Brett Guthrie

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, this is not the answer to the problem. This problem is not going to be solved by only putting people in jail and throwing away the key. I will tell you there are people who are purveyors of this illicit fentanyl that deserve to be put in jail and throw away the key. That is what we have to do to people that are selling this poison to children. Congress has people that testify before our committee that their child took Adderall before a test, and it was laced with fentanyl. They were poisoned. It is not that they had addiction issues. It is that they are poisoning our communities. There are people selling this. They are purveying it, creating it, growing it, and creating it chemically. What the Energy and Commerce Committee is doing, today we are doing the HALT Fentanyl Act to address the criminal justice side of it. However, my friend from New Jersey is correct, what also has to be addressed are the issues affecting people that are suffering from substance use disorder. We did that in the SUPPORT for Patients and Communities Reauthorization Act of 2025 where we had over, I think, 350 votes on the floor. It was broadly bipartisan on the floor of the House. We are committed to ensuring that people have access to treatment. We are equally committed to ensuring that people that are purveying this poison on our communities, our cities, bringing it across the border, deserve to have their day in court, and deserve to answer to justice. If it be the case that these are the people poisoning our children, they should be put in jail and the key thrown away. Our committee will not apologize for that. It takes an all-of-the-above approach for this issue, and we are willing to do an all-of-the-above approach. I ask my colleagues to support this bill. It is extremely important. The DEA alone has said that they support this, and it is time we do it. Mr. Speaker, I ask this body to support it.

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Joanne Thomas for her service to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. A graduate of Wayland Baptist University, The University of Sydney, and The Catholic University of America's Columbus School of Law, Joanne began her career on Capitol Hill as a Law Clerk for the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary in 2022 after having previously worked in the legal field. In January 2023, Joanne joined the House Committee on Energy and Commerce to serve as Counsel for the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. As Counsel, she oversaw Congressional investigations into FDA foreign drug inspections, the Office of Refugee Resettlement's management of unaccompanied minors, and a $900 million taxpayer funded HHS COVID-19 Public Health Campaign. Recently, Joanne departed the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. I wish her the best in her future endeavors and thank Joanne Thomas for her service to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Gavin Proffitt for his service to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. A Lynchburg, Virginia native, Gavin began his career on Capitol Hill as a Research Assistant for Rep. Louie Gohmert (TX-01) in October 2016 before becoming a Legislative Correspondent and Legislative Assistant for Rep. Bob Goodlatte (VA-06) and a Professional Staff Member for the Republican Study Committee. In February 2023, Gavin joined the House Committee on Energy and Commerce as a Professional Staff Member for the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations after serving as a Senior Advisor to the Administrator and Medicaid Project Officer for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. During his time working for the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Gavin worked on a wide array of issues such as the fentanyl crisis, FDA drug shortages, and antimicrobial resistance. Recently, Gavin departed the House Committee on Energy and Commerce to take on a new role as Health Policy Advisor for Sen. Ron Johnson (WI). I wish him the best, congratulate him on his new role, and thank Gavin Proffitt for his service to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. James), my good friend and very strong leader on the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Schmidt), one of our freshman Members, not a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, but he has been on the front lines of the opioid crisis in Topeka as attorney general, and it is great to have his expertise in the Congress.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Chair, I will remind you that we spend about almost $700 billion in Medicaid. When this bill goes into effect, 10 years from now, we are going to spend $1.1 trillion in Medicaid. I just want to make sure that point is made. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Obernolte), my good friend and a great leader on the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chair, this isn't a hollow exercise. This is our opportunity to say these programs are important to us. Article I of the Constitution clearly gives us legislative authority: All legislative authority will vest in the Congress of the United States. We authorize these programs. I don't think the answer is to say we believe in these programs, therefore we are not going to vote to reauthorize them because we don't believe they are going to be carried out. It is our job to authorize them, to work the appropriations process, and then to do the oversight to make sure these are implemented. If the White House and the President can do this more efficiently, I am all about doing it more efficiently, but our job is to ensure that the mission is accomplished. If they can do that with different agencies, we need to have that debate. I think that is important. It starts with authorizing the program, and in this case reauthorizing the program. Mr. Chair, I just want you to know there are no reasons to vote against this in substance. The language of this bill that we have before us was negotiated by both the House and the Senate, with the Democratic leaders and the Republican leaders in the House and the Senate, so it