Joe Courtney

Mr. COURTNEY

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to the amendment.

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Chair, I represent the State of Connecticut, which today is the site in southern New England of an offshore wind energy project that is 9 years into the process, 80 percent complete with offshore wind turbines already installed. Forty-five out of 65 turbines are in the ground and have gone through exhaustive permitting, including the Department of Defense, in terms of making sure that this project will proceed safely and securely in an area where we have the largest military installation in New England, with the New London Submarine Base and Coast Guard presence there. There is no question that this issue of radar interference was exhaustively investigated with the Federal Aviation Administration, the Air Force, and NORAD. All of them were brought into the permitting process. Mr. Chair, I include in the Record a letter dated December 2024, which states clearly that the Department of Defense has found that construction of the Revolution Wind project would not have adverse impacts on DOD missions in the area. Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense, Washington, DC, December 13, 2024. Reference: Federal Aviation Administration Aeronautical Study Number: 2021-WTE-2881-OE and 23 associated structures Ms. Whitney Marsh: ;rsted, Providence, RI. Dear Ms. Marsh, Thank you for your participation in the Mitigation Response Team to assess and overcome military impacts from your proposed Revolution Wind project off the coast of Squibnocket Beach in Chilmark, Massachusetts. In a letter dated October 27, 2021, the Department of Defense (DoD) described the potential impacts to military operations for the project. As a result of discussions between ;rsted and the U.S. Air Force and a resulting mitigation agreement signed by the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment on November 4, 2024, the Military Aviation and Installation Assurance Siting Clearinghouse (Clearinghouse) has found that construction of the Revolution Wind Wind project, with no more than 65 wind turbines up to 873 feet above sea level and no more than two offshore substations up to 228 feet above sea level, would not have adverse impacts to DoD missions in the area. The Clearinghouse has entered a determination of ``No Objection with Provision'' for this project via the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Obstruction Evaluation/Airport Airspace Analysis system. Our response to the FAA included a notification that additional structure proposals or an increase to the current maximum structure height may present an adverse impact. We encourage you to engage DoD prior to any proposed expansion or height increase. If you have any concerns, please contact Ms. Robbin Beard, Clearinghouse Deputy Director. Sincerely, Steven J. Sample, Executive Director, Military Aviation and Installation, Assurance Siting Clearinghouse.

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Chair, this is documentary proof that the concern that is being raised with this amendment is something that is already part of the permitting process. The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management signed off on the project. Again, we are about $4 billion into the project. The Trump administration, on August 22, put out a halt work order, citing national security concerns, with not a single bit of detail. We have union jobs, laborers, operating engineers, and longshoremen who are now totally in limbo in terms of whether or not the good work that they have been doing, in compliance with a Federal permit on a project that has been paid for, is going to be suspended by issues that don't exist in terms of the process. This issue is covered. Having this amendment pass would add an additional layer of delay on this project. Time is the enemy in terms of these working families having their job security at a time when our labor market is eroding. The project will also bring lower energy costs to southern New England. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Chair, NORAD and FAA examined this issue. It was raised about radars. There was a software upgrade that all parties agreed upon would mitigate and solve this problem, and that is why they issued this order permitting this project. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Magaziner), my good friend.

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

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Chair, I yield 45 seconds to the gentleman from California (Mr. Carbajal).

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Amo).

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. COURTNEY

Mr. COURTNEY. Madam Speaker, on August 22, the Trump administration, with absolutely no warning, issued a halt work order to an offshore wind project off the coast of southern New England that has been in the works for 9 years. The developers of this project have invested close to $4 billion, employed thousands of workers, and installed 45 out of 65 wind turbines that the Federal Government permitted in 2023. As of August 22, 80 percent of the project is complete, and 100 percent of the turbine foundations have been placed on the ocean floor. When the turbines are turned on, 704 megawatts of power will be transmitted by cable to Rhode Island and Connecticut. That is enough electricity to power 350,000 homes--400 megawatts to Rhode Island and 304 megawatts to Connecticut. The wind power contracts approved by both States at a guaranteed rate will over time save money for ratepayers, particularly during cold, winter months, and will add to the grid at a time we all know demand for electricity is going to increase. Incredibly, the Department of Energy's halt order was one-page long and cited nonspecific, vague ``national security concerns'' as the reason to suddenly eliminate good jobs and a plentiful supply of affordable electricity. Despite repeated requests from the operators, the two States, and the congressional delegations, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, BOEM, has provided absolutely no description or detail of what exactly are the national security concerns that at this late hour could possibly justify such a drastic action. The closest thing to an explanation came in a CNN interview with the Secretary of the Interior a few days ago, who cited ``radar interference'' and possible swarm attacks from undersea drones at the wind farm as potential threats. Madam Speaker, here is the thing: During the yearslong permitting process, BOEM meticulously investigated all national security concerns, and its 2023 Record of Decision approving the project specifically had a section on national security. It specifically addressed the issue of radars which was resolved to the satisfaction of the Department of Defense and NORAD. Madam Speaker, I have a letter from the Department of Defense dated December 2024, which states that the Department ``has found that construction of the Revolution Wind project . . . would not have adverse impacts to DOD missions in the area.'' I include this letter in the Record. Office of the Assistant Secretary Of Defense, Washington, DC, December 13, 2024. Reference: Federal Aviation Administration Aeronautical Study Number: 2021-WTE-2881-OE and 23 associated structures. Ms. Whitney Marsh, ;rsted, Providence, RI. Dear Ms. Marsh: Thank you for your participation in the Mitigation Response Team to assess and overcome military impacts from your proposed Revolution Wind project off the coast of Squibnocket Beach in Chilmark, Massachusetts. In a letter dated October 27, 2021, the Department of Defense (DoD) described the potential impacts to military operations for the project. As a result of discussions between ;rsted and the U.S. Air Force and a resulting mitigation agreement signed by the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment on November 4, 2024, the Military Aviation and Installation Assurance Siting Clearinghouse (Clearinghouse) has found that construction of the Revolution Wind Wind project, with no more than 65 wind turbines up to 873 feet above sea level and no more than two offshore substations up to 228 feet above sea level, would not have adverse impacts to DoD missions in the area. The Clearinghouse has entered a determination of ``No Objection with Provision'' for this project via the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Obstruction Evaluation/Airport Airspace Analysis system. Our response to the FAA included a notification that additional structure proposals or an increase to the current maximum structure height may present an adverse impact. We encourage you to engage DoD prior to any proposed expansion or height increase. If you have any concerns, please contact Ms. Robbin Beard, Clearinghouse Deputy Director. Sincerely, Steven J. Sample, Executive Director, Military Aviation and Installation Assurance Siting Clearinghouse.

