Marcy Kaptur

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I am deeply troubled by the majority's action this week in capitulating to the President-elect's transition team to deny the House the opportunity to hear from the esteemed nominee for Secretary of Defense, General James Mattis. To eliminate the opportunity for the chamber closest to the American citizens, the People's House, to have a full dialogue in advance of changing a law paramount to the civilian control of the Defense Department is troubling. Rolling over a Congressional Chamber to expedite a waiver that has only happened once before denigrates the responsibilities of our representative democracy. General James Mattis--has served our nation and the U.S. Marine Corps with distinction in war and peace. He has earned the moniker ``warrior- monk-intellectual'' for his devotion to his soldiers, the library of widely ranging books he carries with him, and his lifetime devotion to the study of war. To politicize the nomination of a great General rather than allow Congress the proper procedure to deliberate his talent and experience is a blemish to liberty.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, the freedom to live in a democratic society with freedom of speech, assembly, press, and religion are rights Americans hold most precious. Not so in Putin's Russia. Putin's Russia brutally invaded Ukraine in 2013, resulting, to date, in over 10,000 war dead, with millions of displaced persons. The war grinds on. Dozens and dozens of Putin's critics in the press have ended up dead, murdered for expressing their views. In 2015, Boris Nemstov, about to lead an assembly in favor of Ukrainian independence in Moscow, was murdered on the stairs near the Kremlin. Georgiy Gondgadze, editor of the news Website Ukrayinska Pravda, featured critical articles about Putin ally Leonid Kuchma. He disappeared in the year 2000, and his headless body was discovered in a forest more than 40 miles from home. Anna Politkovskaya, a Russian journalist, was murdered in the elevator of her block of flats in 2006. And Paul Klebnikov, an American, who was chief editor of the Russian edition of Forbes, was killed in 2004, likely by hired assassins. All dead, no investigations, no justice. This is Putin's Russia. President-elect Trump best be very wary of whom he showers praise upon, for the cock is crowing too close to home.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today as co-chair and founding member of the Polish, Hungarian, and Ukrainian House Caucuses. I am also a strong defender of NATO and of its purpose in linking the free nations of Europe and the United States through this historic, hard-won alliance and security treaty among Europe's sovereign nations that respect the rule of law and our shared passion for liberty. Our Nation and NATO's members paid the ultimate price in the last century for our priceless gift of liberty. We won the cold war, and our most treasured democratic values of life, liberty, freedom of assembly, press, and religion are under siege today by a predatory and repressive Russia. Go no further than any major business in your district and ask them how many times they are hacked daily by Russian predators--to get a sense of what is going on. My purpose this morning is to remind our citizenry of the continuing and major, real threat to our NATO alliance and to the destabilization of Europe by Russia that necessitates our strengthening the alliance, not weakening it, to ward off Vladimir Putin's expansionist dreams. I must say I am concerned by our President-elect's loose talk about Russia. His naive assumption that personal friendships with Russia's oligarchs--some of whom are active members of Russia's notorious mafia--can overcome strategic, expansionist imperatives that fill Vladimir Putin's mind are truly not in America's interest. So let's review some recent history. Domestically, Mr. Putin has suppressed the basic freedoms of the Russian people. His leadership has resulted in countless infringements of human rights violations and other actions that directly conflict with our foundational values in Western democracies. Putin has an aggressive and very hostile foreign policy toward us-- toward the United States--and our top allies. Russia has invaded neighboring sovereign countries, including the Republics of Georgia and Ukraine. Russia has threatened and harassed U.S. military personnel and diplomats overseas, not in the last century, now, orchestrating an anti-American propaganda campaign--the largest since World War II--both in our country and around the world; and it is conducting cyber warfare, as I speak, against our country, our government, our interests, as well as European governments; against political institutes; against our think tanks; against our State voter data systems, as our intelligence services have just informed us; and against our cities and counties, journalists, and individuals. Information about Putin's aggressive behavior is well-documented and is specifically highlighted in the intelligence briefings that our President-elect began to receive when he secured the Republican Party nomination last year. Despite this, throughout his campaign and as President-elect, Mr. Trump continues to praise and support Putin. He has even taken the foreign dictator's side over those of the leaders of our country he was elected to represent. Here are examples: December 18, 2015: During an interview on ``Morning Joe,'' host Joe Scarborough asked Mr. Trump about Putin's alleged killing of journalists and political opponents. Trump answered: ``He's running his country, and at least he's a leader. Unlike what we have in this country.'' Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a list of dozens of journalists in Russia who have been murdered in cold blood because they were reporting on corruption, on growing repression in that society--on what Russia was executing around the world. A Partial List of Journalists Who Have Died in Repressive Russia 1. July 16, 2000: Igor Domnikov, an editor and reporter for the independent Novaya Gazeta who covered local government corruption, died after being attacked. His assailants are serving prison terms but the ex-government official who: orchestrated the attack was not convicted. 2. July 26, 2000: Sergey Novikov, the owner of the independent radio station Vesna, was shot in his apartment. Novikov was a vocal critic of local government corruption and received death threats prior to his murder. The case remains unsolved. 3. Sept. 21, 2000: Radio Liberty correspondent Iskandar Khatloni died from an attack by an unknown assailant. Khatloni, who was also a poet and former BBC correspondent, was covering human rights abuses in Chechnya. The case remains unsolved. 4. Oct. 3, 2000: Sergey Ivanov, the director of the independent and influential TV station Lada, was shot in his apartment. The case remains unsolved. 5. Nov. 21, 2000: Cameraman Adam Tepsurgayev, who shot most of Reuters' footage from the second Chechen conflict, was shot dead in a Chechen village. The Russian government contends that Chechen guerrillas murdered Tepsurgayev, but local residents were doubtful. The case remains unsolved. 6. Feb. 3, 2001: Photographer Valery Kondalkov was killed after the publication of photos he took of the private mansions of urban elite in the city of Armavir. The case remains unsolved. 7. Sept. 18, 2001: Eduard Markevich, the editor and publisher of a local newspaper, was shot in the back after receiving threats and surviving a previous attack. Markevich frequently wrote about local corruption and die suspected perpetrators of his murder are government officials. The case remains unsolved. 8. March 9, 2002: Natalya Skryl, a local business reporter, died from an attack. She was planning to publish an article on the struggle for the control of a local metal plant. The case remains unsolved. 9. April 29, 2002: Valery Ivanov, editor of the independent newspaper Tolyatinskoye Obozreniye, was shot eight times in the head. His newspaper is known for his coverage of local organized crime, drug trafficking and corruption. The case remains unsolved. 10. April 18, 2003: Dmitry Shvets, the deputy director of the independent television station TV-21, known for his critical reporting on politicians, was shot dead outside the station's offices. He had been investigating a mayoral candidate's links to organized crime. The case remains unsolved. 11. July 3, 2003: Novaya Gazeta deputy editor Yuri Shchekochikhin died from an acute allergic reaction while those close to him believe he was poisoned. Shchekochikhin was working on a corruption case involving high-ranking government officials and had received threats. The government has not opened an investigation and says there's no evidence of foul play. 12. July 3, 2003: Local television reporter Alikhan Guliyev was shot in his apartment building. Guliyev had accused an influential politician of campaign violations, and had survived an attempt on his life in 2002. The case remains unsolved. 13. Oct 9, 2003: A year after the murder of his predecessor Valery Ivanov, Tolyatinskoye Obozreniye editor Aleksei Sidorov was stabbed by two unknown assailants after receiving threats. Officials initially agreed he was murdered in retaliation for his investigative work, but the case remains unsolved. 14. July 9, 2004: Forbes Russia founding editor Paul Klebnikov was shot in Moscow in a contract killing. The magazine had recently published a feature on Russia's richest people, and Klebnikov himself had written books and articles about business, crime and corruption in Russia. A decade after his death, the case remains unsolved, prompting Secretary of State John Kerry to urge Russia to bring the perpetrators to justice. 15. May 21, 2005: Cameraman Pavel Makeev, while reporting on illegal drag racing, was found dead on the side of a road. Though his death was initially classified as a traffic accident, Makeev's colleagues say his death was related to his work. The case has been reopened but remains unsolved. 16. June 28, 2005: Magomedzagid Varisov, who wrote critical political columns for the weekly Novoye Delo, was shot in his car by unknown assailants with machine guns in Dagestan. Varisov had received numerous threats through years. Three suspects were killed in October 2005, and the unsolved case was closed. 17. Jan. 8, 2006: Reporter Vagif Kochetkov, who wrote for the newspapers Trud and Tulskii Molodoi Kommunar, died from an attack. Officials labeled his death the result of a robbery, though only work-related documents and his cellphone were taken, while his wallet and fur coat were not. A local businessman was charged with the attack but later said he was coerced into confessing. 18. Oct. 7, 2006: Renowned journalist and human rights activist Anna Politkovskaya was shot in her apartment after receiving, and narrowingly escaping, numerous death threats. The five men hired to kill her were convicted and sentenced seven years later, but whoever ordered the murder (believed to be $150,000 contract) remains unknown. 19. Nov. 30, 2006: Prominent investigative journalist Maksim Maksimov was declared dead. He disappeared two years earlier while investigating local corruption in St. Petersburg as well as several unsolved murders. The case remains unsolved. 20. March 2, 2007: Defense correspondent Ivan Safronov died from mysteriously falling from a fifth-floor window while investigating the sale of Russian arms to Syria and Iran. Safronov embarrassed military officials with reports on problems with Russia's nuclear program. His death has been officially ruled a suicide, but his colleagues and friends say he had no reason to kill himself. 21. Aug. 31, 2008: Magomed Yevloyev, owner of the independent news site Ingushetia, was shot while in police custody. Officials had been attempting to close down Ingushetia for extremism; the site had covered corruption, human rights abuses, unsolved murders, and voting fraud in the 2008 presidential election. Yevloyev was detained as a witness in investigation of a local explosion, and police say the shooting was an accident. 22. Sept. 2, 2008: Television editor Telman (Abdulla) Alishayev was shot by unknown assailants in Dagestan. Alishayev produced an anti-radical Islam documentary two years earlier and received death threats from radical groups. 23. Jan. 19, 2009: Anastasia Baburova, a freelancer for the opposition newspaper Novaya Gazeta, was shot by ultranationalists in a double murder. Baburova had covered the rise of neo-Nazism and race-motivated crimes in Moscow. Her murderers, members of a neo-Nazi group, have been sentenced. 24. March 30, 2009: Layout designer Sergei Protazanov died after an attack by unknown assailants. Protazanov was part of the editorial staff of Grazhdanskoe sogalsie, a newspaper known for its critical coverage of the ruling party of Russia. The case remains unsolved. 25. July 15, 2009: The fifth Novaya Gazeta journalist murdered since 2000, Natalya Estemirova was kidnapped and shot execution-style in Chechnya. Her colleagues believe that Chechen officials ordered the Kremlin-backed assassination, as Estemirova had reported on human rights violations committed by authorities in the region. The official investigation pinned the murder on a Chechen rebel who was killed by an air strike, but her colleagues and human rights activists believe this is a cover-up. 26. Aug. 11, 2009: Abdulmalik Akhmedilov, an editor for the independent news website Hakikat and editor-in-chief of the political monthly Sogratl, was shot in his car in Dagestan. Akhmedilov was critical of government efforts to curb religious and political freedom and inaction in investigating assassinations. The case remains unsolved. 27. Dec. 15, 2011: Independent newspaper founder Gadzhimurad Kamalov was shot outside his office in Dagestan. His newspaper Chernovik was known for its investigations in government corruption, police abuse and Islamic extremism, and his name appeared on an anonymous hit list. 28. Dec. 5, 2012: News anchor Kazbek Gekkiyev, who covered social issues, was shot in the head while returning home from work. Several reporters at his state-controlled station, VGTRK, had received threats allegedly from Islamist separatist fighters. 29. April 8, 2013: Mikhail Beketov, founding editor of the Khimiki, died after a 2008 attack by unknown assailants that left him severely brain-damaged, amputated and unable to speak. Beketov had covered government corruption and the planned destruction of the Khimki forest to make way for a planned toll road. In retaliation for his reporting, his car had been set on fire and his dog left dead on his doorstep. He never fully recovered from the attack and died five years later in the hospital. 30. May 18, 2013: Nikolai Potapov, a former government official and founding editor of the local Selsovet newspaper, was shot in the Stavropol region. Selsovet was known for its coverage of government corruption. 31. July 9, 2013: Akhmednabi Akhmednabiye, deputy editor of the independent newspaper Novoye Delo, was shot dead outside his house in Dagestan. He covered government corruption, abductions, police abuse and torture and had received numerous threats for his work. His name appeared on an anonymous hit list. 32. Dec. 4, 2013: Arkady Lander, editor of the opposition newspaper Mestnaya, died after an 2010 attack by unknown assailants in Sochi. He underwent operations and hospitalizations for three years after his attack, which left him amputated and with a fractured skull. Lander had covered local elections and distributed his newspaper free of charge. The statute of limitations ran out on his case. 33. Aug. 1, 2014: The body of independent journalist and civil activist Timur Kuashev was discovered in the woods after he disappeared a day earlier. Kuashev was threatened by police after reporting on civil liberty and human rights violations by security forces

Ms. KAPTUR. The interview with Mr. Scarborough took place the day after Mr. Putin praised and propagandized Mr. Trump as ``bright and talented'' and the ``absolute leader of the Presidential race.'' That was about a year before our election. Months later, the President-elect asked the Russian Federation to hack Hillary Clinton's email. How about that by our President-elect? September 8, 2016: At NBC's Commander-in-Chief Forum, Mr. Trump praised Putin by saying: If Putin says great things about me, I'm going to say great things about him . . . I've already said he is very much of a leader. The man has very strong control over his country. He is right about that. If you speak against Putin, you can be murdered in Russia. America, pay attention.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Dr. John H. Coleman, a longtime Toledo physician who was dedicated to his community. Dr. Coleman was renowned for his empathy and giving nature. In every situation, Dr. Coleman's first concern was for others. Friends describe his attitude as always seeking to help others and improve the lives of those he has helped. Dr. Coleman's spirit was an inspiration to those who worked with him in Toledo, where he served as a family physician for many decades. In 1999 Dr. Coleman was awarded Family Physician of the Year by the Ohio Academy of Family Physicians, a testament to his skills as a doctor and also his leadership and stewardship. Dr. Coleman taught at the former Medical College of Ohio and served on the Lucas County Children Services and Cordelia Martin Health Center Boards. These positions enabled him to shape the minds and embolden a new generation of physicians who continue to honor him by serving the Toledo community, including Dr. Imran Andrabi, now the president and chief executive of Mercy Health. It is unsurprising that Dr. Coleman is held in such high esteem by his colleagues. His story is one that cannot be fabricated. Born in August, 1928, Dr. Coleman grew up in segregated Madison, Indiana, the grandson of a slave. At age fifteen he graduated from high school as the class valedictorian. Genius notwithstanding, Dr. Coleman also showed an early desire to serve his community and his country as a Captain in the Army Medical Corps. Dr. Coleman will be dearly missed for his enduring kindness and dedication to his community. Dr. Coleman will now join his son David, who died in 1977. He is survived by his wife, Joan, children Michael, Jeffrey, and Linda, and eight grandchildren. His legacy will survive him in Toledo, where he has shaped the current medical landscape and done so much for the community at large, and for the African-American community as a path-breaking role model. We offer his family our prayers and hope that they find comfort in the wonderful memories of their beloved husband and father.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a momentous occasion in the life of the Sylvania congregation of the Sisters of St. Francis. The Sylvania Order of the Sisters of St. Francis celebrated its centennial year in 2016. Our entire community honors the noteworthy contributions of the Franciscan's 100 years of noble service through a celebratory mass. It was Bishop Joseph Schrembs of the Toledo Catholic Diocese who initially requested religious sisters to teach the children of Polish immigrants in Toledo's Catholic Schools. On December 8, 1916, the Sylvania Franciscans were founded as a province of the Sisters of St. Francis in Rochester, Minnesota. The Sisters were stationed at St. Hedwig School in the North End of Toledo which served as a hub of Polish life in the city. After 89 acres of land was purchased in 1917 through the Rochester community, the Sisters were formally established in Sylvania, Ohio. They were known as the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate Conception and were led by Mother Adelaide. In the century that followed, the Sylvania Franciscans branched out from their original call to teach the city's Polish immigrant children. They began sharing the Franciscan presence in ministries spanning health care, housing, human services and pastoral care, in addition to education. The Sisters' work is carried forth in eight states and the country of Haiti with 150 Sisters serving our human family. The Sisters' ministries are founded on the ``core values of reverence, service, community, stewardship.'' The Franciscan Sisters are called ``like Francis of Assisi to live the Gospel in joyful servanthood among all people. The Sisters of St. Francis of Sylvania, Ohio as messengers of peace, commit themselves to works that reverence human dignity, embrace the poor and marginalize, and respect the gift of all creation.'' Living Christ's message described in Matthew 25:40 ``whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.'' The