was bipartisan and bicameral discussions. That is the text of the bill before us. What we are here doing today, it is not a hollow move. That is not it at all. We are here today to say these are important to us. If there are discussions on what is important and what is not important, the first thing we need to do is come together as a House and say these issues are important to us as a House. Let's get this bill to the Senate and put it on the President's desk. I strongly believe the President will sign this bill because he believes, as we all believe, that people are hurting. They are hurting with substance use disorder. You have the supply coming across the border that he is shutting down and trying to shut down, but we also have to deal with the demand side. We need not just to slow down the demand, which is important, but change people's lives because when they are suffering with substance use disorder, it is just chaotic on themselves, their families, in which they live and the friends that they have. This truly changes people's lives. It is a bipartisan bill. Everything in it is bipartisan and has been discussed. I just encourage my colleagues to vote for this bill, reauthorize these provisions, fight to get them through the Senate, put them on the President's desk, and then fight for their authorization through the appropriations process, as well. I am committed to doing that, and I look forward to hopefully a bipartisan vote on this bill. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Dunn), my good friend who is the vice chair of the Health Subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Chair, I want to point out that Medicaid reform specifically exempted people with substance use disorder from being defined as able-bodied for the purpose of the work requirement. It specifically exempted them. We understand that Medicaid is a big payer for people with substance use disorder recovery services, and our bill exempted them. That will continue. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Balderson), my good friend.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Chair, I want to point out one more time that in Medicaid reform, people with substance use disorder and mental health issues are exempted from having to comply with the work requirement so that hardworking taxpayers who go to work will provide the categories we were just talking about today with Medicaid. They are not going to provide for the able-bodied. There is an exemption from the able-bodied requirement for substance use disorder recovery and mental health. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Cammack), my great friend and a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 2483, the SUPPORT for Patients and Communities Reauthorization Act. When the Committee on Energy and Commerce led the way on the original SUPPORT for Patients and Communities Act 7 years ago under the leadership of Chairman Greg Walden, the opioid crisis looked different. Overdose deaths were largely driven by prescription and semisynthetic opioids, like oxycodone and heroin. When the COVID-19 pandemic hit, government-enforced lockdowns hurt patients in recovery and sent more people into despair, increasing the amount of people taking illegal drugs for the first time. Since then, the heartbreaking stories about the toll illicit fentanyl and fentanyl-related substances have on our communities have continued. The rate at which Americans are dying from fentanyl poisoning is just devastating. In our first Health Committee hearing this Congress, my colleagues listened to the testimony of Ray Cullen, who lost his son Zach to fentanyl poisoning. Nobody should have to experience this pain. Earlier this year, the House took a critical step to get illicit fentanyl off our streets in passing the HALT Fentanyl Act, which was led by my friend, Congressman Morgan Griffith. I am proud today to lead the reauthorization of the SUPPORT for Patients and Communities Act. By passing this bill, my colleagues continue our work to help improve treatment and recovery opportunities, bolster prevention initiatives, and fight the fentanyl crisis. This bill is about offering hope to those in despair, those battling substance use disorder, their families and loved ones, healthcare heroes, and first responders who need continued support to help save lives. I thank Congresswoman Pettersen and all the Members who have supported this important bipartisan piece of legislation. I am hopeful that by reauthorizing programs with proven success and increasing access to treatment, Congress can continue to address and prevent these tragic drug-related deaths and restore hope and healing to those who need it. I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chair, I point out, as they have had efficiencies in HHS in this area, it has been reported to us that there are no material changes in the programs before us today, showing that the Trump administration has substance use disorder and drug addiction as a number one priority. Mr. Chair, I don't understand the logic that the best way to send a message to the President that you support these programs is to vote ``no'' on the bill. I just don't understand that logic. I hope we can get bipartisan support. We will put the bill on the President's desk, and I believe the President will sign the bill. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Latta), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chair, I really appreciate the hard work of the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Pettersen) on this issue. She is a leader in Congress on substance use disorder. I actually didn't know the story of my friend from Colorado's mother. Certainly, when someone is touched by an issue, they certainly become passionate about it. I greatly appreciate her passion on the issue. The section 1115 waivers are important to the Medicaid program. States are the laboratories for democracy. Section 1115 waivers provide key State flexibility to test new authorities and ideas in the Medicaid program. In substance use disorder alone, 1115 waivers were pivotal in early efforts to lift the IMD exclusion, an obsolete edifice to the Medicaid program that undermines access to mental health care and substance use disorder care by only allowing for Medicaid to reimburse for care in- patient facilities with fewer than 16 beds. Under President Trump's guidance, in 2018, States were able to use 1115 waivers to waive the IMD exclusion, expanding access to care as the opioid epidemic began to grow worse. After 5 years of State experimentation with 1115 waivers to lift the IMD exclusion, Congress stepped in and ultimately lifted the IMD exclusion. We took on that initiative in 2023, alongside the rest of the SUPPORT for Patients and Communities Act. We were able to get that signed into law, even when the Senate blocked the rest of the SUPPORT for Patients and Communities Act, because it was important to get it done. The 1115 waivers have been on the books for decades, and States have used them a multitude of ways to transform the Medicaid program. A key tenet of those waivers, though, is that they have to be budget neutral. This wasn't a problem when 1115 waivers were used to lift the IMD exclusion. States were clearly able to demonstrate how early access to care reduced emergency room services. Nonetheless, the Biden administration in the use of 1115 waiver authorities put forth new guidance that allowed States to rely on so- called hypothetical expenditures that let States spend Medicaid dollars on services that were over budget and unrelated to the core functions of the Medicaid program. Some examples of this included paying for air conditioning systems for beneficiaries and for providing payments for legal support for beneficiaries. This isn't to say that HVAC systems in a hot climate or legal supports aren't important or may have some potential relation to someone's health, but they fall far outside the scope of what Medicaid is intended for. They open the door for States to draw down Federal funds or for services that are oftentimes entirely funded by the States. In 2023, as the then-subcommittee chairman for Energy and Commerce's Health Subcommittee, I raised concerns with that direction with the Biden administration as they were moving toward these waivers. Specifically, in this CMS, I wrote: ``The committee is also concerned about the potential for fraud, waste, and abuse in calculation and application of States' budget neutrality limits under Section 1115 Medicaid waivers.'' As chairman of the full committee, those concerns remain. Madam Chair, 2 weeks ago, House Republicans began to take steps to address this. In the reconciliation bill that we passed, we included key language to require stricter adherence to the budget neutrality requirements for 1115 waivers. It doesn't matter if the President is Democrat or Republican who is approving these waivers. It needs to be budget neutral. We need to be good stewards for programs like Medicaid and to make sure that it is spending in a fiscally responsible manner and that we aren't just writing blank checks to States who can spend money how they choose. I will close by saying I greatly appreciate the leadership my friend from Colorado has shown. She is a leader in this House and in ensuring that we deal with as much as we possibly can in every way possible with substance use disorder. I believe we need to stick to the budget neutrality. Madam Chair, I oppose the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter), the chair of the Subcommittee on Health, an important worker on this piece of legislation and my good friend.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the legislation and to include extraneous material in the record on H.R. 2483.

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Kaley Stidham for her service to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. A London, Kentucky native, Kaley began her career as an intern for her hometown member and Dean of the House Congressman Hal Rogers (KY- 05) followed by an internship with Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (KY). During her Senior Year at the University of Kentucky, Kaley became the Staff Assistant for Congressman Andy Barr (KY-06) in his Lexington, Kentucky office and upon graduation in May 2023 transitioned to his Washington, D.C. office and shortly after took on the role as Press Assistant as well. When I became Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce in January of this year, Kaley joined my team as the Press Assistant where she became a valuable team member in keeping the American public updated on what our committee has been doing to restore the American Dream. Recently, Kaley departed the House Committee on Energy and Commerce to take on a new role as the Communications Director for Congresswoman Kat Cammack (FL-03). While she will no longer be working for a member of the Kentucky delegation, I know she will succeed in her new role. I wish her the best, congratulate her on her new role, and thank Kaley Stidham for her service to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Kristen Pinnock for her service to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. A Gales Ferry, Connecticut native, Kristen graduated with a Bachelors of Arts in Secondary Science and Social Science Education from DePaul University in 2011. While completing her Masters of Art/Ph.D in Measurement, Evaluation, and Assessment from the University of Connecticut, Kristen began her career in Washington, D.C. as a Student Trainee for the U.S. Government Accountability Office before becoming an Analyst and Senior Analyst. In March 2023, she joined the House Committee on Energy and Commerce as a U.S. Government Accountability Office Detailee for the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations where she has been a critical team member in leading investigations into Anti-Semitism in medical schools and hospitals and supported the Committee's role in the bipartisan AI Task Force report that came out in the 118th Congress. Kristen was also essential in Committee efforts in writing letters pertaining to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. Most recently, Kristen completed another degree graduating with a Master of Arts in Defense and Strategic Studies from the Naval War College in 2024. Kristen's time as detailee