energy Subcommittee this week, and we had the acting general counsel from the Department of Energy appear before us. Just to show you the fast-pass that polluters and gas companies are getting, we asked him about the Energy Secretary's trip overseas to try to sell more natural gas from Americans. I asked him: Well, have you done any analysis on this to show that that is not going to raise costs on American ratepayers and consumers? He said: No, not that I know of. If you keep pushing exports of our energy resources, what happens to the costs for hardworking families here, and what happens to domestic businesses as those resources go elsewhere, as well? One of FERC's responsibilities is to keep prices affordable. That is made possible by competition. You want this resource to be as resource neutral as much as possible. If you don't believe in neutrality, what you are going to do? You are going to stifle American innovation and entrepreneurship. When you talk about reliability, it isn't a description of an individual generator, but rather it is an attribute that applies to the entire grid across the country. It is not a given that additional dispatchable resources aid reliability themselves. You have to rely on a mix of generation, different fuels, and wires to make sure everyone can get the power they need all the time. When you put your finger on the scale of a certain power source and then put barriers to others, especially cleaner, cheaper sources, that is just a recipe for higher costs for businesses and consumers alike. When this bill came before our committee, I had an answer to a lot of this dysfunction about how we expedite resources to the grid. My amendment said that for any projects that are prioritized in the interconnection queue by this bill, if you are going to expedite them, then we want to see proof that they are coming online within 4 years. My Republican colleagues didn't want to shine the light on the gas plants that can't come online in 4 years, and they all voted down my amendment. If they are genuinely concerned about meeting demand growth in the next 4 years and genuinely believe that gas is going to do that, they could have agreed to this amendment, but everyone voted it down. Here is the dirty little secret that everyone in the energy industry knows right now, but Republicans are glossing over: There is a critical shortage of gas turbines. That means the cost of gas plants is already facing inflationary pressures. Those inflationary pressures, who are they passed on to? They are passed on to consumers back home, to hardworking American families. If you haven't ordered your gas turbine now, you are not getting it this decade. The only way we are going to meet growing electricity demand in the next few years is through cleaner, cheaper power that is waiting to come onto the grid--wind, batteries, distributed energy sources, demand response, grid-enhancing technologies, and other solutions. This is an incoherent energy policy from the Trump administration. You say you want more power. We need more power. We have AI data centers, but let's kill the offshore wind projects. Let's create barriers to getting sources of energy onto the grid that are ready to come onto the grid, and let's make life more expensive for hardworking people because we are going to say, no, only gas plants get that fast pass, but we don't have the turbines and the infrastructure to get them on the grid. That is incoherent. That means that it is going to be costly, and that is the last thing that our neighbors need back home. They want people working together on solutions. Ripping healthcare away, making healthcare coverage more expensive, and making electric bills more expensive, all of these policies are unpopular. I wish we could get back to working together on real solutions for the American people. I believe they need relief from the cost of living, and we should be working together to get there. Mr. Speaker, let's reject this bill and get back to working on those solutions together.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to recognize the ten inventors who have been selected as the 2025 Inductees to the Florida Inventors Hall of Fame. Peers nationwide nominate inventors who then undergo and the scrutiny of the Florida Inventors Hall of Fame Selection Committee. As a result, their innovations have been identified as significantly affecting the quality of life, economic development and welfare of their communities, my Tampa Bay neighbors and the United States. The Florida Inventors Hall of Fame was founded in 2013 at the University of South Florida. It was recognized by the Florida Senate with Senate Resolution 1756, adopted on April 30, 2014. The Florida Inventors Hall of Fame catalyzes the cycle of discovery and innovation across the state of Florida by recognizing pioneering inventors, empowering future problem-solvers and change-makers and propelling the American legacy of innovation through transformative experiences and meaningful narratives. Nomination to the Florida Inventors Hall of Fame is open to all Florida inventors, living or deceased, who are or have been residents of Florida. The nominee must be a named inventor on a patent issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. The impact of the inventor and their invention(s) should be significant to society, and the invention should have been commercialized, utilized or led to important innovations. The 2025 Inductees are the 11th class to be inducted into the Florida Inventors Hall of Fame. Their achievements underscore the critical role that innovation plays in driving progress and improving the quality of life for people in our state, our Nation and around the world. Their groundbreaking work not only advances scientific discovery but also strengthens the economy and enhances our global competitiveness. The 2025 Inductees collectively hold more than 460 U.S. patents and come from across industry and academia. Since its founding, the Florida Inventors Hall of Fame has inducted 87 inventors, who collectively hold over 5,700 U.S. patents. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my neighbors in Tampa Bay and the citizens of Florida, I am proud to honor the 2025 Inductees to the Florida Inventors Hall of Fame for this outstanding achievement. Innovation and invention are the building blocks of our Nation. I applaud these highly accomplished individuals and the organizations that support them in their quest to change the world in ways that truly benefit humanity. It is because of the perseverance of these inventors that future generations are inspired to reach beyond their limits and push the boundaries of innovation. I include in the Record the 2025 Inductees: Cleopatra ``Cleo'' Cabuz: Retired Vice President of Technology and Partnerships, in Honeywell's Safety and Productivity Solutions, who is recognized for significant contributions to the field of Micro Electro Mechanical Systems (MEMS) and integrated systems for medical and industrial safety applications. Her innovations in miniaturized flow cytometry, including disposable cartridges, laid the foundation for the ImmuneIQ product line, enabling point-of-care diagnostics for immune diseases. Michael Francis: CEO and founder of Asante Bio and Associate Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine at the University of South Florida, who is recognized for pioneering innovations and clinical translation of transformative medical devices and biologics across the fields of orthopedics and sports medicine via advanced regenerative medicine, biomanufacturing, additive manufacturing, biomaterials, collagen-based tissue engineering and electrospun nanofiber technologies. Joseph Iannotti: Chief Research and Academic Officer and Lang Family Endowed Chair of Orthopaedic Research at the Cleveland Clinic Florida, and Professor of Surgery and Biomedical Engineering at the Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine at Case Western Reserve University, who is recognized for advanced discovery and innovation in shoulder surgery for preoperative planning software and patient specific instrumentation, soft tissue engineering, and implant devices and instrumentation. Hari Kalva: Chair and Professor in the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at Florida Atlantic University, who is recognized for pioneering innovations in video compression and multimedia communication, and video analytics that enable efficient digital video delivery across devices worldwide, transforming how the world experiences visual media. Nasser Kutkut: Founder & CEO of Smart Charging Technologies LLC and Former CTO of Advanced Charging Technologies Inc., who is recognized for pioneering advances in industrial electric vehicle battery charging and the development and commercialization of novel fast charging and battery management technologies for motive power applications delivering substantial energy savings and reductions in carbon emissions. Richard McCullough: the 16th President of Florida State University and former professor of materials science and engineering at Harvard University who is recognized for pioneering the discovery of regioregular polythiophenes, a revolutionary class of conjugated polymers that is foundational to printable electronic materials and organic semiconductors. He also discovered a new class of reactive metal inks. Sumita Mitra: Partner and Co-Owner of Mitra Chemical Consulting, Retired Corporate Scientist at 3M Dental Products Division and Professor in the Institute for Advanced Discovery & Innovation at the University of South Florida, who is recognized for inventing the first dental filling material with nanoparticles, and revolutionizing restorative dentistry with stronger, more durable, and aesthetically advanced solutions that have benefited millions worldwide. Subhra Mohapatra: Professor of Molecular Medicine at the University of South Florida Morsani College of Medicine, Research Career Scientist at the James A. Haley Veterans Hospital, and Co-Founder of TransGenex Nanobiotech Inc., who is recognized for distinguished contributions and pioneering developments in cellular and molecular engineering and nanoscale drug delivery technologies, especially advancing detection and treatment of cancers and neurodegenerative diseases. Edward Rosenthal: CEO and Co-Founder of Florikan ESA, who is recognized for pioneering staged nutrient release (SNR) encapsulated fertilizers that match plant growth cycles to optimize nutrient delivery while enhancing environmental stewardship and sustainable agriculture. Florikan's SNR technology is now the sole fertilizer used on the International Space Station as part of NASA's Veggie and Advanced Plant Habitat program. W. Greg Sawyer: Chief BioEngineering Officer and Chair in the Department of BioEngineering at Moffitt Cancer Center, who is recognized for pioneering inventions in biomedical engineering, cancer engineering and tribology that have revolutionized medical devices, prosthetics and implants, contact lenses, cancer research and regenerative medicine while advancing Florida's innovation ecosystem.