Mr. COURTNEY. Regarding the swarming undersea drones, Revolution Wind has a contract with ThayerMahan, a maritime company that installs and operates undersea surveillance technology using sonar rays and pickets to keep watch and detect malign activity. They protect wind farms today. They protect oil rigs today. They protect U.S. maritime ports today with the finest technology. Madam Speaker, Secretary Burgum and his staff at BOEM should review its own prior investigation on national security and actually meet with the developers and undersea experts in Connecticut and Rhode Island to learn about the thorough, comprehensive investments and systems that were developed with the U.S. Coast Guard, the U.S. Navy, the Department of Defense, and the Federal Aviation Administration to ensure the safe, reliable operation of the wind farms. Madam Speaker, this halt work order needs to be overturned quickly. As we heard on Friday, the U.S. labor market is weakening, and we know the cost of electricity is going up. Leaving Revolution Wind in limbo with thousands of jobs on the line is completely unacceptable. It is no secret that the President doesn't like wind power, but this project has been permanent, paid for, and is 80 percent finished. Leaving the halt work order in place is hurting working families and electric ratepayers. Lawsuits have been filed, and the U.S. Government and taxpayers are going to pay dearly for this uncalled for about-face on a project that the government approved 2 years ago. The better path is to quickly lift the order, meet face-to-face with the developer and the Governors of Rhode Island and Connecticut to end this chaos and get the operating engineers, the longshoremen, the laborers, and the electrical workers back on track to finish the job that today is 80 percent finished. That is not a partisan statement. That is simple common sense.

Mr. COURTNEY

Mr. COURTNEY. Madam Speaker, after an extraordinarily lengthy recess that Speaker Johnson ordered at the third week of July, Congress is finally back in session with a huge to-do list. If there was any benefit in terms of having Members back home, though, it was an opportunity to go out and listen to what is on people's minds. Townhall meetings and community gatherings offer, again, Members of Congress a chance to listen to people in terms of what they care about the most. I had a number of those events, in Mansfield, Colchester, and Old Saybrook, Connecticut, with very packed rooms. The issue that was of most concern was H.R. 1, what President Trump calls the one big, beautiful bill. While Congress was away, the Congressional Budget Office had a chance to finally zero in on final numbers in terms of the impact of H.R. 1, the one big, beautiful bill. It was being written over and over again and changing up until the final minutes, but they finally got some clarity. What they determined was that the number of people who will lose their health insurance coverage because of H.R. 1 is 10 million, 7.5 million people on Medicaid and another 2 million people who get their insurance through private health plans on the exchange. They also calculated the debt impact in terms of H.R. 1 because of the massive giveaway to billionaires and the top 1 percent of this country. They determined that the bill is going to add $3.4 trillion to America's deficits between 2025 and 2034. The debt service on that additional debt is an additional $718 billion. That is just pure interest. It has no value in terms of services or programs that actually help the American people. Because of that debt figure, the bill triggered another law called paygo, the pay-as-you-go law, which was passed in the 1990s to put pressure on Congress not to pass legislation with that big of a deficit impact. Unfortunately, the majority ignored the paygo rule. What CBO told us on August 15 is that will trigger automatic cuts to other programs. That is the way the paygo law was designed to create some deterrent on Congress from excessive deficit spending. Madam Speaker, the Medicare program, the program that helps people over the age of 65, will take the hit of 4 percent across the board. It will be a $45 billion paygo cut because of this measure. In addition to those numbers, we are also hearing from the groups who are going to be impacted. Madam Speaker, in this morning's Connecticut press, there is a story titled: ``What worries CT hospital leaders about Trump's Big Beautiful Bill.'' Madam Speaker, I include in the Record the article from the CT Mirror. [From CT Mirror, Sept. 2, 2025] What Worries CT Hospital Leaders about Trump's Big Beautiful Bill (By Katy Golvala) Connecticut's health care leaders and state officials have been warning for months about the potentially devastating impacts of President Donald J. Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act on access to care for millions of Americans. Nearly two months after the law's passage, hospital executives here say there are critical details still unknown that make it difficult to determine exactly how it will impact providers and patients. ``My best guess is it's not going to be good for hospital providers and health care in general,'' Vincent Capece, president and CEO of Middlesex Hospital, an independent hospital located in Middletown, CT. ``There's going to be less money available, but exactly how much and how that all works out when the dust settles is really hard to calculate.'' The law makes several changes to Medicaid, known as HUSKY in Connecticut, that are projected to kick anywhere from 100,000 to 170,000 residents off the program in the next decade. It also impose new limits on the amount of Medicaid funding states can collect from the federal government through what's known as the ``hospital provider tax.'' Those are just some of the policies that could spell trouble for a hospital's bottom line. Health care researchers predict the law's major components, some of which aren't slated for implementation until 2027 at the earliest, will pose the greatest challenge to rural hospitals and those that serve a large share of Medicaid patients. Hospitals that aren't performing well financially might also be less poised to absorb potential revenue hits that the law's measures could bring. The Connecticut Mirror spoke with hospital executives from around the state about how they're approaching major pending federal changes. Most of the hospital leaders who spoke for this article said it's still too early to consider scaling back services in response to the federal cuts. Ben Wade, chief strategy officer at Stamford Health, said he's hopeful they'll be able to manage costs without reducing access to services. ``We have not identified any programs at this time for closure,'' Wade said. ``We don't plan to do that.'' However, leaders at small community and rural hospitals acknowledged that they may have to scale back the availability of certain services. ``It's not necessarily cutting programs,'' Kurt Barwis, CEO of Bristol Hospital, said. ``It's starting to look critically and strategically at ``How do I retool these programs to accomplish the same thing but at a lower cost?' '' Barwis said he's established partnerships with larger hospital systems, like UConn Health and Hartford HealthCare, and expects to do more of these in the future. Kyle Kramer, CEO of Day Kimball Hospital in Putnam, said service changes are ``inevitable'' at rural community hospitals like his, where they must always think about whether there is enough demand for a particular service, he said. ``There has to be a high enough level of volume to maintain that proficiency,'' Kramer said. ``And if it becomes a service that is too expensive to offer, we've got to think about, `Okay, is this something that we should partner with somebody else who has larger scale to provide it?' '' While the federal changes directly impact people who get coverage through Medicaid and state-based exchanges, the ripple effects will be felt by everyone, health care leaders warned. ``The impact goes far beyond those who lose coverage. Our entire health system and every community we serve will feel the effects. Reduced services, longer wait times, staff reductions, and the potential closure of programs and facilities,'' Daniel Keenan, vice president of government relations at Trinity Health of New England, stated in emailed comments. Keenan pointed to emergency rooms as an example. When people don't have coverage, they turn to emergency departments for basic care, resulting in crowding, service delays and staffing issues that impact the entire system, he said. The changes could drive UP costs for people with private insurance, as well. Leaders at both Stamford and Middlesex hospitals say the reductions in government Medicaid payments will likely force them to negotiate increased payments from commercial insurers, which could result in higher premiums for those with private coverage. ``We will need to think about the upcoming commercial insurance negotiations that we have to make sure that we have the resources that we need to cover our expenses,'' Wade said, adding that if insurers and employers don't opt to absorb these costs, they will end up hitting people's premiums. One of the big areas of uncertainty lies with the hospital providers tax, several hospital executives said. The provider tax is an arrangement that allows states to increase the amount of federal Medicaid dollars they get from the federal government by collecting taxes from hospitals and then redistributing those funds back to the facilities. The exchange counts as Medicaid spending by states and entitles them to extra reimbursements from Washington. The federal budget bill decreases the ``safe harbor limit''--or the rate at which states can tax hospitals--from 6 percent to 3.5 percent by 2031, with a phased-in reduction beginning in 2028. Even though the new limit won't take effect for several years, federal waivers for the tax rate will pose an issue as soon as next year, when the current provider tax agreement between the state and hospitals expires. In advance of a new agreement, approved by the legislature this year and slated to take effect in July 2026, Connecticut will have to reapply for a federal waiver to tax the hospitals above the safe harbor limit in order to go ahead with its plan to increase hospital taxes by $375 million. In the past, states have been permitted to apply for waivers to tax hospitals at rates exceeding the safe harbor limit. Connecticut, for example, taxes hospitals at the maximum 6 percent for inpatient revenues, but received a federal waiver to tax outpatient revenues at slightly over 10 percent, said Paul Kidwell, senior vice president at the Connecticut Hospital Association. It's unclear whether the federal government will continue to grant such waivers, he added. ``It's a big question mark,'' Kidwell said. ``We're proceeding as if we can continue, with the knowledge that we need more information from CMS in order to be certain.'' Capece, CEO at Middlesex Hospital, said the tax change could be the biggest financial disruptor for his hospital, even more so than changes to Medicaid eligibility. ``The risk really lies with regard to the provider tax issue,'' Capece said. ``It's a huge amount of money.'' Barwis, of Bristol Hospital, called the expiration of the agreement at the end of this fiscal year a looming ``day of reckoning'' for Connecticut. ``Will [the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services] grant a new waiver to keep it at 10.5 percent? Or will CMS say, `No, no, no, we're not going to grant this waiver again. You need to go down to 6 percent.' And how will that affect hospitals in the state of Connecticut?'' Barwis said. At least some Connecticut hospital leaders hope the most potentially damaging effects of the bill could get scaled back or repealed before they go into effect. Wade, who oversees strategy at Stamford Health, said there's a chance that, if Democrats take control of Congress in the midterm elections, some of the changes could be ``pushed off or unwound entirely,'' he said. ``We're still doing a lot of advocacy at the federal level because this is still a moving target,'' Wade said. Kramer, who heads up Day Kimball, agreed that there's still time for things to change. Capece from Middlesex said he, too, is ``cautiously optimistic.'' CHA's Kidwell is less convinced the law could be scaled back but, he said, he's grateful to be facing these federal changes in a state that wants to help as many people as possible keep their health coverage. ``We all have this goal of making sure as many people stay insured as possible and that compliance with federal rules is not so onerous that people fall off because of paperwork,'' Kidwell said. ``I don't think that's the same in other states where they might have a different motivation.''