with the House Committee on Energy and Commerce is ending this week and she will return to the U.S. Government Accountability Office. I know Kristen will continue to be as valuable of an asset for the U.S. Government Accountability Office as she was for the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. I wish her the best and thank Kristen Pinnock for her service to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which includes a title from the Energy and Commerce Committee that unleashes American energy, promotes American innovation, and protects care for our most vulnerable Americans. In 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson created the Medicaid program to protect low-income families, individuals who were disabled, and seniors. House Republicans share this commitment to this vulnerable population. This bill protects coverage for those individuals by ensuring ineligible recipients do not cut the line in front of our most vulnerable Americans. The decision by left-leaning State governments to spend taxpayer dollars on people who are ineligible for the program is indefensible. Medicaid should not cover illegal immigrants, deceased, or duplicative beneficiaries or able-bodied adults without dependents who choose not to work. Let's be clear about what my Democrat colleagues are prioritizing when they say they oppose our bill. What they are really saying is that 4.8 million people who refuse to work a part-time job or volunteer in their community are entitled to free healthcare paid by hardworking taxpayers. When they say they are opposed to our bill, what they are really saying is that the 1.4 million illegal immigrants should be prioritized over U.S. citizens. When they say they oppose our bill, what they are really saying is that people who aren't eligible for Medicaid should be prioritized over children, mothers, or people with disabilities for whom the program was intended. House Republicans make no apologies for prioritizing Americans in need over illegal immigrants or other able-bodied beneficiaries who are choosing not to work. Along with work requirements, our bill rolls back restrictive Biden- Harris era regulations, promotes transparency for pharmacy benefit managers, and increases seniors' access to medication. These are all commonsense policies that will strengthen our healthcare system and return taxpayer dollars to middle-class families. House Republicans are fighting for America's children. We are fighting for pregnant women and mothers. We are fighting for individuals with disabilities, and we are fighting for seniors who need long-term care. That is why I urge my colleagues to support this legislation as part of our effort.

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Texas for yielding. Mr. Speaker, the legislation before us today addresses a key issue created in the Biden-Harris administration that harms American businesses and actually disincentivizes investment to reduce pollution. This was originally created during the Clinton administration. It was the ``once in, always in'' rule that penalized job creators and energy producers who took steps to invest in new technologies that lowered pollution. If your emissions are at such a level you become a major source, once in under this rule that we are overturning today, you are always a major source, no matter what you do with your businesses. If you lower emissions, if you lower standards, you put in new equipment, you do operating hours differently, you do whatever you can to lower your emissions, you can't go back to being an area source and regulated with a level of emissions. Once you cross the threshold, no matter what you do, you stay listed as a major source pollutant. We believe it disincentivizes companies from trying to lower their standard, and that is what we want to do. It is a disincentive. It is counterintuitive for what is trying to be done with the rule. We want lowered emissions, and we want to incentivize businesses to get there. In the last Congress, I was proud to lead the legislation to overturn this burdensome regulation, which is a one-way ratchet that creates a disincentive for businesses to take steps to reduce their emissions. By passing this resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act, we are working to unleash American energy and ensuring that every dollar that is invested in our economy is focused on jobs, growth, and innovation, not siphoned off for unworkable compliance created by government red tape. I thank Congresswoman Fedorchak for leading this resolution, and I thank my friend from Texas for yielding. I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, on Roll Call No. 114, H.J. Res. 88, I was not recorded due to official business. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 114, H.J. Res. 88. personal explanation

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Brannon Rains on his career with the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. A Dundee, Oregon native and 2018 graduate of Oregon State University, Brannon began his career in the U.S. House of Representatives as an intern for his home state Congressman, Representative Greg Walden (OR- 02) before joining the House Committee on Energy and Commerce in 2018 as a Staff Assistant for Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers. Since that time, he has served as a Legislative Clerk, Policy Analyst, and most recently a Professional Staff Member for the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade. When I became Chairman in January, Brannon stayed on as a valuable member of my team as a policy expert in critical areas such as artificial intelligence, data privacy, and children's online safety. During his time in the United States House of Representatives, he has helped develop important pieces of legislation including the RANSOMWARE Act and the American COMPETE Act. Brannon was also crucial in planning legislative hearings regarding technology policies, Federal Trade Commission, and Department of Commerce. Recently, Brannon accepted a role in Senator Todd Young's office as a Policy Advisor. I thank him for his service, congratulate him on his new role, and wish him the best.