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for yielding me time and thank her for everything that she does to protect the pocketbooks of American families. Mr. Chairman, American families and small business owners deserve lower electric bills, but Republicans in Congress are really sticking it to folks with higher costs at every turn, especially in this spending bill. Mr. Chairman, Representative Kaptur is right. Household electric costs and energy prices have risen 10 percent this year. In some places, they have more than doubled, driven by Trump's tariffs; new demand from Big Tech AI data centers; and expensive, old, polluting plants. Back home in Florida, Florida's largest utility has proposed the largest utility rate hike in U.S. history, amounting to $10 billion, that will raise Floridians' electric bills by hundreds of dollars every month. Mr. Chair, Republicans in Congress are now making it worse. Their big, ugly bill, which was passed in July, already is projected to crush working families with higher costs, and now their spending bill adds insult to injury by slashing home improvement weatherization savings.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman for the time. Let's talk about how Republicans in Congress are making it worse, harder for families to afford the cost of living, especially when it comes to their electric bills. Their big, ugly bill, which was passed in July, already is projected to crush working families with higher costs. Mr. Chair, this spending bill adds insult to injury by slashing home improvement weatherization savings and taking a hatchet to cleaner, cheaper energy and the important initiatives to modernize the grid. If my colleagues care about helping their neighbors out of the affordability squeeze, they will vote ``no'' on the Republican spending bill.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the career and contributions of Mary Bryan, a spirited and dedicated public servant whose love of the City of Tampa knows no bounds. Mary served her Tampa neighbors for over 63 years, which began after her high school graduation in 1962. She holds the record for the longest-serving employee of the City of Tampa. I congratulate Mary on an incredible career and thank her for her unwavering dedication to the Tampa Bay Community. Mary began her career in the early redevelopment office of Urban Renewal in 1962 and remained there until 1972. She assisted in the first wave of City of Tampa renewal and redevelopment programs. She continued her work in the housing, code enforcement and zoning department before beginning in the city attorney's office. Mary was the principal and trusted grants writer responsible for awards totaling in the tens of millions of dollars to the city annually. Mary served under 11 mayors and 59 city council members, and she has helped Tampa Bay grow into the thriving community it is today. Mary worked in the legal department as City Attorney James Palermo's Assistant until 2011. She then returned as the legislative aide to City Council member Charlie Miranda, where she will finish out her tenure as a City of Tampa employee. Serving as an aide to Charlie Miranda, Mary garnered a reputation that no constituent request was out of reach. From potholes to a noisy neighbor, she ensured that everyone's requests were accounted for. Mary is known for her vast institutional knowledge, willingness to help and tenacity. She was known for calling up an administrator and speaking plainly, cutting through red tape to make sure the job at hand got done in a timely manner. In 2023, Mayor Castor awarded Mary the Josephine Howard Stafford Memorial Award, an award given to a woman employed by the City of Tampa who has demonstrated outstanding commitment to her position and community. Mayor Castor has commented that, ``There's rarely a night I go home and it's not dark outside, and if there is another car in the lot, it's Mary's.'' For over the past twenty years, Mary has also set up the holiday decorations at Old City Hall. Even through her hard work, she always made time to spread cheer. Mary's colleagues say she is not only an effective fighter, but her dedication reflects deep care for her neighbors. Occasionally when residents have appeared before the city council, some have felt intimidated by a list of suits and procedural rules. She has, at times, held people's hands to help them navigate city-level bureaucracy. Stephen Michelins, a city planner in the 1970's, said, ``When people would get stuck, she'll go out in the audience and grab them and say, `Come here.' She's been the friend of thousands.'' Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my neighbors in Tampa Bay and the citizens of Florida, I am proud to honor Mary Bryan for her service to the City of Tampa. Mary dedicated her life ensuring that everyone had a place in Tampa Bay. It is hard-working and selfless public servants like Mary that make Tampa the welcoming and generous place it is today. Our community is eternally grateful for Mary's immense contributions.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to amend the rule to make in order the amendment at the desk that protects against any cuts to Medicaid and SNAP.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the 170 inventors who will be inducted as the 2024 Fellows of the National Academy of Inventors (NAI). An induction ceremony will take place June 23-26, 2025, in Atlanta, Georgia to celebrate these inventors and their incredible accomplishments. The ceremony will be presided over by the Acting Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Coke Morgan Stewart, and President of the National Academy of Inventors, Dr. Paul R. Sanberg. To be named as a Fellow, these individuals were nominated by their peers and underwent a review process by the NAI Selection Committee, which ultimately deemed their innovations as making a significant impact on the quality of life, economic development and the welfare of their communities, the residents of Florida and the United States. The NAI Fellow program has 2,068 Fellows worldwide representing more than 300 prestigious universities and governmental and non-profit research institutes. Collectively, the Fellows hold more than 68,000 issued U.S. patents, which have generated over 20,000 licensed technologies, 4,000 companies and created more than 1.2 million jobs. In addition, over $3.2 trillion in revenue has been generated based on NAI Fellow discoveries. Among NAI fellows, there are more than 170 senior leaders of research universities and nonprofit research institutes, over 755 members of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, 63 inductees of the National Inventors Hall of Fame, 70 recipients of the U.S. National Medal of Technology and Innovation and U.S. National Medal of Science, 57 Nobel Laureates, over 533 AAAS Fellows, over 395 IEEE Fellows and more than 232 Fellows of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, among other awards and distinctions. Founded by Dr. Paul R. Sanberg at the University of South Florida in 2010, the NAI's mission is to recognize and encourage inventors with patents issued from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, enhance the visibility of academic technology and innovation, encourage the disclosure of intellectual property, educate, and mentor innovative students and translate the inventions of its members to benefit Florida and communities all throughout the United States. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my neighbors in Tampa Bay and the citizens of Florida, I am proud to honor the 2024 Fellows of the National Academy of Inventors for this outstanding achievement. We owe a debt of gratitude to these inventors for their invaluable contributions to society, which continually propel us forward. May their example inspire future generations to pursue their own paths of discovery and innovation, ensuring a bright and innovative future for us all. I include in the Record the 2024 National Academy of Inventors Fellows Class: Ishwar Aggarwall, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte; Pierre Agostini, The Ohio State University; Mark Akeson, University of California, Santa Cruz; Yousef Al-Abed, The Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research; Herb Aldwinckle, Cornell University; Dan Ammon Jr., University at Buffalo, The State University of New York; Alain Aspect, Institut d'Optique Graduate School; Corinne E. Augelli- Szafran, Southern Research Institute; Clinton Ballinger, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; Robeit S. Balog, Texas A&M University; Prith Banerjee, University of Illinois at Chicago; Ronald Barrett-Gonzalez, University of Kansas, Robert Bartlett, University of Michigan; Peter J. Basser, National Institutes of Health; Moungi Bawendi, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Dibakar Bhattacharyya, University of Kentucky; Pratim Biswas, University of Miami; Silvia Blemker, University of Virginia; William Branch, University of Georgia; Malcolm Brenner, Baylor College of Medicine; Richard K. Brow, Missouri University of Science and Technology; Edgar B. Cahoon, University of Nebraska-Lincoln; Jianfeng Ca, University of South Florida; Hui Cao, Yale University; Arnold Caplan, Case Western Reserve University; John M. Cioffi, Stanford University; Corie L. Cobb, University of Washington. Eric W. Cochran, Iowa State University; Daniel Codd, University of San Diego; Todd J. Cohen, New York Institute of Technology; Bruce N. Cronstein, New York University Grossman School of Medicine; Maria Croyle, The University of Texas at Austin; Anthony Czarnik, University of Nevada, Reno; Arvin Dar, Memorial Sloan Kettering Institute Cancer Center; Matthew Darr, Iowa State University; Hiranmoy Das, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center; Kenneth Dawson-Scully, Nova Southeastern University; Edward J. Delp, Purdue University; Horacio Dante Espinosa, Northwestern University; Ying Fang, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign; Aaron Franklin, Duke University; Eby Friedman, University of Rochester; Klaus Fruh, Oregon Health & Science University; Lilit Garibyan, Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard University; Robert Garry, Tulane University; Manas Ranjan Gartia, Louisiana State University; Arun K. Ghosh, Purdue University; Simon Francis Giszter, Drexel University; Steven Goldman, University of Rochester; Andrea Goldsmith, Princeton University; David Gracias, Johns Hopkins University; Joel S. Greenberger, University of Pittsburgh; Jaime Grunlan, Texas A&M University; Ephraim Gutmark, University of Cincinnati. Keith Hearon, Boston University; Larry Heck, Georgia Institute of Technology; Wolfgang Heidrich, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology; Joseph P. Heremans, The Ohio State University; Mark Hoffman, University of Missouri- Kansas City; Kaibin Huang, The University of Hong Kong; Bertram Jacobs, Arizona State University; Hamid Jafarkhani, University of California, Irvine; Shibin Jiang, The University of Arizona; Christopher S. Johnson, Argonne National Laboratory; Sergei V. Kalinin, University of Tennessee, Knoxville/Pacific Northwest National Laboratory; Homayoon Kazerooni, University of California, Berkeley; Brian G. Kiernan, New Jersey Institute of Technology; Steven Koester, University of Minnesota; Johann Walter Kolar, ETH Zurich--Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich; Farinaz Koushanfar, University of California, San Diego; Ferenc Krausz, Max Planck Institute of Quantum Optics, Garching, Germany; Ashok Kumar, University of South Florida; Eren Kurshan, Princeton University; Ioannis Kymissis, Columbia University; Klaus Lackner, Arizona State University; Gregory Lanza, Washington University in St. Louis; Matthew Laskoski, U.S. Naval Research Laboratory; Chih-Kung Lee, National Taiwan University. Hui (Helen) Li, Florida State University; Hai Li, Duke University; Wenbin Lin, University of Chicago; Walter Ian Lipkin, Columbia University; Xuedong Liu, University of Colorado Boulder; Devinder Mahajan, Stony Brook University; Abhijit Mahalanobis, The University of Arizona; Stanton F. McHardy, The University of Texas at San Antonio; Michael McLaughlin, The University of Adelaide; Shawn A. Mehlenbacher, Oregon State University; Charles L. Melcher, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville; Tommaso Melodia, Northeastern University; Rajesh Menon, The University of Utah; Theodore Moise, The University of Texas at Dallas; David Morse, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute; Javad Mostaghimi, University of Toronto; Naima Moustaid-Moussa, Texas Tech University; Christopher Murray, University of Pennsylvania; Tina M. Nenoff, Sandia National Laboratories; Gabriele Neumann, University of Wisconsin- Madison; Kytai T. Nguyen, The University of Texas at Arlington; Michael Niederweis, The University of Alabama at Birmingham; Thomas Nosker, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey; Rafail Ostrovsky, University of California, Los Angeles. Cynthia Owsley, The University of Alabama at Birmingham; Cengiz Ozkan, University of California, Riverside; Makarand Paranjape, Georgetown University; Dan Peer, Tel Aviv University; Yuri Karl Peterson, Medical University of South Carolina; Konstantin Petrukhin, Columbia University; Wellington Pham, Vanderbilt University; Edwin Piner, Texas State University; Darrin Pochan, University of Delaware; Francisco Quintana, Harvard University; Muhammad Rabnawaz, Michigan State University; P. Srirama Rao, Virginia Commonwealth University; Ramesh Raskar, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Edward Ratner, University of Houston; Jeff Reed, Virginia Tech; Fan Ren, University of Florida; Catherine L. Riddle, Idaho National Laboratory; Guillermo Risatti, University of Connecticut; Carol Robinson, University of Oxford; Cliona Mary Rooney, Baylor College of Medicine; Alberto Salleo, Stanford University; Richard Samulski, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Gaurav N. Sant, University of California, Los Angeles; Edward Sargent, Northwestern University; Charles Shoemaker, Tufts University; Daniel Siegwart, UT Southwestern Medical Center; Neal Sikka, The George Washington University; Blake Simmons, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Rajesh Singh, Morehouse School of Medicine; Anand Sivasubramaniam, The Pennsylvania State University; Yiqiao Song, Harvard University; Vivek Sujan, Oak Ridge National Laboratory; Zhaoli Sun, Johns Hopkins University; Nian Sun, Northeastern University; Yang Tao, University of Maryland, College Park; Ravi Thadhani, Emory University; Voon-Yew (Aaron) Thean, National University of Singapore; Ashley Parkinson Thrall, University of Notre Dame; Martin Thuo, North Carolina State University; Theo T. Tsotsis, University of Southern California; Francisco Valero-Cuevas, University of Southern California; Omid Veiseh, Rice University; Victor Veliadis, North Carolina State University; Uzi Vishkin, University of Maryland, College Park; Edmund Waller, Emory University; Angela Wandinger-Ness, The University of New Mexico; Guoan Wang, University of South Carolina; Grace J. Wang, Worcester Polytechnic Institute; Dean C. Webster, North Dakota State University; Di Wei, University of Cambridge; Marc Steven Weinberg, Draper Laboratory (CDSL), Ulrich Wiesner, Cornell University; Hugh E. Williams, RMIT University. Peter Wipf, University of Pittsburgh; Gary E. Wnek, Case Western Reserve University; Jang-Yen Wu, Florida Atlantic University; Wei Wu, University of Southern California; Younan Xia, Georgia Institute of Technology; Longya Xu, The Ohio State University; Zhen Xu, University of Michigan; Mengsu (Michael) Yang, City University of Hong Kong; Yang Yang, University of California, Los Angeles; Jianhua Yu, University of California, Irvine; Carlos A. Zarate Jr., National Institutes of Health; Junshan Zhang, University of California, Davis; Zhongfei (Mark) Zhang, Binghamton University, State University of New York; Ji-Guang (Jason) Zhang, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory; Min Zou, University of Arkansas.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank Ranking Member Pallone for yielding the time. Mr. Speaker, this is a dirty, pro-polluter resolution, so I rise in strong opposition to S.J. Res. 31. It is going to increase hazardous air pollution across America. It is going to expose more Americans to cancer-causing toxins. What is worse, it comes at a time when Republicans are ripping healthcare away from at least 13.7 million Americans in their billionaire boondoggle bill. In fact, Mr. Speaker, if you talk to folks back home or in your townhalls, what they are talking about is the cost of living. It is amazing that this is the priority of the GOP at a time when people are really being squeezed back home. Republicans have not brought one bill to the floor to lower the cost of living and tackle the everyday challenges of our neighbors back home. Instead, they are consumed by this tax giveaway for billionaires. This is the priority, to gut the Clean Air Act, to give polluting industrial plants the right to pollute more, to pollute our air with toxins that cause cancer, neurological damage, and death. As a result of this Republican bill, we will see about 1,800 industrial facilities able to increase their pollution output. Back home in Florida, we anticipate that will apply to 72 more polluting facilities that will be allowed to escape regulation and emit cancer-causing air pollution. These are the major sources of hazardous air pollution, the large industrial facilities like chemical plants, refineries, and pesticide manufacturers. It is especially troubling because--and I think Mr. Pallone would agree that this hasn't gotten a lot of play--in that billionaire boondoggle bill, the big tax giveaway package that is ruminating here in the Rules Committee right now, the American people need to know what else was included in that bill. The Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans included a pay-to-play scheme to sell out the most vulnerable communities to the highest bidder. This is in addition to gutting Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act. What they put in relating to their pay-to-play scheme would allow Big Oil polluters to pay a one-time $1 million fee to the Department of Energy to grease the skids to get polluting gas plants online faster. Yes, we need more energy, but this comes at a time when they are, in doing so, going to raise electric bills across the country because they say it is only oil and gas. Forget about solar, wind, storage, all the energy that is ready to come onto the grid. It is another example of sacrificing the people's interests for the special interests'. The special interests here are the chemical plants, refineries, and pesticide manufacturers. This is especially troubling, too, because, for decades, Congress has recognized the clear health dangers of hazardous air pollutants from these large-scale industrial polluting plants. We know they cause cancer. We know they cause birth defects, developmental disorders, and neurological problems, even at low levels of exposure. While Americans struggle with the high cost of living and watch this billionaire boondoggle bill try to get through the House, just know what else is going on at the same time. They are gutting the Clean Air Act, the bipartisan piece of legislation that has stood us well for years and years. No Congress has ever stripped away protections against toxic air pollution, and we shouldn't start now.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding the time, and I rise in opposition to this farcical bill. I thought I would share what I am hearing from my neighbors across the Gulf Coast. They want policymakers in Washington, D.C., to tackle the cost of living. During this Republican-led Congress, there has not been one bill brought to the floor of the House--and here we are in May--to lower the cost of living for families along the Gulf Coast and all across America. In fact, what the Republicans have been focusing on is a massive tax giveaway to billionaires like Elon Musk while they rip away healthcare from millions of Americans. In Florida, we have about 4.6 million Floridians who rely on the Affordable Care Act for their healthcare and about 3.9 million Floridians who rely on Medicaid. These are the family members we love the most, kids with complex conditions, seniors in skilled nursing, seniors who want to live in dignity in their homes with a home health aide. However, is their priority to make people's lives easier, to make people's lives better? No. It has been totally focused on how you rip that away and make people's lives more expensive. It also means for the Gulf Coast we are still reeling from Hurricanes Helene and Milton, just like other parts of the country, in Georgia and North Carolina. We don't need Elon Musk creating turmoil and firing civil servants and public servants who are helping us rebuild. We do not need the Trump administration making people's lives harder to rebuild and harder to afford to stay in their homes. We are preparing for another hurricane season. Folks along the Gulf Coast need a National Weather Service that is functional that can warn us about the threats ahead. We need the hurricane hunters out in the Gulf telling us how severe the storms are going to be, but the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress seem to be turning away from the people along the Gulf Coast and all across America to understand the threat of a warming climate.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. You started this by saying that Gulf of America started as a joke. This is not a joke to the people I represent. They want help. They want help with the cost of living. It seems like that is the last priority on Republicans' list. Instead, they want to give a massive tax giveaway to the wealthy and the well-connected while people really need help with their pocketbooks. They need help. They want to retain their healthcare. They want to make sure that the ocean waters are free of pollution. Please vote ``no'' and focus on what is important.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Pallone for yielding the time, and I thank Chairman Bilirakis for his partnership in this endeavor, as well. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1479, the Hotel Fees Transparency Act, to help families save money and to ensure that their hard-earned vacations go as planned. I thank Representatives Kim, Mullin, and Fry for partnering with me on this bipartisan legislation that will increase cost transparency for hotels, motels, and short-term rentals. Mr. Speaker, have you ever planned a vacation and when you searched online, you thought you found a great deal at a hotel or a short-term rental, but then you were surprised at check-in or check-out that there were a lot of surprise fees added on? This piece of legislation will prohibit that kind of unfair or misleading price advertising for hotels and rentals. It will require accurate price listings that must include all mandatory and resort fees. I have to say that it is a privilege to represent the State of Florida in the Congress, and I know my friend, Mr. Bilirakis, will agree. We enjoy welcoming visitors from all across the Nation and all across the globe to Florida for their vacations. Unfortunately--it is not just in Florida--but sometimes visitors arrive and are surprised by a lot of these resort fees and add-ons that were not part of the bargain. That is not fair. Consumers deserve to see upfront prices when they plan their budgets and vacations. They shouldn't have to play a guessing game when planning a trip about what the final cost of their vacation will be. The cost of living right now is very high, and it is just not fair to allow this kind of unfair behavior to continue. Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues in the House to pass the Hotel Fees Transparency Act. It will be a win for families and consumers. It is about fairness, transparency, and allowing hardworking families to focus on making memories together and not worrying about surprise charges and costs. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mrs. Dingell for yielding the time, and I thank Chairman Bilirakis for moving the bill forward to the floor today. I rise in strong support of H.R. 906, the Foreign Adversary Communications Transparency Act. This bill would require the Federal Communications Commission, the FCC, to publish a public list of entities with ties to foreign adversarial governments, such as China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran, especially if they have a license or authorization that is tied to our communications networks. Along with Representative Wittman, I serve on the bipartisan Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party. Last Congress, the committee released a bipartisan report on maintaining America's economic and national security interests. The report found that the widespread adoption of certain People's Republic of China-developed technologies in the United States poses a significant risk to national security and threatens long-term U.S. technological competitiveness. Our committee report recommended that we enact the FACT Act to shine a light on companies connected to foreign adversarial governments like the CCP and to ensure greater accountability and transparency in our critical communications networks. Our bill passed the House unanimously by voice vote in the last Congress, but it didn't quite get over the finish line. We really have no more time to wait, Mr. Speaker. Our adversaries continue to target our communications systems, so Congress must take steps now to protect our communications, telecommunications infrastructure and strengthen our national security to keep Americans safe. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the bill.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this Republican bill that requires businessowners to spend more money and use more energy. Mr. Speaker, here we are at the end of March. It is the 83rd day since the Congress convened under the Republican majority, and Republicans haven't brought one bill to the floor of the House to help lower costs or tackle the cost of living for our neighbors back home. Instead, Republicans have been singularly focused on crafting a massive tax giveaway for billionaires like Elon Musk that is paid for by ripping away health coverage from the people we love the most: kids, our parents, our neighbors who rely on skilled nursing, and people with disabilities who especially rely on Medicaid. It is wrong, and it makes life harder for people back home. It makes their lives more expensive. People want answers, but Republicans have refused to hold townhalls. Many of them will not even answer the phone. At my townhall last week in St. Petersburg, people wanted to know why the administration and Republicans want to make it more difficult to receive Social Security rather than strengthen Social Security. Instead of a wasteful, time-consuming, silly bill like this, why don't we work together and bring to the floor a bill that will strengthen Social Security? That would be a help to our neighbors back home. I think what it comes down to is Republicans in Congress are out of touch with hardworking people. They are out of touch with their struggles. They want lower costs. They don't want bills like this that say you will pay more and our Big Oil friends are going to make more on their bottom line. People are tired of being ripped off by the special interests and politicians who all have too much power here in Washington, D.C. This bill is another example of that. Republicans want to make it harder for businessowners to save money through energy efficient appliances. Energy efficiency saves people money. It is pretty straightforward. It cuts costs. It cuts pollution. It encourages innovation. Specifically, electric bills for walk-in refrigerators and freezers are a huge line item for restaurants and grocery stores. Taking those savings away will increase costs for businesses, and these are costs that will be passed on to consumers. Mr. Speaker, I want you to think about that the next time you are in the frozen food aisle of your grocery store. This is not right. Overall, when the Department of Energy goes in and works with manufacturers and consumer advocates, they come up, they look at the latest technology, and then move forward on adopting a standard that will be in effect years from now. They look particularly at the cost savings overall, and the savings they estimate here are huge. It is $6.5 billion in utility bill savings over the next 30 years. This also hits home in my community because many of the businesses and many of my neighbors are rebuilding from Hurricanes Helene and Milton. They were flooded out. They lost their appliances. Many businesses went on the fritz. It would be particularly helpful to know that they are going to save money over time as they make these major investments. This is exactly what Congress intended when we passed the Energy Policy and Conservation Act. It was passed in 1975. We directed the Department of Energy to set and regularly update these standards. Energy efficiency standards also incentivize innovation, and American manufacturers have traditionally led the way in innovation due to updated standards. By weakening these rules, we open our markets up to countries like China that manufacture low-efficiency products at the expense of American companies and American families. The Department of Energy followed the law. They collaborated with manufacturers to ensure that the standards work. After all of this hard work, Republicans now want to swoop in and repeal these standards on coolers and freezers. They are, in essence, walking out on the cost savings at a time our neighbors really expect us to work together to lower the cost of living. There is a larger issue here, and it is the fact that Republicans are ignoring the affordability squeeze. When Democrats were in charge, we did everything we could to help lower the cost of living. We passed a cap on insulin at $35 per month. We required Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices. We gave help on health insurance bills. We provided tax rebates and savings for appliances on electric bills. This has led to a major manufacturing boom across the country of over 750 clean-energy projects and over 400,000 new jobs created all across America, many in Republican districts. Since the Trump administration came in and started these illegal shutdowns and threatened new taxes through tariffs, the economy has stalled. Has anyone looked at their 401(k) lately? People are very uncertain. Let's get back to business, standing up for hardworking Americans, standing up for businesses. Let's make sure we guard their pocketbooks and tackle the affordability squeeze together, rather than serve the special interests that all have too much power. Republican billionaires and Big Oil companies are the real winners when resolutions like this are passed and savings are ripped away from American consumers. Mr. Speaker, let's stand up for the people for a change and not the powerful special interests. Let's stand up for their pocketbooks and vote ``no'' on this resolution.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey for yielding the time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.J. Res. 75, a bill to force small business owners to use more energy and spend more money. Here we are at the end of March, and Republicans have not brought one bill to the floor to lower costs and tackle the cost of living for our neighbors back home. Instead, Republicans in Congress have stood idly by while American families and small business owners are left to twist in the wind, making life harder for people back home, more expensive, more difficult to receive the Social Security they rely on, adding taxes through tariffs. It is just unconscionable because what people really want is for us to work together on solutions, and Republicans in Congress are missing in action. People want answers, but Republicans won't have townhalls. Some of them will not even answer the phone. I also had a townhall back in St. Petersburg, Florida, last week when I was home, and people want answers. They want to know what you are doing to tackle the cost of living. Then, you come up here to the House of Representatives, and Republicans are making it more expensive because they don't want you to have an energy-efficient appliance. This isn't something that happens overnight. This is something that manufacturers and consumer advocates worked on for years. The previous speaker asked when the Department of Energy got into energy efficiency. It has been decades that they have been doing this, trying to help people save money through conservation. I know that doesn't align with my Republican colleagues' Big Oil and Gas allies, but people want to save money. They want to cut pollution. They don't want us wasting their time with inane bills like this that are simply going to cost people more money. It gets worse because Republicans in Congress are barreling toward a massive tax giveaway to billionaires paid for by targeting the family members we love the most: our parents who rely on skilled nursing, children, pregnant women, and our neighbors with disabilities. We know what this is. This is an attempt to distract from what is going on behind the scenes here in Washington, D.C. I have to say I think my Republican friends are out of touch with working people. People are tired of being ripped off by special interests and politicians in Washington. This resolution is another example of that. This makes it harder for small business owners to save money through energy-efficient appliances. It essentially picks your pocket. Mr. Speaker, have you ever been in a crowd where you are getting jostled, and then you reach back and your wallet is gone? That is exactly what is happening right here. I hope that Republicans join Democrats in trying to reduce electric bills, but no. I hope that Republicans are going to stand up to Elon Musk as he takes a chain saw to Social Security, but no. Today, the Republicans don't even want to address the real challenges facing our neighbors, helping them with the cost of living, housing, healthcare, and electric bills. This bill will simply make matters worse. These DOE standards are long overdue. It has been, I think, at least 6 or 7 years since they have had an update. The law says you update energy-efficient standards for appliances every few years. That is what happened under the Biden administration. They came together. Those kinds of standards also incentivize American innovation. Manufacturers in America have been the leaders. By weakening these rules, we open our markets to companies in countries that manufacture low-efficiency products, like from China, at the expense of American companies and American families. It is not right. I heard Mr. Pallone say that he had a townhall. A lot of the Democrats are having townhalls. I had a townhall back in the Tampa Bay area. They want help with hurricane recovery. Do you know what they are having to replace right now? Appliances. They want an appliance that is the most modern, the most efficient, the most affordable, and that is made in America, and that is what these appliance standards do. They help you save money over the long run. They also want us to safeguard their healthcare. They want us to have an eye on Elon Musk as he takes his chain saw to all sorts of agencies. Social Security was a topic of conversation in my townhall. Lo and behold, yesterday, there was a press report about the backdoor cuts to Social Security. It says: ``The Social Security Administration website crashed four times in 10 days this month because the servers were overloaded, blocking millions of retirees and disabled Americans from logging in to their online accounts. In the field, office managers have resorted to answering phones in place of receptionists because so many employees have been pushed out. Amid all this, the agency no longer has a system to monitor customer experience because that office was eliminated . . . by Elon Musk. And the phones keep ringing. And ringing.'' ``The turmoil is leaving many retirees, disabled claimants, and legal immigrants needing Social Security cards with less access or shut out of the system altogether.'' Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the article titled: ``Long waits, waves of calls, website crisis: Social Security is breaking down.'' Long Waits, Waves of Calls, Website Crashes: Social Security is Breaking Down (By Lisa Rein and Hannah Natanson, Mar. 25, 2025) A flood of cuts led by Elon Musk has sent the agency into chaos as a new commissioner prepares to take charge. The Social Security Administration website crashed four times in 10 days this month because the servers were overloaded, blocking millions of retirees and disabled Americans from logging in to their online accounts. In the field, office managers have resorted to answering phones in place of receptionists because so many employees have been pushed out. Amid all this, the agency no longer has a system to monitor customer experience because that office was eliminated as part of the cost-cutting efforts led by Elon Musk. And the phones keep ringing. And ringing. The federal agency that delivers $1.5 trillion a year in earned benefits to 73 million retired workers, their survivors, and poor and disabled Americans is engulfed in crisis--further undermining the already struggling organization's ability to provide reliable and quick service to vulnerable customers, according to internal documents and more than two dozen current and former agency employees and officials, customers and others who interact with Social Security. Financial services executive Frank Bisignano is scheduled to face lawmakers Tuesday at a Senate confirmation hearing as President Donald Trump's nominee to become the permanent commissioner. For now, the agency is run by a caretaker leader in his sixth week on the job who has raced to push out more than 12 percent of the staff of 57,000. He has conceded that the agency's phone service ``sucks'' and acknowledged that Musk's U.S. DOGE Service is really in charge, pushing a single-minded mission to find benefits fraud despite vast evidence that the problem is overstated. The turmoil is leaving many retirees, disabled claimants, and legal immigrants needing Social Security cards with less access or shut out of the system altogether, according to those familiar with the problems. ``What's going on is the destruction of the agency from the inside out, and it's accelerating,'' Sen. Angus King (I- Maine) said in an interview. ``I have people approaching me all the time in their 70s and 80s, and they're beside themselves. They don't know what's coming.'' King's home state has the country's oldest population. ``What they're doing now is unconscionable,'' he said. Leland Dudek, who became acting commissioner after he fed data to Musk's team behind his bosses' backs, has issued a series of rapid-fire policy changes that have created chaos for front-line staff. Under pressure from the secretive Musk team, Dudek has pushed out dozens of officials with years of expertise in running Social Security's complex benefit and information technology systems. Others have left in disgust. The moves have upended an agency that, despite the popularity of its programs, has been underfunded for years, faces potential insolvency in a decade and has been led by four commissioners in five months--just one of them Senate- confirmed. The latest controversy came last week when Dudek threatened to shut down operations in response to a federal judge's ruling against DOGE that he claimed would leave no one in the agency with access to beneficiaries' personal information. Alarmed lawmakers are straining to answer questions back home from angry constituents. Calls have flooded into congressional offices. AARP announced Monday that more than 2,000 people a week have called the retiree organization since early February--double the usual number--with concerns about whether benefits they paid for during their working careers will continue. Social Security is the primary source of income for about 40 percent of older Americans. Trump has said repeatedly that the administration ``won't touch'' Social Security, a promise that aides say applies to benefit levels that can be adjusted only by Congress. But in just six weeks, the cuts to staffing and offices have already taken a toll on access to benefits, officials and advocates say. `creating a fire' With aging technology systems and a $15 billion budget that has stayed relatively flat over a decade, Social Security was already struggling to serve the public amid an explosion of retiring baby boomers. The staff that reviews claims for two disability programs was on life support following massive pandemic turnover--and still takes 233 days on average to review an initial claim. But current and former officials, advocates and others who interact with the agency--many of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retribution--said Social Security has been damaged even further by the rapid cuts and chaos of Trump's first two months in office. Many current and former officials fear the push is part of a long-sought effort by conservatives to privatize all or part of the agency. ``They're creating a fire to require them to come and put it out,'' said one high-ranking official who took early retirement this month. Dudek, who was elevated from a mid-level data analyst in the anti-fraud office, hurried to cut costs when he took over in mid-February, canceling research contracts, offering early-retirement incentives and buyouts across the agency, and consolidating programs and regional offices. Entire offices, including those handling civil rights and modernization, were driven out. The 10 regional offices that oversee field operations were slashed to four. ``I do not want to destroy the agency,'' he said in an interview Monday. ``The president wants it to succeed by cutting out the red tape to improve service while improving security.'' Musk's Department of Government Efficiency team began poring through Social Security's massive trove of private data on millions of Americans, working in a fourth-floor conference room at the Woodlawn, Maryland, headquarters, with blackout curtains on the windows and an armed security guard posted outside. At first, the DOGE team was obsessed by false claims that millions of deceased people were receiving benefits. Then came new mandates designed to address alleged fraud: Direct-deposit transactions and identity authentication, operations that affect almost everyone receiving benefits, will no longer be able to be done by phone. Customers with computers will go through the process online; those without will wait in line at their local field office. A change announced internally last week will require legal immigrants with authorization to work in the United States and newly naturalized citizens to apply for or update their Social Security cards in person, eliminating a long-standing practice that sent the cards automatically through the mail. ``We realize this is a significant change and there will be a significant impact to customers,'' Doris Diaz, deputy commissioner of operations, told the field staff Monday during a briefing on the changes, a recording of which was obtained by The Washington Post. She said the agency was ``working on a process'' for homeless and homebound customers who cannot use computers or come into an office--and acknowledged that service levels will decline. In the weeks before that briefing, phone calls to Social Security surged--with questions from anxious customers wondering whether their benefits had been or would be cut and desperate to get an in-person field office appointment. That is, if they could get through to a live person. Depending on the time of day, a recorded message tells callers their wait on hold will last more than 120 minutes or 180 minutes. Some callers report being on hold for four or five hours. A callback function was available only three out of 12 times a Post reporter called the toll-free line last week, presumably because the queue that day was so long that the call would not be returned by close of business. The recording that 66-year-old Kathy Martinez heard when she called the toll-free number two weeks ago from the San Francisco Bay Area said her hold time would be more than three hours--she was calling to ask what her retirement benefits would come to if she filed for them now or waited until she turned 70. She hung up and tried again last week at 7 a.m. Pacific time. The wait was more than 120 minutes, but she was offered a callback option, and in two hours she spoke with a ``phenomenally kind person who called me,'' she said. Martinez said she wants to wait to file for benefits to maximize her check. But ``I'm kind of thinking, I wonder if I should take it now. When I apply, I will do it over the phone. But will there still be a phone system?'' `not acceptable' Aging, inefficient phone systems have dogged Social Security for years. A modernization contract with Verizon begun under the first Trump administration suffered multiple delays, system crashes and other problems. As commissioner in the last year of the Biden administration, former Maryland governor Martin O'Malley moved the project to a new contractor, Amazon Web Services, and data shows that the average wait time for the toll-free line was down to 50 minutes, half of today's average. But O'Malley ran out of time to switch the new system to field office phones, he said. Now a perfect storm has overtaken the system. Turnover that's normally higher than 10 percent has worsened at the 24 call centers across the country. Some employees took early retirement and buyout offers--a number that Dudek said was ``not huge'' but that current and former officials estimate could be significant. Shonda Johnson, a vice president at the American Federation of Government Employees Council 220 who represents 5,000 call center staffers, said low pay (starting salary is $32,000 a year), anger at a return-to-office mandate after years of telework, rapid policy changes, and frustration with how the Trump administration is treating federal employees have hurt morale to the point that people aren't giving their all to the job. ``When you're facing threats yourself, it kind of prevents you from being totally there for the public you're servicing,'' she said. Asked about worsening phone service, Dudek told reporters in a call last week that ``a 24 percent answer rate is not acceptable.'' ``I want people who want to get to a person to get to a person,'' he said, adding that ``all options are on the table'' to improve phone service, including outsourcing some call center work. The new limits on phone transactions take effect at the end of the month, but field offices have been deluged for weeks, even as DOGE is targeting an unspecified number of field and hearing offices for closure over the next three years. In one office in central Indiana, the phone lines are jammed by 9 a.m. with hundreds of retirees, further taxing a staff of less than a dozen that is responsible for nearly 70,000 claimants across the state, according to one employee. That worker, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retribution, said the questions have become predictable: What is the U.S. DOGE Service doing to Social Security? Will the office close? Will my benefits continue? The employees, with no training yet on the impending changes, have few answers. ``I hope we're going to be here,'' the employee tells caller after caller. ``But I can't guarantee anything.'' Complicated benefits cases are falling by the wayside, the employee said. Online claims, which are completed by field staff, are piling up. ``There is just no time to breathe or get anything else done,'' she said. ``We used to be efficient.'' Another employee in a regional office said the staff was told at a recent briefing that field offices across the country are seeing ``exponential growth'' in foot traffic. The elderly are not only calling but showing up at bricks- and-mortar buildings to ask about the DOGE-led changes. In one Philadelphia office, the federal government's return-to-office edict has left 1,200 staffers competing for about 300 parking spots, according to an employee. Staffers wake up as early as 4:30 a.m. to try to snag a space, and some are buying backup spots for $200 a month nearby. As morale has cratered, some employees have stopped wearing business clothes and now come to work in jeans and a T-shirt because, as they tell colleagues, they no longer take pride in their work, the employee said. `OFF THE CHARTS' Scammers are already taking advantage of the chaotic moment, according to internal emails obtained by The Post. Last week, employees in several offices were warned that seniors were reporting receiving emails from accounts pretending to be linked to Social Security. The messages asked recipients to verify their identity to keep receiving benefits. ``Sounds like scammers are jumping on this press release to trick the elderly,'' one Social Security staffer wrote to colleagues Thursday, referring to the agency's announcement of the in-person verification program. In Baltimore, an employee who works on critical payment systems said nearly a quarter of his team is already gone or will soon be out the door as a result of resignations and retirements. Talented software developers and analysts were quick to secure high-paying jobs in the private sector, he said--and the reduction in highly skilled staff is already having consequences. His office is supposed to complete several software updates and modernization processes required by law within the next few weeks and months, he said. But with the departures, it seems increasingly likely that it will miss those deadlines. His team is also called on to fix complicated technology glitches that stop payments. But many of the experts who make those fixes are exiting. ``That has to get cleaned up on a case-by-case basis, and the experts in how to do that are leaving,'' the Baltimore employee said. ``We will have cases that get stuck, and they're not going to be able to get fixed. People could be out of benefits for months.'' Meanwhile, a DOGE-imposed spending freeze has left many field offices without paper, pens and phone headsets--at the exact moment phone calls are spiking, the employee in Indiana said. The freeze drove all federal credit cards to a $1 1imit, and purchasers for the agency were reduced to about a dozen people for 1,300 offices, said one employee in the Northeast. These purchasers must get a green light from higher-ups for anything other than 12 specific preapproved transactions, according to emails obtained by The Post. The list includes ``shipping costs,'' ``phone bills,'' ``Legionella testing'' and ``services to support fire safety and emergency response.'' It does not include basic office supplies. The field office in Portland, Oregon, is so slammed that the claims staff has told advocates to send questions or information by fax because they can't get to the phones, according to Chase Stowell, case management supervisor for Assist, a nonprofit that helps disabled people apply for benefits. Many of them are homeless. ``The attrition rates in Portland are off the charts,'' Stowell said. ``They just don't pick up the phone. They were already short-staffed. They've told us they just don't trust that there's a reliable system to get ahold of them by voicemail.'' The service issues keep bubbling up to members of Congress. Hundreds of Maryland residents turned out for a town hall meeting last week hosted by Baltimore County Council member Pat Young about a mile from Social Security headquarters. Asked by one retiree in the audience to provide ``a little bit of hope'' that his Social Security benefits would not be cut, Sen. Angela Alsobrooks (D-Maryland) conceded, ``The truth of the matter is that we don't know what they intend.''

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, this is a real cry for help, and we need Republicans and Congress focused on Americans' pocketbooks, not trying to distract from the massive tax giveaway to billionaires and special interests. Mr. Pallone is absolutely right. They are out of touch. Let's send a message and vote ``no'' on this bill and get back to work on safeguarding the pocketbooks of our neighbors back home. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.J. Res. 42. This is the latest Republican bill to raise costs on American families. In fact, Republicans in Congress have failed to bring any bill over the past couple of months since this new Congress started to help reduce the cost of living for our neighbors back home. Meanwhile, the Trump administration's illegal shutdown of grants, loans, and partnership funds to our local communities and nonprofits; the firing of public servants, like the inspector general at the Department of Energy, whose job it is to root out waste, fraud, and abuse; the firing of experts that oversee the nuclear enterprise and our nuclear weapons; and tariffs, which are, in essence, new taxes on American families and businesses, is really socking it to the pocketbooks of American families and businessowners, except for billionaires like Elon Musk, who stand to win big from the tax breaks for billionaires that Republicans are moving through the House. Let's talk about what is going on right now with all of this chaos and confusion. The unemployment rate is up. Prices are up. If you haven't checked your 401(k), that is down. All of this has a real-world impact, and I really want to beseech my Republican colleagues to help us end the madness. Find your spines to stand up to the chaos and confusion that all of these illegal actions are having on our folks back home. I mean, right now laying people off, public servants who provide essential services, the illegal pause in funding--thank goodness the United States Supreme Court just announced this morning that they were turning back one of the illegal actions to, in essence, rob money that has been congressionally mandated to fund essential services. It really is weighing on the entire economy. More importantly, people back home want to know what the Congress is going to do about it, and it is just silence from my friends on the other side of the aisle. Let's talk about how ridiculous this is to target labeling on energy- efficient appliances, just plain information that you need to have when you go shopping. Energy efficiency is very important to Americans. It has been, as a matter of fact, for about 50 years. When the Congress passed the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, we said to the Department of Energy: Work with manufacturers and advocates and do everything you can to help with innovation to help consumers save more money. That is really smart policy. One of the innocuous things that goes along with it is the labeling so that customers understand what they are buying. They need to know about how energy efficient an appliance is and be able to comparison shop when they buy a dishwasher or some other appliance. Republicans, I just don't understand why you want to keep families and businesses in the dark on this. It is a real head-scratcher until you understand that polluters and big oil and gas companies have all too much influence here on Capitol Hill. Republicans keep sending these love letters to big oil and gas companies. In fact, it was on Valentine's Day, February 14, when the Trump administration announced it would halt cost savings for consumers through energy-efficient coolers and freezers, clothes washers, and air-conditioners. This labeling fiasco, I just don't understand why you think it is important for families to have less information just when they are trying to figure out what appliance to buy. In contrast, the Democrats, over the past few years, have really been focused on lowering the cost of living and passed very significant cost savings for consumers. I am not talking about prescription drugs and the cap on insulin. I am talking about energy-efficient appliances, home energy tax credits, and rebates so that you can buy those energy- efficient appliances. Right now, Floridians are waiting for about $350 million, which has now been put on hold because of the illegal shutdown of a lot of funds that are supposed to flow back home to the benefit of my neighbors. I know that Republicans and polluters don't like energy efficiency, but today's resolution does nothing to even get at energy efficiency. In fact, it just creates more confusion. They are just talking about the labels. It creates confusion for businesses. It is confusing for manufacturers. So many of them are grappling now with the twists and turns of new taxes through tariffs on their products. This is going to cost everyone money. Americans are rightly asking why Republicans are wasting time repealing this until this week. Until this week, I would hazard to guess that most Members of Congress didn't even know that this was a rule. American families are also asking why Republicans are turning a blind eye to their responsibility to look out for the pocketbooks of our families and small business owners back home. I think it is because the Republicans are scared. They are scared of Elon Musk. They are scared to talk about the real problems facing working families across the country: affordability, the escalating costs of the overheating climate, what that is doing, higher insurance costs, and higher electric bills because their summers are longer and more intense. Back in the Tampa Bay area, we are trying to rebuild from the most devastating hurricane season that we have ever experienced. The changing climate isn't just about the weather. It is about your wallets, and folks really need help. They need Republicans, in addition to Democrats, looking out for them, not just lipservice about lowering costs. That is why it has been so disheartening to watch Elon Musk and the new administration. They have no plan, no interest in addressing the problems. Instead, they continue to double down on chaos and confusion. Last night, we heard from the President. He continued his crusade of endless lies. It was difficult to listen to. It was very long because the President campaigned on reducing costs and making government more efficient, and instead, all he has proposed is a major tax giveaway to billionaires like Elon Musk, paid for by hardworking folks, children who rely on Medicaid, our neighbors with disabilities, and our older neighbors in skilled nursing, saying to Social Security recipients it is going to be harder for you to get your payment because we are going to slash the people who ensure that that happens, repealing affordable healthcare, repealing these initiatives that lower your electric bills, and other actions that make us less safe. Congressional Republicans have a lot to say about today's resolution and their war against energy-efficient appliances. As Elon Musk and his lackeys really take a hammer--a chain saw, I guess--to what really matters in this country, it is very difficult to try to work together to say we are going to solve problems for the American people when one side has no spine and no answer and instead brings these ridiculous resolutions to the floor rather than working on really helping the American people. The only labels we should be talking about today are the lies stickered across Trump's empty campaign promises. He continues these misleading claims and lies to the American people, and Democrats are not going to stand idly by while he loots the U.S. Government for his own benefit. There has to be an end to the chaos and corruption, and it needs to start right now.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding the time. Mr. Speaker, here we are at the end of February, 2 months into the new congressional session, and House Republicans haven't offered one bill to lower the cost of living for our neighbors back home. Instead, they bring this silly bill to the floor, a bill to force to working families to spend more money, to use more energy, and to sell out American manufacturers. Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress have stood idly by while there has been an illegal shutdown of grants and loans to our local communities and nonprofits that help people save money and help families. Plus, House Republicans didn't raise any concern when the new President illegally fired Inspectors General and prosecutors who are charged with rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse, and that includes in the Department of Energy. It gets worse because Republicans now are barreling toward a massive tax giveaway to billionaires paid for on the backs of American families, children, our neighbors with disabilities, our older neighbors, and grandparents in nursing homes. This is not business as usual. I know Republicans bring a bill here and they say: Okay. This is just like what we have always done. This is not business as usual. Where is the House Republicans' outrage that everything they have worked on congressionally mandated through appropriations is just illegally frozen? It is not business as usual. This resolution is the latest of a whole lot of nonsense. It is hard to explain, except when we realize that oil and gas companies often have their way here in Washington, D.C. We wasted hours and hours over the past couple of years trying to demonize energy efficient appliances. These kinds of appliances are popular. There has been a law in place for decades that says that every few years we update these appliance standards. Manufacturers work on it, advocates work on it, and they come together and update it. This actual residential water heater standard hasn't been updated since 2010. Here we are in 2025, and the standard we are discussing today effects less than 10 percent of all water heater sales and most, over 100, of these models already meet this standard. Meanwhile, Mr. Speaker, if you want to talk about cost savings, it was Democrats who put in place tax credits and rebates to help everyday Americans lower the cost of their energy bill on appliances. This is one of the reasons why we are so angry. Part of the illegal freeze on government initiatives also impacts the money that should be going into the pockets of our neighbors back home. This includes the home energy rebates. Those are the rebates that help consumers save money on select home improvement projects that can lower energy bills by providing up to $14,000 a year for homeowners as they update their homes. Mr. Speaker, you had better believe this is important to my neighbors in Florida recovering from hurricanes Helene and Milton. They would love to be able to get these funds to help them repair their homes. Right now, frozen in Florida is $346 million that could be helping everyday Floridians recover from the storms as they repair their homes. That is not the only one. Weatherization assistance, very smart, has often been bipartisan in the past. Elon Musk and this new administration have frozen it. They have frozen billions of dollars that go to working-class households to improve the energy efficiency of their homes. In Florida alone, $94 million that should be flowing to my neighbors to help them weatherize their homes and save money is frozen. So what Republicans are doing by freezing this and by trying to roll back energy appliance standards is contributing to the rising cost of energy for families and businesses. It is a dereliction of duty. They are turning a blind eye to the peoples' pocketbook. Democrats are going to fight for the peoples' pocketbook. Meanwhile, an unelected billionaire who has made his vast fortune on government contracts should not be able to unilaterally stop and take money out of the pockets of American families, of the Americans who need it most. Here is the warning, because this major tax giveaway that House Republicans are hammering out says to our committee: Find $880 billion. Republicans say: Oh, okay. Maybe there is enough waste, fraud, and abuse--even though they have taken the Inspectors General off the playing field to root out waste, fraud, and abuse. There is no way that you can say improper payments total up to $880 billion. Republicans shouldn't gaslight us and Americans if the majority is concerned about a major tax giveaway so that billionaires can have more money and Americans are going to have less healthcare for their grandparents and their children. It is not right, and we are not going to stand for it. Mr. Speaker, who really benefits here on these tankless gas water heaters? Let me pull the curtain back. As they build homes, big corporate housing developers often install a slightly cheaper, less- efficient model, and they pass on the costs of higher energy bills to that new homeowner for the next 20 years. Foreign manufacturers are going to benefit here. The American manufacturers who have participated in these energy efficiency standards aren't going to benefit. It is the foreign manufacturers who will get to sell their inferior, less-efficient appliances and take away sales from U.S. manufacturers. It is the American Gas Association who will get to sell more polluting fossil gas to power inefficient appliances and pass the costs on to working families. Once my colleagues take a closer look, Members will see this resolution really doesn't hold water. It does nothing to lower costs for working families. It does nothing to support American companies. It does nothing to address the real challenges facing our families back home. It is a warning. It is a warning shot across the bow that this is not business as usual. It is a hold-on-to-your-wallet moment because the unelected billionaires who are calling the shots, who are reaching into citizens' wallets, and who are going to take away our healthcare want to rule the day. House Democrats are not going to stand for it. We are going to continue to hold Republicans accountable. We are going to hold this administration accountable. We are going to fight for our constituents' wallets and pocketbooks, and we are going to make sure that Republicans are not going to be able to say that this kind of ridiculous stuff is business as usual here in the House of Representatives. It is not. We believe in checks and balances. We believe in the hardworking Americans. We do not countenance unfairness and trying to steal from our kids, loading them up with massive debt and saying that their health doesn't matter in this country. It does. Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this resolution. It is not business as usual, and people need to know it.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights on behalf of this large and diverse coalition of 240 national organizations. The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, February 4, 2025. Hon. Mike Johnson, Speaker of the House, Washington, DC. Hon. Hakeem Jeffries, House Minority Leader, Washington, DC. Dear Speaker Johnson and Minority Leader Jeffries: On behalf of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, a coalition charged by its diverse membership of more than 240 national organizations to promote and protect civil and human rights in the United States, we write to express our strong opposition to H.R. 27, the Halt All Lethal Trafficking (HALT) of Fentanyl Act, and to urge the House to reject this bill. The Leadership Conference will score the House's vote in our Voting Record for the 119th Congress. This bill permanently schedules fentanyl-related substances (FRS) on schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) based on a flawed class definition. Additionally, it imposes mandatory minimums and fails to provide an offramp for removing inert or harmless substances from the drug schedule. The classwide scheduling that this bill would impose would exacerbate pretrial detention, mass incarceration, and racial disparities in the prison system, doubling down on a fear- based, enforcement-first response to a public health challenge. Under the classwide control, any offense involving a ``fentanyl-related substance'' is subject to federal criminal prosecution, even if the substance in question is helpful or has no potential for abuse. The case of Todd Coleman is instructive. Mr. Coleman was sentenced to a mandatory minimum of 10 years for selling 30 grams of cocaine--about two tablespoons--because a local lab said that they were laced with three illegal fentanyl analogues. But none of the substances were illegal fentanyl analogues, and one was a substance called ``Benzyl Fentanyl'' that the Drug Enforcement Administration has long known is not dangerous or illegal. Moreover, the HALT Fentanyl Act enshrines mandatory minimums for distribution of FRS under the Controlled Substances Act, which could criminalize inert or harmless substances. This bill expands mandatory minimums for both foreign importation crimes and domestic drug distribution offenses, including nonviolent drug distribution involving small quantities of drugs. As mandatory minimums eliminate judicial discretion, judges are prevented from tailoring punishment to a particular defendant by taking into account an individual's background and the circumstances of their offenses when determining the sentence. Mandatory minimums instead place more power in the hands of prosecutors and their charging decisions, which is particularly concerning given that prosecutors are more likely to charge Black people with a crime that carries a mandatory minimum than a White person. The HALT Fentanyl Act threats to replicate this pattern and deepen these disparities. This Congress should not repeat its past mistakes when it comes to policy responses to fentanyl and its analogues. Beginning in the 1980s, draconian drug laws with harsh mandatory minimums and their resulting enforcement under the banner of the ``war on drugs'' fueled skyrocketing prison populations. In the ensuing decades, Black people have been disproportionately incarcerated and sentenced to mandatory minimum sentences for small amounts of crack cocaine, despite the fact that White people are more likely than Black people to use crack cocaine in their lifetimes. Similar trends for FRS are emerging: Between 2015 and 2019, prosecutions for fentanyl-analogue offenses increased by more than 5,000 percent, with no corresponding decrease in the use of FRS or in overdose deaths. In 2019, 58.9 percent of those sentenced in fentanyl-analogue cases were Black. Any further extension of the classwide scheduling policy threatens to repeat past missteps with crack cocaine that policymakers are still working to rectify. Harsh federal drug laws and mandatory minimums have caused the federal prison population to explode. The Urban Institute has found that increases in expected time served for drug offenses was the largest contributor to growth in the federal prison population between 1998 and 2010. Currently, people convicted of drug offenses make up 43.9 percent of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) population. There is no indication that overly punitive sentences or mass incarceration deter crime, protect public safety, or decrease drug use or trafficking. We share your concerns about fentanyl-related deaths and support effective health-based approaches to mitigating this public health crisis, but classwide scheduling and mandatory minimums merely repeat the mistakes of the past by exacerbating our incarceration problem. We welcome continued dialogue with you about how to move forward on this important topic. However, we must reiterate our firm opposition to classwide emergency scheduling and to mandatory minimum sentencing. We strongly urge Congress to take bold steps on these issues and transform our criminal-legal system into one that delivers true justice and equality. For this reason, we ask you to vote NO on the HALT Fentanyl Act. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Chloe White, senior policy counsel, justice. Sincerely, Jesselyn McCurdy, Executive Vice President of Government Affairs.

Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank Ranking Member Pallone for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 27. I am here to say this is not business as usual right now in Washington, D.C., or all across the country. House Republicans are offering this bill as window dressing, Mr. Speaker, to a lot of the illegality that is going on across the agencies that is distracting from the White House's stop work orders and payment freeze orders that have been deemed illegal and have been restrained by Federal courts. This is a window dressing bill to distract from what is happening to payments with our partner States and nonprofit agencies like Head Start centers, infrastructure projects, and medical research across the country. This is window dressing to distract us from the incursion into Treasury and Medicare payment systems by an unelected billionaire, Elon Musk, and based on some fake, made-up agency, a so-called Department of Government Efficiency. This is a distraction from the illegal and dangerous purge of law enforcement officers and intelligence agents in other agencies. Mr. Speaker, this is a way to distract and spin your wheels at a time when Elon Musk has just decided to ride into a congressionally appropriated agency in USAID and just say that we are closed for business, which runs completely counter to the United States Constitution. Where are the Republicans? The American people are demanding answers. Where are the House Republicans? Mr. Speaker, your silence is deafening. Federal courts have issued orders to stop this illegal and dangerous activity, and we are not going to allow these illegal operators to run amuck. Instead, what are House Republicans doing here today? They are offering a flawed bill to address opioid addiction. I would say to my good friends and colleagues: Your record does not match your rhetoric because there is a back story that belies what House Republicans are bringing here today. First of all, this bill doesn't get the job done. My providers back home say that this is overbroad and really fails to meet the moment of our opioid addiction crisis. Here is the back story: The SUPPORT Act was adopted in a bipartisan fashion in 2018. It was the largest congressional investment in overdose prevention at the time, and it directed resources to communities that need it to save lives through community-based treatment and recovery. It required Medicaid to cover medications for opioid use disorder. The SUPPORT Act and everything was broadly successful and appreciated. It was working to help free people from fentanyl addiction. We have to do so much more, however. That is why in the last Congress we worked together to pass a new and more robust SUPPORT Act to address the third wave of the opioid crisis. However, when it came to the year- end appropriations package that was crafted to include it, who shows up but Elon Musk to throw a wrench into our year-end compromise between Democrats and Republicans to address the opioid crisis through reauthorizing the SUPPORT Act. The Republicans let him do it. You are allowing it to happen again, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, why didn't Republicans bring the SUPPORT Act to the floor, something that really meaningfully helps families and communities address the opioid addiction crisis and the fentanyl crisis? Second, by standing by and allowing the White House and the Justice Department to purge FBI agents and CIA personnel, Mr. Speaker, Republicans are taking the cops off the beat who are tracking the drug traffickers who are trying to break up the fentanyl cartels. So Republicans are making us less safe and are heaping a lot of costs on families that just don't need this chaos. Third, Mr. Speaker, Republicans have this sneaky and chaotic halt to the flow of healthcare dollars back home, medical research and NIH. Medicaid, we know from all of the reporting, is on Republicans' chopping block. Medicaid is the backbone to providing healthcare and substance abuse treatment for people all across America. Mr. Speaker, Republicans have that in their sights, too. Tell me whose record doesn't match their rhetoric. I would say it is the House Republicans. No one has the legal authority to turn Treasury payments into means of political retribution. No one in the executive branch has the authority to cancel or ignore congressional appropriations. That is a basic constitutional precept. Why do Republicans serve in Congress if they want to be a royal subject to a king rather than a Representative of the Article I branch?