Mr. COURTNEY. Madam Speaker, again, this journalist went out and interviewed hospitals across the State. This included urban, rural, and suburban hospitals. What all of them are reporting is that the hit of $1 trillion of Medicaid is going to ripple through the system and cause impact for everybody who relies on those critical services. Daniel Keenan from Trinity Health Of New England, Saint Francis Hospital of Hartford is one of their big members. I was born there a number of years ago. He stated: ``The impact goes far beyond those who lose coverage. Our entire health system and every community we serve will feel the effects. Reduced services, longer wait times, staff reductions, and potential closure of programs and facilities. ``Keenan pointed to emergency rooms as an example. When people don't have coverage, they turn to emergency departments for basic care, resulting in crowding, service delays and staffing issues that impact the entire system.'' That affects everyone, and it will spill over into other people's employment-based insurance premiums, which the article goes through in great detail. Madam Speaker, President Trump the other day said he actually doesn't think he wants to call the bill the One Big Beautiful Bill Act anymore. As he said, it was good for getting it approved, but it is not really good for explaining it to people. People have figured out enough in terms of deficit impact, taking away people's health insurance coverage, and the impact on services, particularly in the hospital sector, which they warned us about before the bill was passed. Yet, the majority and the White House turned a deaf ear. We have a lot of work to do when we get back into town, starting tonight. Again, what would be nice is if all of the Members who had townhalls--and I know Republicans heard about this as well as Democrats--recognized that this bill is not the Ten Commandments. Madam Speaker, we have the ability and the legal authority to make changes and listen to the people who are warning us that it is actually going to harm the American people, and there is nothing beautiful about it.

Mr. COURTNEY

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, tomorrow the House of Representatives will be taking up H.R. 4275, the Coast Guard Reauthorization Act of 2025. That is legislation that updates and codifies changes and reforms to America's oldest continuous maritime service, the Coast Guard. It is actually called the first fleet because technically, actually the Coast Guard is older than the U.S. Navy. This bill contains many good, bipartisan provisions that are addressing many of the challenges that the Coast Guard faces every day, whether it is drug interdiction, obviously doing the work in terms of our coastal, littoral regions of the country, and making sure we have safe passage of commercial and civilian maritime activity. Included in this bill is a provision to reach out to our great ally Finland to update and modernize our icebreaker fleet. Our Polar Star large icebreaker is now 50 years old, and it is long past due, particularly with the challenges in the Arctic with Russia and China, to make sure we update and modernize our Coast Guard and icebreaking fleet. This bill also contains a long overdue provision to reform the Coast Guard statutes regarding protecting victims of sexual assault and harassment both within the Coast Guard service and also the Coast Guard Academy. I represent New London, Connecticut, which is home to the Coast Guard Academy that is an outstanding institution that builds future leaders for the Coast Guard. It actually has a large international contingent of allies such as Iceland and Pacific Island nations that come to learn at the cutting edge institution in terms of coastal activities that are there. Like all the military academies, there has been a shadow of, unfortunately, activity regarding female cadets over the years that have had to put up with totally unacceptable conduct and forcing them into almost an impossible position in terms of reporting this activity over the years. The bill includes a safe-to-report policy, which will protect members reporting sexual assault. Again, sometimes incidents occur where there may be minor misconduct issues where both the victim and the perpetrator are involved, and that risk of being punished for those minor misconduct has really inhibited people to come forward and report sexual assault. This is an issue which was the subject of exhaustive hearings at the Oversight and Government Reform Committee over the last 8 years. Our dear, late Congressman Elijah Cummings conducted many of those hearings. There were brave whistleblowers that came forth, such as Dr. Kim Young-McLear who is now a retired commander from the Coast Guard. She testified before that committee and talked about, again, some of the hard experiences that she went through. Other military academies, such as West Point and Annapolis, have actually adopted safe-to-report policies, and tomorrow's bill will get the Coast Guard Academy in line with those institutions. This bill also extends the safe-to-report policy to the entire Coast Guard personnel, the entire service. That was done administratively by the last Commandant of the Coast Guard, Linda Fagan, who, again, I think was very focused in terms of making sure that the safe-to-report policy was going to be in place to eradicate activities that really harm the readiness and effectiveness of the Coast Guard. Women Coast Guard officers are some of the finest, most talented people who are doing the important work of the Coast Guard, and we need to make sure that there is a statutory structure in place to make sure that with this type of activity, people will be able to report it and get a remedy and a response, in some cases punishment to, again, make sure people are not hindered because of this unacceptable conduct. Tomorrow when we take up this bill, those brave women who came forward to testify and report their experience--and sometimes watched their dreams and their careers end because of the fact that they were subjected to unacceptable pressure and retaliation for reporting--will see that by law that is now going to be a thing of the past. It is long overdue, and, again, I just want to take a moment to publicly thank Commander Young-McLear and her colleagues for having the courage to step forward and make sure that the Congress is aware of this situation and will end it in the passage of tomorrow's bill.

Mr. COURTNEY

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, this week we are going to be taking up legislation on H.R. 672, an act to establish new ZIP Codes for certain communities. This measure is aimed at fixing problems in about eight communities all across the country where the post office's ZIP Code allocation system has just completely fragmented these towns and cities because of the proliferation of ZIP Codes that have occurred and been implemented in some of these towns. It is a bipartisan bill. I am one of the bipartisan cosponsors. I represent one of those towns, which is Scotland, Connecticut, in eastern Connecticut. Scotland, Connecticut, is a community that was established back in the 1700s. It was incorporated in the 1800s. It is a small town. The last census was 1,576 people. There are 625 residents in the town. Mr. Speaker, it is almost hard for people to believe me when I tell them this, but it has six ZIP Codes in a community with 1,500 people. It creates havoc in terms of people doing their ordinary business through the post office. First Selectman Dana Barrow of the town of Scotland described in a letter to the House Committee on Oversight and Reform: ``Due to the town's ZIP Code configuration, Scotland residents face daily frustration with packages being misdelivered, service providers being unable to find their properties, and digital ordering or registration systems refusing to accept their address information. But the issue goes beyond inconvenience. People have paid taxes to the wrong town and sent their children to the wrong schools. Town party committees and voluntary associations cannot effectively reach residents by mail. Public health statistics seriously understate the burden of disease in our town, and other survey data also misrepresent us. A high percentage of absentee ballot applications that we were required by law to send out . . . were returned--not because the people weren't in town, but because the USPS computer scanning system rejected their addresses. The situation is clearly damaging to us individually and as a community.'' What this bill does is it just simply says for Scotland and a number of other communities that have been identified by the community that basically we are going to unify a ZIP Code for those communities so they don't have to, again, experience what Scotland First Selectman Dana Barrow described. Last night, the post office actually sent out a letter of opposition to the bill to all Members of the House Chamber. They actually had the nerve to say that passage of this bill would significantly degrade mail service in the affected communities. Mr. Speaker, it is hard to imagine how the mail service for the people of the town of Scotland could be any worse than the situation that exists today where they have six ZIP Codes for a population of 1,500 people. Luckily, we have Members of Congress like the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart) who chairs the committee and who is bringing the bill out later this week. He has the common sense to understand that the post office needs to get their act together and go into a very finite and manageable number of communities and aggregate the ZIP Codes so that people, again, can get the services they rely on. I am a strong supporter of the post office. It is in the Constitution. It is mandated we have a Postal Service in this country. People depend on it to get their medications, to get important documents, and to receive their monthly Social Security payments. To have a dysfunctional system that is completely self-inflicted and man-made because of the organization of the post office is just unacceptable. Mr. Speaker, again, despite the post office's somewhat hysterical, out-of-touch opposition that they announced last night, I am here on the floor to publicly call on all my colleagues to join Mr. Diaz-Balart from the Republican side, myself from the Democratic side, and a host of other cosponsors to get this modest and obviously commonsense bill passed and sent to the Senate and then to the President's desk.

Mr. COURTNEY

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, today is June 24, and it is almost exactly a month ago that in this House, the misnamed One Big Beautiful Bill Act was passed in the dead of night after hours and hours of debate while the American people were asleep at home. With the rush of events that take place every single day, it sometimes gets hard to remember exactly where that stands and what is going on. The bill is moving in the Senate, literally as I stand here in the well of the House. In the light of day over the last month or so, a lot of the rocks have been kicked over in H.R. 1 to sort of see what is in there. A lot of pretty ugly things have slithered out, including a provision to auction off some of our precious public lands out West, basically robbing those treasured assets from future generations. There are deregulated gun silencers, which have been on the National Firearms Act since the 1930s. Who benefits from that? I am sure there are a lot of criminals that are rooting for them to be able to go out and buy tax-free gun silencers. It increases the national debt by $5 trillion, with about $3.5 trillion in new debt with another $1.5 trillion in interest payments. It cuts taxes for American families with a yearly income above $500,000 to the tune of over a trillion dollars with a pittance for middle-class and working families. It raises the debt ceiling by $5 trillion so the government can sell bonds to finance debt. Again, it is a bill that basically benefits the Elon Musks and Jeff Bezos of the world. What is really at the heart of H.R. 1 that should concern every single American is a provision that includes the largest cut in healthcare spending in American history with over a trillion dollars of cuts in the bill as it left this floor on May 22. I have here a poster next to me that talks about what the real-life impact is going to be on hospitals all across the country. It is not coming from me as a member of the minority caucus. This comes from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which has been around for 50 years and is a completely nonpartisan analyst in terms of healthcare spending and healthcare financing throughout the country. What it did was break down State by State what the impact of this bill will be. For the State of Connecticut, where I am from, it is actually about a $9 billion cut over the next 10 years in terms of the Medicaid program, as well as eliminating the premium tax subsidies for people who get their health insurance through the Affordable Care Act. That is about 15 million Americans. The hospitals, in particular, are going to take the biggest hit. As this headline says in the Connecticut press, it is about $4 billion over the next 10 years. All of my colleagues that are here today, I encourage them to look at this analysis which shows State by State, sector by sector within healthcare spending, hospitals, physicians, and prescription drugs, in terms of the impact that this bill will have. There was a lot of hope that maybe in the Senate this bill might be fixed and addressed, particularly because it hits rural hospitals so hard. There are so many Republicans in the majority caucus in the Senate that obviously are going to feel the pain if this provision goes through. Unfortunately, what we saw come out of the Senate Finance Committee is even worse in terms of what came through from the House. Don't take my word for it. Listen to the Catholic Hospital Association, who issued a statement just a few days ago after this provision came out. They had warned them before of the devastating impact it would have, particularly on safety net hospitals which Catholics are definitely a part of all across the country. It fell on deaf ears. Children's hospitals rely on Medicaid to a greater proportion than other hospitals because they don't have elderly patients, obviously. They are children's hospitals, and Medicare pays for a lot of those patients. Children's hospitals have no place to cost-shift, so they have uncompensated care with this devastating Medicaid cut that is going to hit every State in terms of its Federal matching funds. This is going to land on the most vulnerable in our society and the people who are delivering the care. They are not partisans. They are not approaching Congress as Democrats or Republicans. They are there as people who are doing their job day in and day out. I visited one of those hospitals last week, Lawrence Memorial Hospital in New London, Connecticut. Over 40 percent of their patient census is on Medicaid. It is in the heart of New London, a wonderful, historic community, but it has a high Medicaid population. Mr. Speaker, we have to stop this insane attack on healthcare that affects every single American. We have got to block H.R. 1. We got to go back and do a better job for the American people.

Mr. COURTNEY

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the extraordinary career of an eastern Connecticut stalwart public servant, Peter DeBiasi, and celebrate his retirement from Access Community Action Agency. Peter DeBiasi's journey with Access began in March 2005, a challenging period marked by high leadership turnover and significant budgetary and staffing hurdles. Yet, it was precisely during this time of adversity that Peter's vision, dedication, and unwavering commitment to serving low-income individuals in Windham and Tolland counties truly shone. Prior to joining Access, Peter honed his leadership skills as President/CEO of the Connecticut Council of Family Service Agencies from 1999 to 2002, and as Vice President for Development and Marketing at United Community & Family Services from 2002 to 2005. This wealth of experience laid the groundwork for the transformative impact he would have at Access. Under Peter's leadership, Access Community Action Agency has experienced unprecedented growth and made profound strides in its mission to empower individuals and families. One of his most significant legacies is the agency's pioneering work in affordable housing. What began with a single senior housing development in Willington, Connecticut has blossomed into a portfolio of over 200 units of owned or managed affordable housing, providing safe and stable homes for countless individuals. Beyond housing, Peter dramatically improved Access's homeless services. The establishment of a 24/7 emergency shelter in Danielson, coupled with the opening of a cold-weather overnight shelter, has expanded the agency's capacity to offer immediate and vital support to those experiencing homelessness. Furthermore, Access has broadened its focus to proactively prevent homelessness by providing crucial assistance to individuals at risk, underscoring Peter's deep understanding of the complex challenges faced by vulnerable populations. His leadership ensured that Access met the growing need to address homelessness head-on. The scale of Access's growth under Peter's guidance is truly remarkable. The agency has doubled its workforce to approximately 90 dedicated employees and has seen its yearly budget expand to an impressive $15 million. This expansion has enabled Access to deliver more comprehensive and impactful services, with affordable housing leading the way in terms of growth. As someone who worked with Peter over many years, I can personally attest to his amazing dedication and passion to achieve the goals of community action. He has a deep understanding of all the policies and criticisms that inevitably would surface over the years and he deftly and pragmatically overcame many difficult challenges. We are very lucky in eastern Connecticut to have benefited from his great work. As Peter transitions into a well-deserved retirement, planning to relax and enjoy time with family and friends, his impact on Access and the communities it serves will undoubtedly endure. His passion for fighting poverty has been a lifelong commitment, driven by the profound belief that poverty is difficult to experience, but does not have to be permanent. He made his life's work assisting those less fortunate and empowering them to find ways to achieve sustained economic stability. We extend our deepest gratitude to Peter DeBiasi for his decades of exceptional leadership, unwavering dedication, and transformative contributions. His legacy will continue to inspire and guide Access Community Action Agency as we strive to build a more equitable and supportive community for all.

Mr. COURTNEY

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend and honor Mr. Michael Price of Essex, Connecticut, for his outstanding achievements in the realm of American theatre and the arts. On June 8, Michael will receive special honors for his lifetime achievements at the prestigious 2025 Tony Awards ceremony. Michael holds the record as the longest serving Executive Director of an American theatre, leading the Goodspeed Opera House in East Haddam, Connecticut for 47 years from 1968 to 2014. The impact of his tenure on the Goodspeed Opera House has reverberated all across the world, and thus this honor is well deserved. Michael was born on August 5, 1938, to William and Sylvia Price in Chicago, Illinois. From a young age, he was introduced to the theatre through family members who worked in the industry. Michael got a bachelor's degree from Michigan State University, followed by a master's degree from the University of Minnesota and a master's in fine arts from the Yale University School of Drama. Michael's career included many different jobs at theatres throughout the country. Early in his career, he worked as a stagehand and electrician at the Shubert Theatre in New Haven, Connecticut. Other jobs took him around the country, serving in different roles at theatres and performances before he settled at the Goodspeed Opera House. In 1968, Michael started as the Executive Director of Goodspeed Musicals in East Haddam, Connecticut. After years of disrepair, Michael helped rebuild the reputation of the Goodspeed Opera House as one of the best venues to develop musicals in the country. Goodspeed became internationally recognized for their distinguished performances. During Michael's time as Executive Director, he produced over 250 classic and forgotten musicals, 100 new musicals, and transferred 19 shows to Broadway, which earned 13 Tony Awards. The Goodspeed Opera House was honored with two special Tony Awards during his reign. Michael's valuable contributions to the theatre industry have been recognized before. He was inducted into the Theatre Hall of Fame, which honors lifetime achievement in the American theater. Michael's involvement in theatre is not limited to his time at the Goodspeed Opera House. He is also the founder of the League of Historic American Theatres and a founding member of the National Alliance for Musical Theatre. Michael currently serves on the Executive Committee of the American Theatre Wing and as a member of the Tony Administration Committee. Michael is also a board member for the American Academy of Dramatic Arts, the Johnny Mercer Foundation, the ASCAP Foundation, and numerous charitable and non-profit organizations. Now, Michael will receive one of the Tony Honors for Excellence in the Theatre, a well deserved honor that he will share with his wife Jo- Ann, children Daniel and Rebecca, and grandchildren Ezra and Ari who have been with him every step of the way to this special honor. The Tony Awards are presented annually to Broadway productions for exceptional performances and include special honors beyond the boundaries of Broadway. Mr. Speaker, Michael has been an asset for the theatre community locally in Connecticut, nationally, and internationally. He spent his entire life dedicating himself to the preservation of the arts, and this award is a representation of that devotion. As a friend of Michael's for over twenty years, I can attest to his endless passion for advancing the benefits of live theatre, and for his wonderful, down to earth sense of humor. He is a caring person, always ready to help his community and people in need. He is an inspiration to all who have the opportunity to know him. Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues in this chamber join me in adding a layer to his already permanent case, by recognizing the astonishing career of Michael Price.

Mr. COURTNEY

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, today, June 3, Congress reconvenes after a 12-day break. On May 22, the last time we were here, this Chamber was involved in a 2-day marathon. H.R. 1, the misnamed one big, beautiful bill, was jammed through in the dead of the night, as it was being written in real time, by a vote of 215 to 214. During my time home, I held two townhalls. One was up in Tolland, Connecticut, near the border of Massachusetts. The other was down along the shoreline in Madison, Connecticut. Both townhalls were well- attended. Last night in Madison, it was standing room only. People were bursting with questions about how a bill that can change the tax code for the next 10 years, that can intervene in terms of our healthcare system, in terms of taking away people's health coverage, can happen with no transparency and no public input. As I said, it was being written in the dead of the night prior to the vote on May 22. This is what we know now as the dust has settled in terms of what the impact of this bill is. In terms of healthcare, the bill is going to cut our Medicaid program, America's largest healthcare program, and extract roughly $700 billion from the system over the next 10 years. The Affordable Care Act, subsidizes premiums, which provides health insurance for millions of Americans. Again, those premiums are going to be cut. As a result, people are going to lose their health insurance. That is not me saying that. That is the Congressional Budget Office, the neutral umpire that calls balls and strikes around this Congress who is saying that. Again, they have calculated that 15 million Americans will lose their health insurance as a result of this measure which was passed by the majority and jammed through in the dead of the night. In Connecticut, we have already seen what the numbers mean in terms of this bill. The Kaiser Family Foundation is not a partisan group. They have been studying healthcare trends and finance for decades. They determined that 140,000 citizens in the State of Connecticut will lose their health coverage as a result of this bill. As the dust has settled, we now know of one thing that didn't get a lot of attention. As a result of the deficit impact of this bill, which is going to add trillions of dollars to the national debt, it is going to trigger a sequestration, an automatic cut to the Medicare system. Medicare is the system that provides health insurance for people over 65 and people on disability. That is $500 billion over the next 10 years. Again, it is going to be a cut across the board to hospitals, to physicians, and to a whole series of medical devices and pharmacy products that are covered by Medicare. Again, this is because of the reckless deficit spending that this bill creates. That is not me saying that. The calculation of the Joint Committee on Taxation was $3.7 trillion of new debt on top of the $36 trillion of debt that we have today. The Wharton School of Finance, where President Trump attended school, calculated $3 trillion, as well. When they added the interest costs that are going to be paid on that additional deficit, that spending, that is going to push the number closer to $5 trillion. Again, today the deficit is $36 trillion. We are spending $89 billion a month in terms of interest costs on the existing debt. That is larger than what we spend in the Department of Defense on a monthly basis. It is bigger than any other account in the discretionary budget of this government. This bill accomplishes two harmful, damaging impacts to America which are, number one, 15 million people are going to lose their health insurance. We are also going to see the deficit grow by anywhere between $3 trillion and $5 trillion. For what? It is to reward the top 1 percent whose tax cuts are going to be extended and enlarged for many over the coming years, leaving working families and the poor in the dust. We can do better than this as a nation. Again, it is not too late to stop this. The Senate is now going to take up this bill. The external pressure is going to rise up with the American Hospital Association and with patient groups like the American Cancer Society, the American Lung Association, Autism Speaks, and people who represent disability groups. They are rising up now to stop this bill because of the harm it is going to cause on individuals and families all across this country. It is time to stop this one big, ugly bill that is going to do so much damage to the American people.

Mr. COURTNEY

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and congratulate a devoted public servant, Elissa DeVito of Preston, Connecticut. Elissa is retiring from teaching at Waterford Public Schools after over 30 years of dedicated service. Her decades of outstanding expertise and dedication to her community will be sorely missed. Elissa spent her early life in Rockville, Maryland before attending Syracuse University where she met the love of her life, Michael. Elissa moved to Connecticut in May of 1991. She and Michael lived in Groton and Mystic before settling in Preston in 1994, where they have been ever since. Elissa chose a path of public service and has dedicated her life to education and teaching. For decades, she has worked as a teacher, helping to shape the minds of generations of children. She began her career with Waterford Public Schools on November 30, 1992, at Oswegatchie Elementary School. She stayed at Oswegatchie until the fall of 2009 when she transferred to Quaker Hill Elementary School. While Elissa has spent most of her career working with kindergarteners, she has also spent a few years working with first and second graders. Always going above and beyond to create a caring and supportive environment for the students that entered her classroom, it has been Elissa's mission to provide the next generation with the tools they need to succeed. Elissa is a natural educator and has been known as an expert at teaching young students to read. Students go from learning the letters of the alphabet to reading books by the end of their time in her classroom. As she enters retirement, Elissa is looking forward to spending more time reading, one of her favorite pastimes, visiting her daughters, Samantha, Emily, and Alexa and going on trips with her husband Michael. Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to represent constituents as devoted and compassionate as Elissa. Elissa has impacted hundreds of students during her career. Elissa will leave behind an expert skill set and enthusiasm that will be hard to replace, but her 33 years of unwavering dedication to the Waterford community will leave a legacy for years to come through each and every one of her students. Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in recognizing Elissa DeVito's immeasurable contributions and congratulating her on her well-earned retirement.

Mr. COURTNEY

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to enthusiastically honor Mr. Jon Roe, a pillar of eastern Connecticut, for his lasting contributions to the town of Vernon, Connecticut and the Tankerhoosen River Valley. His more than six decades as a resident of Vernon have been filled with selfless advocacy and dedication to the region that will be long remembered and admired for generations to come. A few weeks ago, on April 24, 2025, Jon was recognized for his selfless volunteer contributions, when he was awarded the Marie Herbst Memorial Award. This award, named after a longtime Mayor and State Senator for Vernon, is reserved for persons who demonstrate outstanding service and dedication to the community. Jon's journey to this milestone began in the small town he grew up in, in northern New Jersey, where his family had lived for 200 years, which taught Jon the value of small-town institutions. After graduating from Pennsylvania State University in 1961 with a degree in engineering, Jon found his home in Connecticut where he worked at Pratt & Whitney Aircraft, a world-renowned engine manufacturer that has powered planes and jets for 100 years. After marrying the love of his life, Janet, in 1963 they settled in Vernon's Tankerhoosen River Valley where they have built and lived their lives for the past 62 years. Jon always knew he could make a difference when he put his mind to something. He established a deep interest in natural health and spirituality in the 1980s. After 32 years of highly skilled work for Pratt & Whitney, Jon retired in 1993. He took this opportunity to embrace new opportunities, publishing a magazine and helping holistic practitioners move into the mainstream. Jon built on his interest in holistic health, working with the Vernon Youth Services Bureau to bring awareness to the benefits of holistic medicine to the wider Vernon community in the early 2000s. In 2004, Jon was instrumental in the creation of the Greater Vernon Holistic Healthfest, which hosted their 12th annual festival this March. Jon has been a dedicated member of Vernon, always longing to learn more about the place he has called home for so many years. After meeting people passionate about protecting the Tankerhoosen Valley, Jon took it upon himself to learn all he could about the area and its people. The Tankerhoosen Valley is located in Vernon and Tolland, Connecticut and is one of the state's Officially Designated Greenways. The area has a rich environmental history that Jon knew he needed to share with others living in and visiting the Valley. He created a website and newsletter to help share what he learned with those around him. Working with volunteer nonprofits, Jon was also instrumental in creating the Vernon Volunteers' Collaborative (VVC) in 2014, a group that serves to preserve the community of Vernon for residents. Finding his niche in research and sharing information, Jon has dedicated the past 15 years to writing and giving talks about the Tankerhoosen Valley and the early families that lived there. His extensive research and down to earth speaking style, infused with a warm sense of humor, made him a favorite at all his speaking engagements. He recently published a book on Vernon's first 90 years and has several other books planned to continue telling the rich story of northeastern Connecticut history. Mr. Speaker, Jon Roe has been an exceptional leader in eastern Connecticut throughout his life. I count myself lucky to know leaders like Jon, working so hard to preserve our history for future generations. Jon's commitment to the corner of eastern Connecticut he and his children and grandchildren have called home for decades is evident in his relentless service to the community. His contributions and tireless work will continue to be felt in Vernon and the northeast region. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to please join me in congratulating Jon on his award and honoring his works.

Mr. COURTNEY

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, due to unavoidable delays in travel, I missed votes on Monday, May 19, 2025. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 132 and YEA on Roll Call No. 133.

Mr. COURTNEY

Mr. COURTNEY. Madam Speaker, for the last 5 months, across the country, people have been waiting with bated breath to see what this big, beautiful bill is that the Republicans have been working on behind closed doors, much of it down in Florida putting it together, particularly America's healthcare sector. It has been clear from the outset that the Medicaid program, the program which provides more coverage for more Americans than any other program, 72 million Americans, was a target in this budget reconciliation bill. Over the weekend, the measure had been released and we finally get to see what, in fact, it looks like. The chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, who is a good friend and a good guy, came right out and said that Democrats are going to use this as an opportunity to engage in fear-mongering and misrepresent our bill as an attack on Medicaid. Madam Speaker, it is not just Democrats and Republicans that have an opinion about what is happening here, it is about the people that the Medicaid cuts are going to impact, particularly our healthcare sector, particularly the hospital sector. This morning, Politico's headline shows what their reaction has been over the last 48 hours, which is ``Hospital groups slam cuts to Medicaid in megabill.'' This is a sector that has many trade associations, the biggest one, the American Hospital Association, came right out and said that it will lead to millions of Americans losing access to healthcare and leaving many of our hospitals struggling to maintain services and stay open for their communities. The Catholic Health Association said, Congress has a moral obligation to consider the harm that this would have for America's most vulnerable communities, cascading effects of lost coverage and cost-shifting will impact nearly every American. Children's hospitals, who depend on Medicaid, can't cost-shift to older patients on Medicare. They have been blasting this proposal from day one and they have continued it. Essential hospitals, which are the safety net hospitals for this country, have also said that it is going to lead to closures of hospitals as well as the private-sector hospitals. The Federation of American Hospitals, Director Chip Kahn, came right out and said that it is imperative that congressional Republicans go back to the drawing board. Too many lives depend on it. The American Cancer Society, not a Democrat organization, said the results of these Medicaid cuts will be devastating. Lives will be lost and State economies will suffer. It is not too late for this Congress to finally engage in a bipartisan negotiation about ways that we can address the budget deficit and protect the most vulnerable people in our country, but unfortunately, part of this plan, this, megabill, is a tax cut, and this chart shows who benefits. This bar here, that is the rich folks in this country, the top 20 percent; everybody else gets peanuts. That is what this cut is aimed at trying to offset, the impact, the fiscal impact, on the deficit that these tax cuts will produce over the next 10 years. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget issued their report last night and they conclude that this plan is going to add $4 trillion to the national debt. That is even with the cuts that were part of the Medicaid plan, which I talked about a little bit more. We have a bill, which is going to cut services, basically put one of our most vulnerable sectors in our economy which we all rely on, our hospitals, at greater financial risk all for the benefit of the small slice of America's population and it is going to add to our national debt, which according to what the committee said is now $36.2 trillion. Last month, we paid $89 billion in interest on that national debt. That is the second biggest expenditure for the Federal Government. It is bigger than the Department of Defense last month in terms of what was paid, and that is what we are faced with. This is a gut check moment for this country in terms of where are your values? Where are your priorities? Are you going to listen to the caring professionals, the people who are the nurses and the people that take care of us in times of healthcare crisis? Are we going to listen to that top 1 percent who are clamoring to make sure that their tax cuts--the Bezoses, the Musks, the Gateses--they don't really need the help. The people who are working their butts off every day in hospital wards making sure that we are all healthy and safe and cared for, they are the ones that need the help. We need to reject these Medicaid cuts and reject this plan. Let's go back to the drawing board, as Mr. Kahn said from the Federation of American Hospitals, and do it the right way. Let's protect our values and protect our priorities, which all Americans depend on.

Mr. COURTNEY

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate a stunning, dominant victory by the UConn women's basketball team yesterday over a very good University of South Carolina team by a margin of 23 points, which actually is lower than really where it was for most of the second half. It is an amazing group of women student athletes who, again, rose to the occasion to take the UConn women's basketball program into further heights with its 12th national title. All records are made to be broken, but it is hard to even imagine any other school's team that could come close to 12 national titles. They were led by Paige Bueckers who is going to be one of the greats in the history of college basketball. She scored 17 points and had numerous rebounds, steals, and blocks. She has had every award imaginable for a college basketball player: ESPY Award, John R. Wooden Award, and Naismith Awards, but winning that trophy which so far had eluded her is just a storybook way for her career at the University of Connecticut to finish. She was joined by Azzi Fudd, who is a junior, 24 points, 6 rebounds, and 3 assists. She was named the Most Outstanding Player of the Final Four, which is really saying something when we have a teammate like Paige Bueckers. Lastly, a freshman, Sarah Strong, had 24 points and 15 rebounds. Over the course of the season watching her grow as a player playing with poise and maturity that defied someone of her young age was something quite striking and amazing. Their starting line-up was rounded out by Jana El Alfy and Kaitlyn Chen, a portal transfer from Princeton University, with a really deep bench. KK Arnold came out and provided lots of energy during the game. It was just an amazing team led by an amazing coach, Geno Auriemma. In 2006, which is a long time ago, he already was named to the Hall of Fame in Springfield, Massachusetts, which usually is reserved for coaches after they have retired. However, Geno just kind of keeps going on. Their last win was in 2009, and there were a lot of naysayers out there that while the UConn program has hit its peak, in 2023 in USA Today there was a headline: ``UConn's dynasty is officially dead. That is good news for women's college basketball.'' That is probably the ultimate bulletin board material for someone like Geno Auriemma, if you know him. What is so striking about Geno is just the loyalty of his players. He had all these former stars of the UConn program who have gone on to be at the WNBA who were all there yesterday in Tampa, Florida, rooting them on. The same for the bench. He is an amazing leader and a really talented coach. John Wooden, the legendary coach, never got 12 national titles during his time. I congratulate Coach Auriemma and the team. We have here the college basketball capital of the world. If we add on the six national titles that the men's program has actually accumulated since 1999, its total is 18. I was there for the first one. It was like a religious experience as a UConn fan and a UConn Law School graduate. That is the same as the Boston Celtics have in the NBA. The Los Angeles Lakers have 18 titles, as well. Eighteen titles for a land-grant university in rural Connecticut defies any conventional wisdom about big, high-paying university programs. They just keep getting it done. Coach Hurley, who coaches the men's team, was rooting on Geno and the women as loudly as anyone. It is a great university sports program that brings everybody together. We are so proud of them, particularly in the Second Congressional District. I have the honor to represent the amazing university campus and stores and also Avery Point. Well done, bravo, and kudos to all of them. Just watching them celebrate on the court last night was really so exciting for all of us from Connecticut and from all across the country where many of these players come from. I was texting with the Governor of Minnesota, Tim Walz, which is the home of Paige Bueckers, and he was as happy as anyone in Connecticut to see her great victory.

Mr. COURTNEY

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to celebrate the extraordinary career of Timothy Bowen as he prepares for his retirement from E.O. Smith High School at the end of the 2024-2025 school year. Tim's remarkable 26-year career as a social studies teacher and student mentor at E.O. Smith will be long remembered by his unwavering diligence, inspiring pedagogy, and the profound impact he had on the lives of countless students. Throughout his distinguished tenure Tim did so much more than teach social studies; he embodied the very essence of the subject--he fostered critical thinking, civic engagement, and a deep understanding of the human experience within his students. Tim's dedication extended far beyond the traditional classroom setting. The innovative and engaging activities he meticulously planned for his students epitomize what it truly means to be an educator in the 21st century. He cultivated a dynamic learning environment where history comes alive, government becomes relevant, and the complexities of society are explored with curiosity and intellectual rigor. In 2007, Tim initiated the cherished annual tradition of a farewell celebration for students on the last day of school, a heartwarming display of faculty and staff unity that sets a positive tone for the summer ahead. Similarly, his establishment of a welcoming event for students on the first day of classes in 2015 demonstrates his proactive approach to fostering a supportive and inclusive school climate. His thoughtful recognition of the school cafeteria workers underscores his appreciation for the contributions of all members of the E.O. Smith family. Furthermore, his regular participation as a faculty player in the annual Unified Staff vs Student Basketball Game highlights his commitment to student engagement and inclusive activities. Tim's consistent presence as a chaperone for extracurricular events and his enthusiastic attendance at student performances further illustrate his deep investment in the holistic development of E.O. Smith students. A cornerstone of Tim's impact lies in his tireless efforts to promote civic education. He established an annual Voter Registration Drive in 2010, and coordinated visits from locally elected officials, providing students with invaluable opportunities to engage directly with their government. Tim initiated another annual tradition in 2007 when he invited me as the Congressman for eastern Connecticut for a ``Student Town Hall'' to engage in a question and answer dialogue on a wide range of issues. Over the many years I participated in their visits, I am still deeply impressed by the thoughtful, well informed comments and questions students posed to me. It was obvious to me, that Tim's teaching plans and skills were instrumental in shaping and forming future citizens, voters and activists in our region. Tim also has been a regular chaperone on field trips to Washington, D.C., where he organized meaningful itineraries in our Nation's capitol for students that brought the principles of American democracy to life. Locally, his coordination of field trips to the Connecticut State Capitol and Rockville Superior Court ensured that all levels and branches of our republic were included in his curriculum, which is essential to a lifetime of healthy citizenship. Tim's passion for storytelling is evident in the way he empowered students to explore civic issues in-depth in a Civic Documentaries independent study, culminating in notable achievements such as the Quiet Corner Film Festival Award in 2017 and multiple accolades at the same festival since. Tim's dedication to service extends to the veteran's community. His deep care for those who have served our Nation is evident in the holiday card drives he and his students coordinate at veteran's hospitals and coffeehouses throughout eastern Connecticut. He understands the importance of honoring our troops and made a point to let his students witness the Veteran Stand Down Day at the Rocky Hill Veterans Home and Hospital each year, fostering empathy and a sense of responsibility in them. His impactful work with and for veterans earned him a commendation and thank you from the commissioner of the Connecticut Veterans Affairs in 2024. His coordination of grave cleaning and flag placement on local veterans' graves for Memorial Day further underscores his dedication to connecting students with the veteran community. Finally, Tim's commitment to student well-being is demonstrated in his coordination of student presentations of weekly Star Card drawings--an initiative to promote positive student behavior. As a member of the faculty Wellness Committee he helped to establish a ``Wellness Corner'' in classrooms--complete with reminders to help students know they are not alone in their daily struggles. For his unwavering dedication, innovative spirit, profound impact on students, and exceptional contributions to E.O. Smith High School and the wider community, I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating the inspirational career of Timothy Bowen.

Mr. COURTNEY

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, candidate Trump and President-elect Trump consistently and repeatedly promised the American people that when he was elected, on day one that he would lower the cost of living for Americans. He very effectively campaigned on that issue, and I think that that was a major driving force in terms of why he prevailed on November 5. In fact, he said that in a number of interviews after the election. However, then-President Trump was sworn in on January 20, and to this day, despite over 100 executive orders, countless rescissions that have come out of the White House, not one has been directed in terms of lowering the cost of living for Americans in this country. In fact, last week, the Consumer Price Index was released. It showed that prices jumped again at 2.8 percent, well above the Federal Reserve's target of 2 percent, which is why interest rates are going to continue to stay unnecessarily high. On Wednesday, a couple days from now, so-called Liberation Day, he is now going to announce another wave of tariffs that every economist of every stripe will tell you is going to, in fact, raise the price of goods for Americans. Don't take my word for it, listen to the National Association of Home Builders, a staunch Republican organization that has warned this administration that putting tariffs on everything from steel to copper and nickel is going to drive up the price of home construction. In fact, screws and nails, made from steel, are already showing huge increases. They have already been hit with a 25 percent tariff from one of our biggest importers of steel, our friend and ally for many years, Canada. I now suddenly sort of wonder where this White House is coming from. Steel and lumber used in home construction were one of the biggest factors of increased prices on last Friday's Consumer Price Index. That is, again, why the homebuilders are warning us at this time of a housing crisis. We are seeing an administration that is doing everything in terms of driving those prices up still further. There is a belief in the White House that somehow Americans are going to be inoculated from tariffed goods from other countries because we are going to have this burst of output that is going to happen, even though we don't mine for things like copper and nickel, and even though the steel industry in the U.S. will tell you they do not have the capacity to replace incoming foreign steel. Yet, they somehow believe that commodity price is not going to leak into what American importers are actually going to be paying, which is going to get passed along to the American consumer. He has invoked a law, a 1976 law, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which was put into place by Congress in this Chamber to provide the President with the ability to raise tariffs against a foreign adversary or threat. That is the law that he used against Canada, and the reason he said was that fentanyl is coming into Canada. Last week, the Director of National Intelligence testified before the House Intelligence Committee. They released their annual threat assessment listing all the countries that are threats to the U.S. Do you know what country was not on that list? Canada. Because, in fact, if you look at the data from DEA and people who work at the border, less than 1 percent of fentanyl comes from Canada. Yet, he used that law, without Congress' approval, to strike at that nation. We have already heard from the new Prime Minister that they are going to raise countertariffs against the U.S. This is a vicious cycle where there is not going to be a good ending unless this Congress, led by Mr. Trump's party, grabs the steering wheel and listens to the people who are out there on the front lines of our economy and says: Stop. Enough. The Dow tanked on Friday, dropping 700 points. Futures opened today down 400 points. The warning lights are everywhere. Liberation day is just going to worsen the situation that we are seeing, not only for people who are in the stock market, which, you know, they are big boys and girls. They can handle themselves. It is really the people on Main Street who are going to feel the brunt of a tariff policy that goes completely in the opposite direction of the promises that he made on the campaign trail. It is time for Congress as a coequal branch of government--and, Speaker Johnson, if you are listening, please, you have the ability to bring to the floor a countermeasure to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and stop the madness in terms of where this administration is taking our economy.