Sylvania Sisters of St. Francis celebrated their centennial year as an integral part of our community. Their imprimatur is seen everywhere, from the beautiful elegiac campus in Sylvania, to the schools, caring services and hospitals in which they minister, and the Sylvania Franciscan Village which was established to integrate the Sisters' ministries. In addition to traditional ministries, the Sylvania Sisters of St. Francis are leading efforts toward peace and justice and restoring nature. The Sisters note, ``We believe that nature, the arts and culture, and the goodness around us nurture our souls and make us sensitive to Mother Earth and her people.'' It is that connection that truly defines the Sisters of St. Francis. A walk on the grounds of the Sisters of St. Francis is to behold the beauty of nature in all of its glory, to hear the silence and to feel God's presence everywhere. From the barracks and strawberry patch Mother Adelaide and the 22 pioneering Sisters first established, the grounds of the Sisters of St. Francis now feature many buildings in which the Sisters live and work, shrines, grottos, a prayer garden, the Portiuncula Chapel and adjacent Lourdes University. Its mission-style buildings showcase stunning mosaics and works of art crafted by the Sisters themselves. It is truly an oasis of peace and tranquility. St. Francis of Assisi said, ``Preach the Gospel at all times and when necessary use words.'' Throughout their one-hundred-year history the Sylvania Sisters of St. Francis have lived this truth. Their presence and their good works demonstrate Christ's path and God's deep love. As the kind and generous Sisters go forth toward their next centennial, let us be mindful of the history, but with a vision for the future. Our community gratefully and enthusiastically joins with them to celebrate the life of this vital and cherished congregation that is the Sylvania Sisters of St. Francis.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, in America, we expect no one to be above the law. But, what happens if someone is super rich and breaks the law? Today, I rise to place on the Record a demand that the President- elect's Cabinet nominee for Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos of Michigan, immediately pay fines she owes to the State of Ohio. These obligations total $5.3 million, just as Congresswoman Joyce Beatty stated in her opening statement, and also Congresswoman Marcia Fudge, who will speak subsequent to my own remarks. This is an enormous amount of money owed to the State of Ohio in unpaid fines and levied late penalties for Ms. DeVos' political organization for campaign finance violations in Ohio. They broke Ohio law. These are the largest fines ever levied in Ohio history, dating back to 2008. Essentially, the political organization Ms. DeVos led violated Ohio's election laws. Betsy DeVos of Michigan was in charge of the political action committee known as All Children Matter, based in Virginia. During her chairwomanship, she broke Ohio's election laws which impose spending donation limits of $10,000 per candidate. She, in fact, violated those limits by funneling national PAC money, over $870,000 of it, to Ohio's State candidates--incidentally, all Republican candidates. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record these names and the amounts of money they received. Ohio Candidates Who Received Direct Contributions From Betsy DeVos' Federal PAC--All Children Matter Blackwell, J. Kenneth & Raga, Thomas, $10,000; Husted, Jon A, $10,000; Raussen, Jim, $7,500; Bacon, Kevin, $6,000; Harris, Bill, $5,000; Montgomery, Betty, $5,000; Taylor, Mary, $5,000; Bubp, Danny, $4,000; Coughlin, Kevin, $4,000; Luther, Brant, $4,000. Patton, Thomas F, $4,000; White, Dan, $4000; Adams, John W, $3,000; Bowling, Marcus U, $2,500; Buehrer, Stephen, $2,500; McGregor, Jim, $2,500; Brinkman, Thomas, $2,000; Cousineau, Thomas, $2,000; Fink, Deborah Owens, $2,000; Mandel, Josh, $2,000. McLaurin, Donald K, $2,000; Farmer, Kyle J, $1,500; Goodman, David, $1,500; Peterson, Jon M, $1,500; Seitz, William J, $1,500; Setzer, Arlene J, $1,500; Batchelder III, William G, $1,000; Dolan, Matthew J, $1,000; Faber, Keith Lloyd, $1,000; Hite, Cliff, $1,000. Jordan, Kris, $1,000; Niehaus, Tom, $1,000; Schindel, Carol-Ann, $1,000; Wagoner, Mark, $1,000; Adams, Richard N, $500; Jones, Shannon, $500; Ohio House Republican Campaign Cmte, $500; Rankin, Tim, $500; Whiston, Tom, $500; Young, Tom, $500. Source: The Columbus Dispatch and FollowtheMoney.org

Ms. KAPTUR. All these candidates pledged to advocate for privatizing public school education through vouchers once elected into office. The Ohio Election Commission, comprised of an equal number of Republicans and Democrats, swiftly and unanimously levied a record fine against her organization in 2008. Their decision was subsequently vetted and upheld by a Republican judge in a State court. Yet, now nearly a decade later, neither Betsy DeVos nor All Children Matter has paid their penalty of $5.3 million to the citizens of Ohio. Indeed, the State of Ohio prior to her violations had even informed Ms. DeVos by issuing a legal opinion that such contributions from her national PAC would be illegal to State candidates, and she willfully ignored them and that opinion. No one, no matter how wealthy, should be above the law. And who exactly were the State candidates that received a direct campaign contribution from Betsy DeVos' political action committee All Children Matter? You will notice a few candidates still serving in Ohio office, including Lieutenant Governor Mary Taylor, Secretary of State Jon Husted, State Treasurer Josh Mandel, and Ohio Senate President Keith Faber. Former Ohio gubernatorial candidate J. Kenneth Blackwell also received a direct contribution. Mr. Blackwell now leads the President-elect's domestic policy transition team. In addition, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, Betsy DeVos gave direct contributions to at least 20 current Members of the United States Senate. These are the same Senators who will now confirm her for her Secretary of Education position. Talk about pay to play and a real need to drain the swamp, the President-elect ought to start in his own backyard. The $5.3 million fine that Betsy DeVos' political organization owes to Ohio could pay for better education for Ohio's children. It is outrageous that a candidate for Secretary of Education holds herself above the law and fails to make good on outstanding fines imposed nearly 10 years ago. Public records indicate she personally has a net worth of over $5.1 billion. The New York Times today has a front page story by Noam Scheiber that includes a quote from a writer and scholar who observes about the life of Ms. DeVos. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record this article as well. [From the New York Times, Jan. 9, 2017] Betsy DeVos, Trump's Education Pick, Plays Hardball With Her Wealth (By Noam Scheiber) After Tom Casperson, a Republican state senator from Michigan's Upper Peninsula, began running for Congress in 2016, he assumed the family of Betsy DeVos, President-elect Donald J. Trump's nominee to be education secretary, would not oppose him. The DeVoses, a dominant force in Michigan politics for decades with a fortune in the billions, had contributed to one of Mr. Casperson's earlier campaigns. But a week before his primary, family members sent $24,000 to one of his opponents, then poured $125,000 into a ``super PAC,'' Concerned Taxpayers of America, that ran ads attacking him. The reason, an intermediary told Mr. Casperson: his support from organized labor. ``Deceitful, dishonest and cowardly,'' was how Mr. Casperson's campaign described the ads, complaining that the groups running them ``won't say who they are or where their money is coming from.'' On Primary Day, Mr. Casperson went down to defeat. In announcing his intention to nominate Ms. DeVos, Mr. Trump described her as ``a brilliant and passionate education advocate.'' Even critics characterized her as a dedicated, if misguided, activist for school reform. But that description understates both the breadth of Ms. DeVos's political interests and the influence she wields as part of her powerful family. More than anyone else who has joined the incoming Trump administration, she represents the combination of wealth, free-market ideology and political hardball associated with a better-known family of billionaires: Charles and David Koch. ``They have this moralized sense of the free market that leads to this total program to turn back the ideas of the New Deal, the welfare state,'' Kim Phillips-Fein, a historian who has written extensively about the conservative movement, said, describing the DeVoses. Ms. DeVos declined to be interviewed for this article. Like the Kochs, the DeVoses are generous supporters of think tanks that evangelize for unrestrained capitalism, like Michigan's Acton Institute, and that rail against unions and back privatizing public services, like the Mackinac Center. They have also funded national groups dedicated to cutting back the role of government, including the National Center for Policy Analysis (which has pushed for Social Security privatization and against environmental regulation) and the Institute for Justice (which challenges regulations in court and defends school vouchers). Both organizations have also received money from the Koch family. Indeed, the DeVoses' education activism, which favors alternatives to traditional public schools, appears to derive from the same free-market views that inform their suspicion of government. And perhaps more than other right-wing billionaires, the DeVoses couple their seeding of ideological causes with an aggressive brand of political spending. Half a dozen or more extended family members frequently coordinate contributions to maximize their impact. In the 2016 cycle alone, according to the Michigan Campaign Finance Network, the family spent roughly $14 million on political contributions to state and national candidates, parties, PACs and super PACs. All of this would make Ms. DeVos--whose confirmation hearing has been delayed until next week amid mounting pressure that her government ethics review be completed beforehand--very different from past education secretaries. ``She is the most emblematic kind of oligarchic figure you can put in a cabinet position,'' said Jeffrey Winters, a political scientist at Northwestern University who studies economic elites. ``What she and the Kochs have in common is the unbridled use of wealth power to achieve whatever political goals they have.'' Birth of a Power Couple Ms. DeVos, 59, grew up in Holland, Mich., the daughter of a conservative auto parts magnate who was an early founder of the Family Research Council, a conservative Christian group. When she married Dick DeVos in 1979, it was akin to a merger between two royal houses of western Michigan. Her husband's father, Richard Sr., co-founder of the multilevel marketing company Amway, was an active member of the Christian Reformed Church that preached a mix of social conservatism and self-reliance. He once told the church's official magazine that Chicago's poor dwelled in slums because that was ``the way they choose to live,'' according to a Washington Post story from the 1980s. A fan of Rolls-Royces and pinkie rings, Richard Sr. wrote books with titles like ``Ten Powerful Phrases for Positive People.'' A similar air hung over his business. Amway sales representatives, which the company calls ``independent business owners,'' make money both by selling the company's products--everything from perfume to toilet bowl cleaner--and by recruiting other sales representatives. The Federal Trade Commission once investigated the company for running a pyramid scheme before concluding that it had misled potential recruits about how much they could expect to earn. The flip side of the family's proselytizing for capitalism, according to Professor Phillips-Fein, has been an effort to dismantle much ``that would counterbalance the power of economic elites.'' Amway funded a nationwide ad campaign in the early 1980s, protesting high taxes and regulations. Not long after, the company pleaded guilty to cheating the Canadian government out of more than $20 million in revenue. The family had a more winning public face in Dick DeVos, who combined the practiced empathy of a pitchman with the entitlement of an heir, spending over $30 million on an unsuccessful run for governor of Michigan in 2006. The Detroit Free Press described him that year as the wealthiest man to seek office in the state's modern history. Betsy DeVos, who served as chairwoman of the Michigan Republican Party for most of the decade between 1996 and 2005, has often played the role of strategist in the relationship. She was a key adviser in her husband's run for governor and publicly brooded that he had been too gentlemanly in his first debate against the incumbent. ``He's very good with people, a retail politician who looks you in the eye, shakes your hand, listens to what you say,'' said Randy Richardville, a former Republican leader of the Michigan Senate, describing the couple's strengths. ``I would never underestimate Betsy DeVos in a knife fight.'' Ms. DeVos has sometimes lacked her husband's finesse, once famously blaming many of the state's economic woes on ``high wages.'' She has won detractors, by their account, by browbeating legislators into voting her way. ``Betsy DeVos was like my 4-year-old granddaughter at the time,'' said Mike Pumford, a former Republican state representative who once clashed with her. ``They were both sweet ladies as long as they kept hearing the word `yes.' They turned into spoiled little brats when they were told `no.' '' But Ms. DeVos has often made up for what she lacks in tact through sheer force of will. Mr. Richardville said he and Ms. DeVos disagreed over term limits, which she supported as party chairwoman and he opposed: ``I said, `I don't think you should be setting policy. You should be supporting those of us who do make policy.' But she never backed down.'' While Dick and Betsy DeVos appear to practice a more tolerant form of Christianity than their parents--Ms. DeVos has spoken out against anti-gay bigotry--as recently as the early 2000s they funded some groups like Focus on the Family, a large ministry that helps set the political agenda for conservative evangelicals. They have also backed groups that promote conservative values to students and Christian education, including one with ties to the Christian Reformed Church. Their economic views are strikingly similar to the elder Mr. DeVos's. According to federal disclosures, Amway, which Dick DeVos ran between 1993 and 2002, has lobbied frequently over the last 20 years to reduce or repeal the estate tax. Only the top 0.2 percent wealthiest estates paid the tax in 2015. The company has also opposed crackdowns on tax shelters. Ms. DeVos has been an outspoken defender of unlimited contributions known as soft money, which she described in a 1997 editorial as ``hard-earned American dollars that Big Brother has yet to find a way to control.'' After Congress later passed a major campaign finance reform bill, a nonprofit that Ms. DeVos helped to create and fund masterminded the strategy that produced Citizens United, the 2010 Supreme Court decision laying the groundwork for super PACs funded by corporations, unions and individuals to raise and spend unlimited amounts in elections. And then there are the family's efforts to rein in the labor movement. Through their contributions to think tanks like the Mackinac Center, as well as Mr. DeVos's direct prodding of Republican legislators, the family played a key role in helping pass Michigan's so-called right-to-work legislation in 2012. The legislation largely ended the requirement that workers pay fees to unions as a condition of employment. Unions in the state bled members in 2014, the first full year the measure was in effect. Allies say the DeVoses fight for their beliefs. ``Betsy and Dick see themselves as principled conservatives,'' said Frederick Hess of the American Enterprise Institute. ``It kind of seems healthy and admirable to give resources to folks who are going to fight for causes you believe in.'' But the fights can appear to be as much about consolidating power as ideology. Unions were arguably the family's most formidable political opponent in Michigan, one of labor's traditional strongholds. Changes in Michigan The DeVos family's roots as education activists date back at least to when Richard DeVos Sr. was running Amway and an institute based at the company's headquarters trained teachers to inject free-market principles into their curriculum. According to an interview Ms. DeVos gave to Philanthropy magazine, she and her husband became interested in education causes when they began visiting a Christian school that served low-income children in Grand Rapids in the 1980s. ``If we could choose the right school for our kids''--by which she appeared to mean primarily private schools--``it only seemed fair that they could do the same for theirs,'' she told the magazine. The family spent millions of dollars on a ballot proposal in 2000 asking if Michigan should legalize vouchers, in which students can use taxpayer money to attend private schools. Many critics, like the education historian Diane Ravitch, argue that the point of vouchers is to destroy public education and teachers' unions. The group Americans United for Separation of Church and State has documented how conservative Christians have long supported vouchers, which could fund religious schools. After voters objected by more than a two-to-one ratio, Dick DeVos gave a speech at the Heritage Foundation saying such efforts would have to shift to state legislatures, where groups backed by deep-pocketed donors could offer ``a political consequence for opposition, and political reward for support of education reform issues.'' It is not unusual for the wealthy--who devote nearly 50 percent of their philanthropic dollars to education, according to the group Wealth-X--to spend aggressively in the political realm to impose their preferred reforms. Even by these standards, however, the DeVoses stand out for the amount of money they spend trying to advance their goals through politics rather than philanthropy, such as research into reforms or subsidizing schools. As Sarah Reckhow, an expert on education philanthropy at Michigan State University, put it: ``The DeVoses are like: `No, we know what we want. We don't need to have all this window dressing.' '' Ms. DeVos has led two nonprofits that have spent millions of dollars electing governors and legislators sympathetic to school vouchers around the country. Matt Frendewey, a spokesman for one of the groups, said the efforts had frequently been bipartisan, and that the amount of money they had spent has been dwarfed by contributions from teachers' unions opposed to reform. Yet in Michigan, at least, the family's political strategy has not been subtle. After he defied Ms. DeVos on a key charter school vote, Mr. Pumford, the former Republican legislator, survived an effort by the Great Lakes Education Project, a nonprofit the DeVoses bankrolled, to defeat him in his 2002 primary. But shortly after, the House speaker told him the Education Committee chairmanship he coveted would not be forthcoming. ``I said, `Why?' '' Mr. Pumford recalled. ``He said: `You know why. The DeVoses will walk away from us.' '' Mr. Pumford added: ``She told me that was going to happen.'' (Rick Johnson, the House speaker, said he did not recall the conversation but also that he had not promised Mr. Pumford the chairmanship and would not have explained his reasons for withholding it.) Over time, the Great Lakes Education Project helped elect Republican majorities sympathetic to the DeVoses' agenda. But the DeVoses' lobbyists and operatives also discovered less messy ways to advance legislation. Late one night of their last workweek in 2015, the Michigan House and Senate were about to approve some uncontroversial changes to campaign finance law, when the bill abruptly grew by more than 40 pages. After the legislators discovered what they had voted for, many said they were horrified. Tucked away in the new pages was a provision that would have made it much harder for local bodies like school boards to raise money through property tax increases. ``Michigan schools will likely suffer the brunt of the impact because the vast majority rely on periodic voter approval of local operating levy renewals for property taxes,'' the ratings agency Moody's wrote of the measure the following month. ``I was fooled into voting for something I opposed,'' said Dave Pagel, a Republican representative. ``I consider it the worst vote I've made.'' The chief culprits, according to Mr. Pagel and others at the state Capitol when the bill passed, were lobbyists closely tied to the DeVoses. Tony Daunt, a spokesman for the Michigan Freedom Fund, a nonprofit headed by the DeVoses' longtime political aide, and whose political spending arm they have funded generously, said the group was ``part of the discussion process with people in the legislature'' about the proposal and ``had consistently expressed support for the policy.'' The law was later blocked by a federal judge, but the group has vowed to try again. Radical Suspicions Ms. DeVos's advocates see in these fights the toughness to take on entrenched opponents of expanding reforms like charter schools and vouchers. In promoting Ms. DeVos in The Washington Post, Mitt Romney, the Republican Party's 2012 presidential nominee, emphasized that her wealth gave her the independence to be ``someone who isn't financially biased shaping education.'' He added, ``DeVos doesn't need the job now, nor will she be looking for an education job later.'' But critics see someone with an unmistakable agenda. ``The signs are there that she will do something radical,'' said Jack Jennings, a former general counsel for the House education committee. ``Trump wouldn't have appointed this woman for this position if he didn't intend something radical.''

Ms. KAPTUR. The article states: ``She is the most emblematic kind of oligarchic figure you can put in a cabinet position. . . . What she and the Kochs have in common is the unbridled use of wealth power to achieve whatever political goals they have.'' If confirmed, Betsy DeVos would be responsible for administering our Nation's student loan portfolio and would have to ensure borrowers repay their loans in a timely manner. Yet, how can we believe she will demonstrate sound judgment in her responsibilities or be a role model when her own political organization has blatantly avoided paying legally obligated fines for her violations of Ohio's election laws? Mr. Speaker, Betsy DeVos' attempt to subvert the law and buy influence are diametrically opposed to everything the President-elect advised was wrong with America. He wants to drain the swamp. No one in America should be above the law, and neither should Betsy DeVos be above the law. She ought to pay the $5.3 million she owes the people of Ohio.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Thank you, Congressman Garamendi. You are such a rare and talented Member. I thank the people of California for sending you here. You serve them every day of the week, 7 days a week--24/7. It is a privilege to appear with you tonight and also with Congressman Paul Tonko, one of our most talented Members from upstate New York--a region like my own that has just been battered by the global economy and the outsourcing of jobs. We all are just honored to serve in this Congress, and we respect it and its history and its potential. Mr. Speaker, as I travel my own district and State, I am finding I have to reassure people. Anytime there is a change, I guess, in public life, people need to be bolstered that everything is going to be okay. We are here to be that squad and to say to the American people that they have power, too, and that it isn't just the super rich of this country or the billionaire class. We can label them ``wealth power.'' And that has power; yes, it does. Sometimes extraordinary power. But there is also ``people power.'' I consider myself having been lifted here by people power over many years, and I appreciate the people of my region for allowing me to serve our country and to learn every day, to learn from them, to learn how to make the instruments of the Nation work better for them. There is also ``spiritual power.'' I am amazed at how people's spiritual groundings help them through difficult situations and transitions. Then there is ``intellectual power.'' We hope to use some of that here once in a while. That is a power in and of itself. We think about the power of liberty of a free people to improve their Nation, to heal their Nation, to expand opportunity in their Nation. We are aided and abetted by a very curious media--sometimes more ridiculous than it needs to be--but also of people digging, trying to find that elusive truth that should lead us all forward. So we find ourselves helping to heal our Nation by being Members here, and we all hope for the best for our people and for our country. I think the Members here are very well motivated. I rise to defend, really, and to support two foundational programs of our society: Social Security and Medicare. I will try to be brief so others can comment. I am very proud to say that our family is one of those families who would have been completely destroyed had it not been for Social Security and Medicare. Those didn't exist when my parents were born and grandparents were living in our country. But in 1935, after our country crashed economically and there were major bank failures and the stock market crashed and wiped out the savings of millions of Americans, the Nation turned to the Federal Government, to the President, to guarantee for a large segment of our society--senior citizens--decent incomes. The Social Security Insurance Act was enacted at the urging of Democratic President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. He was regarded as a saint in our household because what happened around our country was that seniors before that time--many of them--were living in what we called poorhouses. They were dying in terrible circumstances, and there was no security as a person aged. Can you imagine how revolutionary it was at that time to create a social insurance program--probably the largest insurance program America has ever had--to ensure that as people aged or if workers became disabled in the workplace or if they died that their children would have sources of income? The program did all of that. In thinking back, gosh, over 70 years, how transformational was that? As for our grandpa, who died in a county hospital in Ohio before the enactment of Medicare, I know the conditions that he died under. And I know that, when our mother died, it was a different situation. She had Social Security and Medicare, and we were able to take care of her. The same was true with our father. Intergenerationally, I see our country getting better. I am proud of that. I am also proud to be a Democrat and a member of a party that has created Social Security, which has become an indispensable part of our way of life. As I have said to seniors and to workers, it is an earned benefit. People pay for it every time their paychecks are nicked, and their employers match it. Obviously, to survivors--and, obviously, I have neighbors who have lost spouses, whose children then benefit from the survivor benefit-- what an incredible gift this idea is to the American people. There are 35 million people today in our country who depend on Social Security-- one out of every six Americans. Every day, Social Security lifts 20 million people out of poverty--people who used to live in poverty. Can you imagine what that was like? We don't ever, ever want to go back to that world. In 2014, the latest data show us that more than 6 million children under the age of 18 live in families who receive income from Social Security, lifting more than a million children out of poverty. Social Security has never been a welfare program. It is an earned benefit, and all Americans who contribute to it during their working lifetimes receive benefits. Social Security is a compact of trust between generations. It is the ever-present sentry at the economic security gate for retirees, for those hurt on the job, or for their survivors, and it is America's greatest insurance program ever. I happened to be living when Lyndon Johnson helped to create the Medicare program, which provides health insurance coverage now to over 55 million people in our country--essential health security for seniors. Today, only 2 percent of the elderly in our country lack health insurance compared to 48 percent--half the people of this country--in 1962, after World War II, before Medicare even existed. That seems sort of modern times, the 1960s; yet it really was not. I would say that that is a ``wow'' by any measure. Yes, people are living longer. Thank God the program is working. People are getting free preventative healthcare screenings and are lowering the long-term costs of care because of early diagnosis. Seniors don't have to pay for mammograms or diabetes or cancer screenings, thanks to the Affordable Care Act; so we keep trying to make the system better. Since House Republicans won the majority in 2011, every House Republican budget has tried to end the Medicare guarantee and turn Medicare into a privatized voucher program. Do you know what that is going to do? It is going to shut out millions of Americans who are elderly--or who are about to be elderly--from insurance. The reason we have Medicare is that insurers weren't insuring seniors--that is the reason it exists in the first place--or they will make the price so high that people won't be able to pay for it; or they will cherry-pick only the healthy people. Then those who have diabetes, those who have had prior cancers, those who have multiple sclerosis, those who have Parkinson's will be cast aside. What kind of a country would this be, for heaven's sake? The American Association of Retired Persons and the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare completely opposed the Republicans' plan to voucherize and let every senior go out there in the market and try to find a plan of his own, because they know what that means. These two programs are the most pro-life programs this Nation has ever created. We should be so proud of what we have been able to do as a country over the last century. The Republican attacks on Social Security and Medicare need to stop. They are America's bulwark for millions and millions of people, and they have proven themselves to be America's most important, lifetime security programs. I thank Congressman Garamendi and Congressman Tonko for being down here tonight. I know how passionately you care about the people of our country way beyond just your districts and why we are here. We are here to stand with them.

Ms. KAPTUR. If the gentleman would yield, I can remember the stench.

Ms. KAPTUR. I can remember that.

Ms. KAPTUR. My grandpa.

Ms. KAPTUR. Our father had to fight to get him in there because there wasn't enough space for people who were ill and dying. That was before hospice and that was before Medicare. I remember, as a young girl, that that was a hard thing to experience, but our mother and father never protected us from the inevitable.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to join Mr. Garamendi and Mr. Tonko, and I want to place in the Record, since both of you have talked so eloquently about the Affordable Care Act, you know how you will be walking through your district, maybe at a parade or some public event, and someone will break from the crowd and run toward you. I am thinking about one particular woman who came up to me in one of my smaller communities. She was in tears. This was during the summertime. She has cerebral palsy, and she never was able to get care. I don't know why she didn't qualify for insurance, I don't know all of that, but she hugged me and thanked me. And then around the corner from where we live, there is a little produce market that I go into all the time. I am friends with one of the women who works there. This little business couldn't afford insurance, so their employees, when the Affordable Care Act passed, went to the private marketplace to get a plan. This particular woman who works long hours and lost her husband to cancer told me: Marcy, why are people complaining about the Affordable Care Act? Guess what, now I have cancer. She said: I was able to go and get all of the tests, and now they have me on chemotherapy. So, with cancer, this woman is working. She was only able to get insurance through the Affordable Care Act. Multiply that times 10,000, 20,000, 1 million, 20 million, whatever the number is. Think about the number of people in our country who were without insurance. Sometimes I am speechless when I meet these citizens because I think: Where were you hiding before? Where were you? Another place I was, a woman was mixing up. She said: Well, I have health insurance, right? I pay car insurance. I said: No. Car insurance doesn't cover health insurance. People sometimes don't act in their own self-interest. She didn't even know that because she had auto insurance, that didn't cover health insurance. Can you believe that? So she was in a job where, with the Affordable Care Act, she could go out to the exchange and buy a plan. It is amazing to me some of the things that have happened and how I see the Affordable Care Act off to a very good start. As Mr. Tonko said, don't just repeal it until you have something to replace it with. You cannot pull the rug out from under these people's lives. It would be unconscionable to do that. We have several Christians, several other denominations in this House. It would be very unChristian to do that, for those who are Christian. And for those of other denominations--pick your denomination--I just think it would be very cruel. I thank the gentleman for allowing us to speak out this evening on behalf of citizens who can't speak for themselves and to try to help perfect what we as a Republic can do for our citizenry.

Ms. KAPTUR. On that point, another woman came up to me, I was over at the medical hospital with my brother, and she has epilepsy, and she has another condition. She told me, she said: You know, Marcy, I have to cut my pills in half. Can you help me try to find pills so that I can afford to pay for all the medicines that I need to take care of myself? Rather than repealing, can't we find a majority of Republicans to help us, to help our citizens be able to get medicine at prices they can afford? Why can't we have competitive bidding for pharmaceuticals? Why can't we have that? We have it for the VA. We have it for the Department of Defense. Why can't we have it for the rest of our citizenry so that we can get the best price? But I thought: Cutting your pills in half? And so what happens to her is, if she doesn't take enough of the medicine, then she has a seizure. But she has got other things wrong with her, so she is trying to cut this pill and cut that pill. And I thought, this is crazy. This is crazy. Can't we do better as a country than this for our people? I have never understood why the price of pharmaceuticals has shot up so much. I can't tell you how many cases we get in our office where we have to call these companies and beg, you know, do you have some foundation where we can get a few more pills from Lilly or a few more pills from this company or that company in order to help people in our district. It shouldn't be our job to turn into a medical dispensary because the system isn't working. There ought to be a way to take care of this.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday, 7 December, I was privileged to participate in the Congressional commemoration breakfast of the 75th anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor with the Friends of the National World War II Memorial. The following are my remarks to honor that solemn occasion: Good morning. Chairman Bunting, thank you so very much and to all you Americans for being here today and helping us commemorate, honor and remember. It really is a distinct privilege to share with you today the remembrance of December 7th 1941, and I must say as we listen to the news reports and the discussion commemorations and so forth, I've actually been--I love this country so much and this vision for all people to live in freedom and to see the American people, and what they're doing to honor this memory and our heritage. You are all here because of what happened 75 years ago, December 7th 1941. I've seen on television this week ceremonies this afternoon and we're actually teaching the new generation by your presence here today. This, the day that honors the 2,403 US citizens and service members who were killed at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii in a surprise attack by Imperial Japan that triggered U.S. entry into WWII one day later. I want to thank Chairman Bunting for your leadership--you don't have to do this, you could be on some golf course somewhere--and all the Friends of the WWII Memorial for organizing not only this breakfast but all the events this week. Many of our schools no longer teach this history, and so your work is even more important. We honor with your presence those Americans who so justly deserve history's keen memory. Thank you to Superintendent of the National Mall, Gay Vietzke, for helping us make these arrangements today. I understand that Congressman Morgan Griffith, from the great state of Virginia is also here--thank you so very much. And importantly, I want to welcome our World War II veterans, and particularly Pearl Harbor survivors and their families with us this morning. If any of you wish to just raise your hand-- thank you! What a truly historic occasion it is to be with you--our nation owes our liberty to your courage, to your patriotism and to your sacrifice. In an earlier era, President Abraham Lincoln wrote a letter to Mrs. Lydia Bixby, that's become pretty famous, a widow living in Boston and thought to have lost five sons during the Civil War, and President Lincoln wrote to her: ``The solemn pride that must be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of freedom.'' These words apply to those of you who remember and whose families have sacrificed because of Pearl Harbor and WWII. Today, again, a grateful nation remembers the solemn events of December 7th, 1941, another time of national testing. We recognize American heroes who rose out of the ashes to lead our country to triumphant victory. On that fateful day, Imperial Japan's surprise attack on the Pacific Fleet also destroyed almost 20 ships and over 300 planes in just two hours. The attack on Pearl Harbor served not only as the catalyst driving America to war, but also as a great rallying cry to our people--overriding any hesitation and instilling grim determination to see the mission through, no matter the cost--and the cost was the greatest the world had ever seen. The story of that morning is filled with examples of the finest America has to offer--Sailors risking their own lives to save their shipmates, nurses tending the wounded as bombs continued to drop and machine guns sprayed the buildings. It is the story of young men, never before challenged on the field of battle, taking up arms to defend their ship, their comrades and their country. It is the story of America--a country that, when knocked down, never gets knocked out, and always gets back up and wins the fight. Exactly one day after the attack, by a vote of 82 to 0 in the Senate, and 388-1 in the House, the United States declared war on Imperial Japan. Three days after that, Congress declared war on the Axis Powers, Germany and Italy, as the United States--President Roosevelt's ``great arsenal of democracy''--engaged in war on two fronts. That vote, to send America's sons and daughters across an ocean, to fight an enemy, knowing they may not come home is the hardest vote of any Member of Congress's life. While we cannot know exactly what those men and women of 1941 were thinking, we can understand their feelings, their hesitations, and their desire to seek justice for the innocent Americans who lost their lives that day. In many of my travels, I've had an opportunity to work with members of the Japanese Diet, and I got to be friends with some of them, and I finally had the mustard one day to ask one of them: ``Could you please explain to me why you bombed Pearl Harbor on December 7th 1941?'' It was a hard question for me to ask, but the answer came back: ``to stop colonialism in the Pacific.'' And I said ``Thank you so much that we can be honest with one another. That we can talk about what happened in that period of time.'' We ignore those exchanges. Those of you involved in education, in historical associations like Friends of the WWII Memorial, we simply can't dialogue enough in this day and age. Many of those who survived that fateful morning continued to serve in the military. Millions more joined them, in uniform and on the home front here, taking on the herculean task of evicting Japanese forces from the Pacific Theater, an awesome undertaking by any measure. But island by island, the US military and our allies achieved victory in some of the bloodiest and hardest fought and sometimes underreported battles, of modern military history. Veterans of this harsh theater, survivors of Bataan, Iwo Jima and Okinawa, became a living history of the cost of war, and the greatness of unified American willpower. As General MacArthur said later in the ultimate surrender of Imperial Japanese ceremony radio address, the war taught us both ``the bitterness of defeat and the exultation of triumph, and from both we have learned there can be no turning back. We must go forward to preserve in peace what we won in war.'' And indeed, America has been about that task, even before my lifetime; well maybe just as my lifetime started and probably yours too! The memorial at the USS Arizona, the Punch Bowl in Hawaii, where I have been honored to place wreaths in the Pacific on behalf of our country, and the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific are permanent memorials to those gave their lives for us and for the values of our country at Pearl Harbor. It is in this spirit that the Punch Bowl in Hawaii as well as the World War II Memorial here in our Nation's capital were created--to not only pay tribute to those who served heroically in uniform or steadfastly on the home front, but to preserve the lessons learned and act as places of living history. They teach future generations about the sacrifices of those gone before, and serve as places of remembrance to the Service Members and their families who gave so much. And even though we dedicated and opened the WWII Memorial here in the year 2004, I am still about the task of trying to work with the Government of the United States to augment the historical collections that are so very, very important to honoring those who gave us their substance. It is not an easy task. We're working with the Library of Congress--I just want to make you aware of this. We have a veterans' history project where many Americans like you volunteered their time to collect the stories of individual veterans. We have a special place for these at the Library of Congress and our task is not finished. One of those veterans was a man named Roger Durbin. He was an Army tank mechanic who fought in Europe in the Battle of the Bulge under General Patton's Third Army. He was a jovial and rather outspoken Ohioan who after the war served as a rural letter carrier and township trustee in the Congressional District that I represent. It was Mr. Durbin, who, almost a quarter century ago, in 1987, in a place called Jerusalem Township, Ohio, at a fish fry of township trustees, shouted across a room like this to me, ``Hey Congresswoman Kaptur! Why is there no World War II memorial in Washington,

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to proudly submit the Urban Agriculture Production Act of 2016. Across America, too many urban neighborhoods are absent stores where community members can purchase fresh, healthy foods. More than 23 million individuals reside in these so called ``food desert'' neighborhoods, where no stores are located within one mile in which they can buy healthy food. Without accessible healthy options, all that is available and affordable is unhealthy, processed, junk-food. The Urban Agriculture Production Act is a step to correct this unacceptable trend. I am pleased to recognize and support the growing resurgence of locally grown and produced product happening across our great country. I see it in my own community at the Sustainable Local Foods and the Toledo Grows Community Garden. Individuals, non-profits, and co-ops have stepped up to take action to address the challenge of access to healthy food, and developed local food sources and community gardens to provide fresh, affordable produce throughout underserved communities. Not only are they growing product to provide to communities, they are also engaging and encouraging community participation throughout the stages of growth and production. They are reconnecting community members to Mother Earth and how to farm in the process. As the ancient proverb says, ``give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.'' And so goes my bill, the Urban Agriculture Production Act. The measure will encourage economic development in underserved communities by furthering the mission of local farming. It provides programmatic funds to educate people on health and wellness, supports marketing and development networks, and will inspire communities to create self sufficient food production systems to stimulate community development and healthy eating options. Throughout our urban and suburban communities there is an abundance of unused land and space conveniently located to neighborhoods that is ripe for agriculture development. We must support and encourage the means to development these plots so they become local sources of wholesome food options. My bill will spur the development and expansion of community agriculture in nontraditional agricultural production areas across this great nation. Mr. Speaker, urban and suburban farming and food production is a viable solution to support healthier dietary options and improve overall health of communities. The Urban Agriculture Production Act is the appropriate means to further develop alternative, more urban agricultural production and to help meet all communities' food production needs of the future.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in solidarity and in championing the cause of the steelworkers of our Nation and of the industrial heartland of Lorain, Ohio, and Gary, Indiana, and Youngstown. Apparently, the Republican majority was not paying attention to the recent election because, in fact, Mr. Trump promised that the Buy American provision and American steel production would be supportive and primary; yet they are proposing to kill the Buy American provision in this bill. I urge the majority not to forget the promises its party made to these proud and strong American workers. I can assure the majority they won't forget. We also have to stand up to Chinese dumping that has put out of work thousands and thousands and thousands of workers across this country. Given the woes of the American steel industry, encouraging more offshoring is unconscionable.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding and compliment her on her work as ranking member, and to the chairman of our full committee, Mr. Rogers, an incredible chairman. Both of them did their work. I rise today--as the underlying bill that all of this is attached to is our energy and water bill--appalled at this Christmas tree bill that the Republican leadership has foisted on this Congress in the last minute. This is exactly the type of bill the public hates. The top brass over there literally disrespected our committee work and produced, instead, a rotten egg. Today, we will take a vote that forces us to choose between shutting the government down 2 weeks before Christmas or supporting a disgrace of a funding bill, laced with nongermane, controversial provisions. What kind of choice is this? What happened to the Republican's top priority of funding the government under regular order? It is not our committee's fault. We did our job. What happened to voting on 12 appropriations bills and allowing amendments under regular order? We want to do that, but we are being handcuffed. I will tell you what happened. The Republican leaders threw out our up-to-date bills. They threw them in the trash, and they replaced them with yet another bill that looks in the rearview mirror with numbers that are 2 years old and doesn't meet America's current realities. It forces our government agencies, including Defense, which Republicans claim to care so passionately about, to operate without any predictability or stability. This is disgraceful. No wonder Americans are so mad at us. If Republicans wanted to take care of the military, they have failed. The military has never, ever operated under a continuing resolution during a Presidential transition until now. Imagine how the commanders in the field feel when the April deadline hits. What is going to happen in May? If Republicans wanted to take care of American workers, they have failed. This resolution abandons hardworking coal miners after years of faithful service, right at Christmastime. Gosh, what a Christmas present.

Ms. KAPTUR. If Republicans wanted to run the House under regular order, they have failed. They only brought up half of the 2017 bills to the floor for a vote. Where are the other six? If Republicans wanted to fund the government in a responsible and efficient way, they have failed. This resolution will likely cost us millions of dollars more in delayed projects, contract breaches, and lost American jobs. Is this a sign of what is to come? What happens on April 28 when this filthy Band-Aid falls off? If we can't pass bills under regular order this year--when we had a bipartisan budget agreement and a Republican majority--what will we do in May when we have not only the rest of the 2017 budget to fix but also the 2018 budget and the debt ceiling to address? I wonder what chaotic path the Republican leaders will lead us down in the new year? This is certainly a sign, a terrible sign, of what is to come.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, as a Representative from Ohio and as the senior woman in the House, I join my remarks to those of former Congresswoman and now U.S. Senator from Maryland, Barbara Mikulski, in tribute to her incredible service. When I first arrived, she was a Member of this House, and I remember how gracious she was to me. Her background from working class, blue collar America--from a steel town like Baltimore, which has transformed since then--brought the concerns and the passion of someone from the working class. She continued on that road every single day whether she was here on the House side or went to the other body as the longest- serving woman in U.S. history. Imagine that. Baltimore is famous for having little steps that people go into their bungalows from, and she took a giant leap. Even though she was probably still one of the shortest Members of Congress physically, she remains one of the tallest women in American history. I think of her when I look at the dome of the Capitol, and I see the woman facing east--the symbol of liberty. She held aloft high not just the flag, but the vision for an America inclusive of all. We wish her Godspeed in the years ahead. I maintain my fond memories of her and of her incredible leadership on every subcommittee on which she served and of the honorable service that she provided not just to the citizens of Maryland, but to our entire country. God bless you, Senator Mikulski, your family, your friends, and those who value your service beyond measure.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a strong recommendation that President-elect Trump address immediately and put to rest the overwhelming conflicts of interest that abound with his personal business affairs that threaten to undermine the public interest and destabilize his future administration. When America's Founding Fathers wrote the Emoluments Clause in our Constitution, their firm intention was to insulate our new government from unethical foreign inducement to our elected officials and corruption attendant to the intertwining of Europe's politics with our own. So reads our Constitution, Article I. Article I, right at the beginning, Section 9, clause 8: ``No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States''--that means we don't coronate kings here--``And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever from any King, Prince, or foreign State.'' No elected official in this country is above the Constitution, the law of the land. This is the strict, time-tested standard, ethical standard to which the President and Congress and all senior government appointees are held. Unfortunately, American history has no shortage of examples of Presidents and senior officials who attempted to skirt this ethical standard outside of appropriate channels, and they paid the price: Ulysses S. Grant's Whiskey Ring, or Warren G. Harding's Teapot Dome, or Richard Nixon's Jewel Scandal or Watergate, to name a few. Each represents an instance of improper gifting, self-dealing, and an array of clandestine and illegal activities, of which President-elect Trump would be wise to reflect upon their consequences. There have been many suggestions offered to the President-elect on what he should do to clear up such potential conflicts about his foreign investments, contacts, and his vast private wealth that could compromise his position as President; yet President-elect Trump's advisers keep us waiting and dodging the main question. He, himself, has said that action is not legally required. He is wrong. He also incorrectly asserts there can be no conflict of interest for a President. History shows that is false. Without separation of his private interests from his public interests, how will the American people know he is acting fairly and impartially in his appointments to regulatory agencies, for example? or his funding recommendations of budgets and departments that could impact his investments? Or how about the contracts that are let by the Federal Government itself? How will he work with banks, and which ones, nation-state-owned or foreign, that have loaned him and his associates money? Who will he be appointing to key regulatory positions that could impact his vast financial interests across many continents? A former Reform Party Vice Presidential candidate opined on the Huffington Post site that Mr. Trump has three options to address his conflicts of interest: Number one, to place his company and assets into a true blind trust, supervised by a totally independent entity; Number two, to persuade the GOP-controlled Congress to enact a law that exempts the President from the Emolument Provision, which I would vote against; or Number three, to resign, or risk impeachment. As the Office of Government Ethics advised, only a true divestiture of his financial stake in his sprawling and global business dealings will resolve ethical concerns about conflicts of interest as he assumes the role of President of the United States. Now, this map gives you a sense of some of his interests that he has acknowledged in some of his filings, of 144 companies in 25 different countries. We don't know what these relationships are. He has a sprawling global business empire, and the list includes countries with strained diplomatic ties to the United States. As the President, his responsibilities will force him to make decisions on foreign policy and tax policy, for example, that will impact these significant business interests. Only a truly complete removal of his ownership can assure the American people that his Presidential actions and political decisions are not motivated by personal financial interests. Even then, suspicion will arise about every move he makes and be subject to prosecution. In the 3 weeks since his election, President-elect Trump has held meetings and calls with foreign dignitaries, Prime Ministers, and Presidents in his official capacity as President-elect. That is normal. What is not normal or appropriate, though, is for the public to hear afterwards that his adult children, who are slated to take over the family business, were also present. The American public is well aware that the Trump team has a steep learning curve in understanding his role, the operation and legal allowances of our Federal Government, and he has a long way to go in separating his personal financial interests from his public financial interests. I can't say in strong enough terms we do need to have his tax filings on record, and we do need to have clarification for the American people that our Constitution must prevail. No public official--no public official--is exempt from the law of the land, and the highest law is the Constitution of the United States. He must separate himself from his business dealings.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, as Catholics worldwide celebrate the feast of St. Nicholas today, the life of Father Paul Kwiatkowski will be celebrated in a Funeral Mass at Queen of the Most Holy Rosary Cathedral in Toledo, Ohio. With eternally grateful hearts but deepest sadness at his passing, thousands of citizens across our community mourn the passing of Fr. Paul, a loving, gentle, and kind apostle of Christ. Fr. Paul was beloved by all who knew him. And we know him through his works. As our perceptive Aunt Esther would observe: ``Now, that was a priest!'' How many of us hold unforgettable memories of Fr. Paul's selfless service and abiding kindness, always in the heart of our community. His steady and faith filled journey among us imbued the word ``faith'' with real meaning. A favorite memory for me is the beautiful, annual Memorial Day Mass with appropriate observances at Mt. Carmel Cemetery for veterans and their families, at which he would officiate. A gifted musician, many times he would play his violin under the budding trees as his cassock blew gently in the spring winds. There was a sense of peace and connectedness to the awesome power of creation he brought to every occasion. A hospitable lunch always followed at the former Polish American Veterans Association Post on Lagrange Street. I too recall the moving Polish Mass at the former St. Hedwig's before the Polish Festival opened, as the church doors swung wide and the congregants filled the sidewalks. To Toledo's Polonia, those of Polish-American heritage, he was a revered touchstone and valued counselor. I similarly treasure the memories of the Central American garment workers he hosted at St. James Catholic Church, a reminder of the work that remains to be done on worker exploitation across our hemisphere. Fr. Paul's service always managed to meet the suffering edge of humanity. And his spirit gave strength to others. Fr. Paul was a learned man, but he possessed a rare gift for communicating with people of all persuasions. He was an educator and Latin teacher as well as a fine musician, and people naturally drew to him. His wonderful sense of humor and twinkling eyes had their own way of communicating ``you are welcome.'' He dedicated his life to ministering to congregations in the heart of our city, always including some of the poorest precincts in Toledo. His rare leadership and tutelage of the Lagrange Stickney and Broadway neighborhoods sparked and immeasurably contributed to the neighborhoods' ongoing revitalization. His work at St. James and Immaculate Conception Catholic parishes made newcomers feel welcome. He consistently engaged with the people of the broader neighborhood, extending beyond the walls of the churches he pastored. Fr. Paul defined evangelization by embracing community. I cannot even imagine nor count the number of individuals he counseled and comforted over a half century of his service. I do know our Toledo community remains grateful forever that he gave his life for us. He was a people's priest, a diocesan priest. He lived his vows. May the angels lift him high, ushering him to paradise where there will always be music, joy and peace.