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Christopher Krepich for his career in the U.S. House of Representatives. An Altoona, Pennsylvania native, Christopher began his near decade long career on the Hill a year after graduating from Pepperdine University in 2014. Christopher has served in many different roles during his tenure and worked for Representatives Sean Duffy (WI-07), Keith Rothfus (PA-12), Jim Sessenbrenner (WI-05), and Brad Wenstrup (OH-02). I came to know Christopher when he began working as a Press Secretary for the House Committee on Energy and Commerce under Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers in 2022, where he served a vital role informing the public of the work the Subcommittee on Health was fighting for while I was Subcommittee Chairman. Christopher then went on to become the Communications Director of the full Committee on Energy and Commerce. Since becoming Chairman of the full committee, Christopher has been an expert policy communicator as a dependable and reliable member of my team serving as Senior Communications Advisor. Recently, Christopher departed the Committee on Energy and Commerce to accept a role as the Director of the Office of Communications for the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services--a role I know he is sure to succeed in. I wish him the best, congratulate him on his new role, and thank Christopher Krepich for his near decade long service in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to be here, and I thank the gentleman for yielding. I rise in strong support of the waivers before us today: H.J. Res. 87 by Representative James of Michigan; H.J. Res. 88, led by the vice chairman of the full committee, Representative Joyce of Pennsylvania; and H.J. Res. 89, led by Representative Obernolte of California. The issue is that it is essentially becoming a nationwide mandate. Article I of the Constitution clearly gives Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce. These are the reasons that I would point to that we need to not have State-by-State standards for building automobiles. What this is, is you can't build a gas-powered car in Michigan and sell it to somebody in California. California has 40 million people, over 10 percent of our country. When you start having a patchwork of State laws banning cars that can be driven anywhere else in the country, except California says no, New Jersey says no, and Maryland, as pointed out, says no, then it completely distorts national commerce. If you think about it, by 2035, zero-emission cars in California, the problem with that is, I don't think anybody believes they can get there with that standard, just like the EV mandates by 2032. What happens, though, these automotive companies have to start building for that. We see the results of it. In my district, BlueOval SK, which is tied to Ford Motor Company, has two battery plants. One they are building. Only one is going to have production in it. They are looking at what to do with the other one. They have that and another one in Bowling Green because they put out these mandates, and businesses have to follow them. When they don't come to pass, it is just not an efficient way to do business. You have California doing mandates on having to buy electric cars or non-internal combustion engine cars. It is clearly within the purview of the Commerce Clause. It is clearly the responsibility of the national government to set up what the standards are so commerce can easily move across State borders. If somebody builds a car in California, a gas-powered car in California, I think California has the right to ban their citizens from buying it. I don't think they have the right to ban their citizens from buying cars produced everywhere else in the States. There are contracts among the States. It is clearly what our Founding Fathers intended. This certainly fits right in it, and I urge my colleagues to reject these policies and support the underlying resolutions.

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 146, the TAKE IT DOWN Act. I echo the sentiments of Representative Dean and my friend Representative Salazar. I appreciate the comments that they just made. I thank Congresswoman Dingell and Senator Cruz for their determination in combating this crisis of malicious, deepfake pornography. Last month, I joined a bipartisan group convened by the First Lady. We heard from young survivors and their parents who were targeted by those abhorrent practices. I thank the First Lady for her leadership and for shining a light on this dark and destructive crisis. I am sad to say that this issue struck close to home with the heartbreaking death of my constituent, 16-year-old Elijah Heacock. He tragically fell victim to an online extortion scheme, showing my community the dangers of predators targeting our kids online. I sat with his mom, his dad, and his brother just this last week. We talked about the tragedy that happened in his life and their determination to see that we move forward in this Congress, not only on this bill but others to make sure that it doesn't happen to other families like theirs. We are all praying for that dear family. Mr. Speaker, the heart-wrenching stories we have heard tell us all we need to know. It is time to send the TAKE IT DOWN Act to the President's desk so we can give survivors and law enforcement the tools they need to combat this crisis. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation.