Kevin Kiley

Mr. KILEY of California

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, there is good news for Americans when it comes to gas prices. They are down about 50 cents since last year, but unfortunately this good news does not extend to Californians. As you can see here, we remain a stark outlier with by far the highest gas prices in the country. As of just a couple days ago, gas prices in California are 29 cents higher than second place Hawaii, an island State. Third place is Washington. Our gas prices are 52 cents higher than Washington. They are 88 cents higher than fourth place Oregon, 94 cents higher than fifth place Nevada, a $1.16 higher than sixth place Alaska. This is truly astounding and is one of the main reasons why it has become so hard for people to get by in our State. Now, it is no mystery why this is so: California has by far the highest gas tax in the country, our cap-and-trade program adds a huge amount to the price of each gallon, as well as the requirements of our fuel blend in California. All of these taxes and regulations combine to give California by far the highest gas prices in the country already and now we have just learned that another refinery is closing. So two refineries have announced they are shutting down in California thanks to our insane energy policies. This certainly is not going to help matters. It is time for Governor Newsom and the California Legislature to restore just a little bit of common sense when it comes to our energy policies because we cannot afford for these trends to continue. Indeed, it is one of the main reasons that people have been leaving our State in record numbers over the last several years. Update on the High-Speed Rail Project

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, I will provide an update on the nonexistent high-speed rail project in California. As I have noted on this floor before, I have introduced a resolution or legislation to cut off all future Federal funding for California High-Speed Rail. I was with Secretary Duffy when he announced an investigation into where the recent Federal funding has actually gone and I have called upon the FBI Director Kash Patel to launch an investigation into what happened to the $17 billion that has already been spent. At this point, the cost of the project is estimated to be about $100 billion more than it was initially sold to the public. But we did get some news this week and maybe I have been a little too unkind to high-speed rail. The new CEO--and, by the way, this is the fifth CEO--so there have been five more CEOs than there have been riders. Five CEOs, zero riders. But the new CEO came out with some exciting news. He announced that he has a goal by the year 2045 of completing the line going from Palmdale to Gilroy. So let's parse that statement, a goal of by 2045 going from Gilroy to Palmdale to Gilroy. Well, 2045 is, of course, 20 years from now. I will note that when the project was passed in 2008, it was supposed to be done, the entire thing, by 2020. So the whole thing was supposed to be done 5 years ago, but now the CEO is saying I have got an exciting ambitious plan. We are going to have Palmdale to Gilroy completed in 20 years. And this is just the goal. There have been a number of goals in the past, in the tortured 17- year history of this project, and they have blown right past them, missing deadline after deadline with more cost overruns than we can even keep track of. Then, finally, when you look at what his goal--which is very unlikely to actually be reached--is, it is to go from Palmdale to Gilroy. Where are these places? Remember, the initial project was supposed to ultimately go from Los Angeles to San Francisco, the two main population hubs of California. Well, Palmdale is a ways away from L.A. It is about 37 miles northeast of Los Angeles, so if traffic is good, it will take you an hour in your car or 2 hours if you are using existing public transportation. Think about this. You are taking our high-speed rail which, by the way, isn't going to be that fast. It will probably be the slowest high- speed rail system in the world if it even gets built. Then you get out at Gilroy, and you have to somehow have a car there and drive another hour or you hop on public transit for another 2 hours of travel just to get into L.A. It is similar on the north part of it. Gilroy is 70 miles from San Francisco, and you would be going for at least another hour, probably more, you would certainly be driving more than an hour after hopping off there if you actually wanted to get into the city. Of course, I am being facetious when I say that this is an exciting, ambitious plan. It is just another example of why we need to end this project once and for all. There is absolutely no reason that State or Federal taxpayers should continue to fund a project that is going absolutely nowhere, especially when our roads are in such bad shape, among the worst in the entire world. It is time to redirect this spending toward transportation needs that will actually improve the quality of life for Californians. Covered California Trackers

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, an investigation by CalMatters has revealed something extremely disturbing when it comes to the personal health information of Californians. It has been revealed that the website of Covered California, which is the State's ObamaCare exchange, had a tracker that was collecting the personal health information of Californians, and then transmitting that information for marketing purposes. Specifically, the CalMatters investigation discovered that trackers on the website of Covered California collected and sent personal information to Linkedin through one of the company's trackers called an Insight tag. This information included very personal health information, whether the individual was blind, disabled, pregnant, whether they used prescription drugs, their gender identity, whether they are a victim of domestic abuse, how often they sought care at inpatient or outpatient facilities. A spokesperson for Covered California even admitted they installed these trackers as part of a marketing campaign, and the trackers, by the way, were not removed until this CalMatters report was published. This illegal action was undertaken despite the fact that Linkedin has publicly advised on their website that the Insight tags ``should not be installed on web pages that collect or contain sensitive data and that pages offering specific health-related or financial services or products to consumers,'' that should not be there, either. However, despite these warnings, Covered California proceeded. I believe this raises a serious issue under HIPAA, a law designed to protect the privacy of individuals' personal health information. I have written to Secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., to ask for an investigation into what happened in California, into how this was allowed to happen and to any illegal violations that may have occurred. Specifically, I am asking Secretary Kennedy to investigate whether Covered California violated HIPAA or any other laws, who authorized the use of the trackers, what controls exist to protect privacy in California's Affordable Care Act exchange? How did Covered California evade those controls? How many people have been impacted? Have they been notified? Has there been any restitution? Why did Covered California use the trackers contrary to Linkedin's explicit guidance? I am asking how this sort of violation can be prevented in the future. This is truly unacceptable, and I am looking forward to getting some answers from this investigation. Congratulating Mark and Marcus Haney

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to take a moment today to commemorate John Adams Academy for its inaugural Servant Leadership Award Gala, which is taking place this weekend. Now, John Adams is an exceptional school in my district. As a matter of fact, they have three schools now--in Roseville, El Dorado Hills, and Lincoln--and there are hundreds of families on the waiting list. This is a charter school. The school is so popular that there are hundreds of families who want to go there, as well. If you walk through one of their campuses, you will see quotes from the Founding Fathers on the walls, and you will see all signs of the classical education philosophy that guides the school's instruction. I have had the chance to work with John Adams over the years in many ways. I have judged the Constitution Bowl at their school. I have been to their ceremonies for veterans. I have met with their student council and participated and helped judge debates that they were a part of. It is truly a special place. This Servant Leadership Award really embodies the spirit of the institution. John Adams was founded by Dr. Dean Forman, and he is spearheading this Servant Leadership Award, which will be awarded this weekend, and the inaugural recipients will be Mark and Marcus Haney. Mark Haney runs the Growth Factory in Rocklin, which helps early-stage entrepreneurs build startup businesses. They work with them to build the funding case and leadership capacity to attract the capital and team needed to support scaling a high-growth company. Then his son, Marcus Haney, started AllegiantVETS, which is a way to provide a bridge for veterans leaving military service to be integrated into jobs in their local communities. Mark Haney, his father, says: We have imagined the impact that the most resourceful regional leaders could have if united to help one promising entrepreneur. The Growth Factory is the realization of that vision multiplied by a hundred. I am a little biased in this respect because I have seen the impact that the Haney family has had on our community in so many different ways. In fact, I honored Marcus Haney with the Veteran of the Year award when I was a member of the State legislature. I wanted to also give you a description that Dr. Forman has given for what a servant leader is because I think it is a timely reminder in these times in many ways of what we should aspire to in public service or in other forms of community leadership. The description of a servant leader is as follows: Robert K. Greenleaf said: ``The great leader is seen as servant first.'' ``A servant leader is a servant first, driven by an inner compass of virtues or core values, with a natural desire to serve and empower others. This is not about being subservient but about sincerely wanting to help others by identifying and meeting needs. ``A servant leader has the gift of persuasion through moral authority: the principled use of natural virtues unique to them for the benefit of others. Positional authority: titles, credentials, degrees give only the opportunity to lead but it is the actions in behalf of others that can command, inspire and motivate change and moral behavior in others. A servant leader has submitted himself to his higher nature and asks, `What is wanted of me?' ``A servant leader has vision. They have knowledge of the past, recognize what is needed to improve their life, family, community and world and act to bring about a better future for others. ``A servant leader applies true principles such as: public and private virtue, natural law, liberty, life, personal responsibility, et cetera. ``A servant leader has the ability to build coalitions and inspire others to follow as first among equals. They see where things are in their condition, where they should be, and then insert themselves to voluntarily move self and others to the ideal. They model what they teach. Every servant becomes a leader because of their example and influence. ``A servant leader understands that life is not just a quest for pleasure or power but of meaning. Meaning and happiness is found when one is dedicated to a cause greater than oneself. The servant nature is not bestowed and cannot be taken away; it is who one is deep inside. Once this is recognized the servant intentionally chooses to lead. American Classical Servant Leadership is about becoming.'' I just say thank you to Dr. Forman and John Adams Academy for providing this tremendous recognition. I look forward to seeing the award promote this idea of servant leadership in the years to come. Congratulations to Mark and Marcus Haney on being the inaugural recipients. Secure Rural Schools

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, today I am calling on the House of Representatives to act with urgency to reauthorize Secure Rural Schools. The program, unfortunately, because of the House's lack of action, has been allowed to expire. Even though the Senate did pass it last year, the House failed to do so. Secure Rural Schools provides critical funding for a number of counties in my district and across the country. It was enacted in the year 2000, and it compensates counties with large amounts of national forest land for lost revenue due to declining Federal timber sales. The funds support local schools, roads, and essential public services. Congress reauthorized the program through fiscal year 2023, but, as I mentioned, the authorization expired in September 30, 2023, and final payments were paid in April of 2024. Congress must reauthorize this to avoid critical funding shortfalls. For example, in some of the counties of my district: Plumas County relies on Secure Rural Schools for $3.7 million, Sierra County for $942,000, Yuba County for $122,000, Nevada County for $393,000, Placer County for $839,000, El Dorado County for $2.1 million, and Alpine County for $493,000. Many of those counties are small counties. This provides critical funding that they need because they have a large amount of Federal land and don't have a large tax base. I am calling on House leadership and my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to act with urgency to get this measure passed and make sure that these communities receive the funding that they need and that they rely upon. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KILEY of California

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. KILEY of California

Mr. KILEY of California. Madam Speaker, our Governor in California, Gavin Newsom, likes to say that California leads the Nation and, unfortunately, President Biden enabled him to do just that. He has led our Nation down a path of total insanity in a way that puts us at war with common sense, with American consumers, and with our fantastic truckers. California has come after truckers in every way you can imagine, whether it is by far the highest diesel tax in the country, the regulation after regulation after regulation that makes more and more trucks unusable, or AB5 that went after the independent owner-operator model and threatened to put thousands of truckers out of work. However, with this regulation, the State came after the whole ball of wax. They said we are going to take your truck itself. With this regulation, the State has said that by just the year 2035, we are going to have for some classes of trucks, 55 percent have to be zero-emission vehicles; for others, 75 percent; for others, 40 percent. What is the practical consequence of this going to be? First, trucks are going to be a lot more expensive, tens of thousands of dollars more expensive. Companies will either have to buy more trucks or they will have to carry less in their trucks because there is less capacity because of the weight of the battery. By the way, they are going to have to use charging infrastructure that doesn't even exist at this point in time. American consumers, as we are seeing already in California, will see the cost of just about everything, certainly the cost of groceries, go up, and this will only contribute to the fact that we have a shortage of truck drivers in our State and in this country. California is being allowed to create policy for the whole country because 11 States are tied to California's actions here and because it puts manufacturers in a dilemma if they have to manufacture one truck for one State and another truck for another State. Today, we are restoring common sense. We are restoring uniformity when it comes to interstate commerce. We are restoring support for our truckers and we are lowering costs for consumers. By the way, we believe fully in innovation and we believe in a clean energy future for this country. We believe in clean air, but it is through innovation that we will get to clean air. It is not by government fiat. Indeed, it is an odd approach to innovation that says we are going to somehow magically fiat innovation by banning any and all available alternatives. That is not the way it works. Finally, to the notion of the gentleman from New Jersey that this sets a dangerous precedent, I will note that no California legislator ever voted on this or the car ban, no Member of this House has voted on it, no individual citizen has voted on it. There has been no vote whatsoever on a policy of profound personal consequence to 40 million Californians and tens of millions other Americans. I think that is precisely the precedent, actually putting this to a vote of the people's Representatives.

Mr. KILEY of California

Mr. KILEY of California. Madam Speaker, today, I am presenting a resolution I have sponsored under the Congressional Review Act to reverse California's ban on gas-powered vehicles, to stop a single individual, Gavin Newsom, from dictating what tens of millions of Californians and other Americans are allowed to drive. Madam Speaker, let me tell you where this ban came from. It was September 23, 2020. California was in the throes of the worst wildfire recorded in our State's history. There was untold suffering. Our heroic firefighters were doing everything they possibly could to get the blaze under control. Governor Newsom came out and announced: Here is what we are going to do. We are going to ban gas-powered cars. Our cars make wildfires worse. It was an absurd, pathetic attempt to deflect responsibility from his own failures, for an NPR investigation would soon find that Newsom exaggerated the fire prevention work he had done by a staggering 690 percent and had also slashed the fire prevention budget by $150 million. Newsom's edict eventually took the form of the regulation that is in front of us today, and on his way out the door, President Biden gave him special authority to effectively impose it on the rest of the country. Three things about this mandate are undoubtedly true: Number one, it was never voted on, not in Sacramento, not in Washington. Number two, it does have a nationwide impact. Number three, it is not just a problem for the future. The 35 percent mandate goes into effect next year. Therefore, we must act with urgency to democratically reverse that which was unilaterally imposed. It will be one of the most important things we do in this Congress. It will lower costs and restore common sense. It will restore the paradigm of consumer choice. Madam Speaker, I like EVs. I happen to drive an EV myself. It works well for where I live and for my lifestyle, but I would never think to use the coercive powers of government to impose my personal preferences as a consumer on everyone else. Americans should be able to drive a car of their choice, not one that is chosen for them by the government. Finally, with this resolution, we can restore a paradigm of dynamic innovation rather than command and control mandates. It is an odd approach to innovation that says we are going to force innovation by banning any and all available alternatives. I believe in the future of clean energy. I believe that it is upon us now, but that future is being driven by entrepreneurs and innovators, not by vainglorious politicians. Madam Speaker, I look forward to this resolution passing. I hope it does with bipartisan support, so we can prevent the insanity of California's politics from infecting the rest of the Nation.

Mr. KILEY of California

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a cosponsor of the SAVE Act to advance the radical proposition that only American citizens should vote in American elections. Of course, this isn't radical at all. It is common sense. I think the vast majority of Americans would be shocked to learn that it elicits any opposition at all. In many States in this country, foremost my own State of California, the administration of our elections is completely out of touch with the rest of the developed world, falling well short of the standards that ought to exist in a modern democratic society. This measure requiring proof of citizenship in order to vote is a needed corrective. I believe, in my State, it will complement other initiatives that we are advancing now to require voter ID and to have a timely vote-counting process in order to restore public confidence in our election process. What is at stake is not only election integrity and election security but democratic legitimacy, ensuring that our people have the ability to express themselves fully in our own identity as a State in the country through the democratic process. I urge passage of this on a bipartisan basis.

Mr. KILEY of California

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight ten ways in which the State of California is currently under Federal investigation. In particular, the Newsom administration is under Federal investigation. The New York Times recently ran a story on this topic with the headline, ``Trump Takes Aim at California Six Times in 24 Hours.'' The question was asked: Why is the administration targeting California? They call it a multipronged assault on California that has begun in earnest. That is actually the wrong question. Why the administration is targeting California is the wrong question. The appropriate question is: Why is California so flagrantly violating Federal law in so many different ways? In the article, the junior Senator in our State, Adam Schiff, is quoted as saying: ``The President had a `partisan vendetta against California.''' Senator Schiff says that he is ``continuing to weaponize the Federal Government against the one in ten Americans.'' Of course, that is not it at all. Protecting the civil rights of Californians is not weaponizing the Federal Government. It what is the Federal Government is supposed to do and what it is required to do under established law. What Senator Schiff and others are so upset about is that they are used to one-party rule in California being absolutely unchecked. They are used to radicalism and having absolutely no counterweight. They are used to Governor Newsom. His only motivation is his own political self- promotion. He has a supermajority legislature and other statewide- elected officials that simply go along with whatever he says or does, regardless of how much damage it does to our State and regardless of how clearly it violates Federal law. When The New York Times asked my opinion for this article, I said: ``Extreme policies and unchecked one-party rule have lowered the quality of life across our State. All Californians will benefit from greater accountability. We need balance and common sense.'' Investigation into Male Athletes Participation in Girls' and Women's Sports

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, I will discuss today the ten ways in which Federal investigations are restoring that sense of balance and common sense and assuring compliance with the law. Number one is on the issue of men in women's sports. The State has continued to be defiant. Recently, the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights announced a direct investigation into the California Interscholastic Federation because of its refusal to follow antidiscrimination laws related to girls and women's sports. This includes the possibility of allowing male athletes to compete in women's sports and use women's intimate facilities. Governor Newsom has received a letter from U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon. The letter warns the Governor that California could lose Federal funds if the State continues allowing transgender athletes to play in girls' and women's sports. Secretary of Education McMahon wrote: ``I am officially asking you to inform this Department whether you will remind schools in California to comply with Federal law by protecting sex-separated spaces and activities.'' She also wrote: ``Allowing participation in sex-separated activities based on `gender identity' places schools at risk of Title IX violations and loss of Federal funding. As Governor, you have a duty to inform California school districts of this risk.'' Interestingly enough, Governor Newsom actually recently stated that he believes it is unfair for the State to allow men to compete in women's sports. Yet, he has taken absolutely no action to stop this unlawful practice. Investigation into Alleged Violations of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, the second ongoing investigation relates to California's policy of forcing school districts and schools to keep secrets from parents about their own children. The U.S. Department of Education's Student Privacy Policy Office has launched an investigation into the California Department of Education for alleged violations of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, FERPA, which gives parents the right to access their children's educational data. It is alleged the California Department of Education has abdicated the responsibilities FERPA imposes because of a new California State law that prohibits school personnel from disclosing a child's gender identity to that child's parents. What happened in California is there are a number of school districts that have said that they are simply going to hide this information from parents. They will not tell parents if their child changes their name or pronouns or anything like that. There are other districts that say that this is not right. We actually want to make sure we are being open and transparent with parents. They passed their own policy, saying, no, our policy is that we believe that parents have a right to know this. What the State then did is they started suing these districts. They tried to get legal judgments against them, saying they were required under law to lie to parents about their children. Fortunately, those lawsuits are being rejected. The State legislature then followed up with a statewide law, saying that it is now the policy of the State that they are not allowed to communicate this information with parents. The school districts are not allowed to have any policy that allows them to communicate this information with parents. Mr. Speaker, think about the absurdity of this. In California, teachers are forced to use one name and one set of pronouns with a student in class. Then their parents come in for a conference, and they are supposed to switch names and switch pronouns and doctor their assignments and the names written on them. This has actually been done in documented cases in California. Thankfully, this Federal law of protecting the privacy right of students and the right of parents to know this information is on the books. Accordingly, the Department of Education has launched a Federal investigation. Investigations Relating to Racial Discrimination in California Higher Education

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, the third ongoing investigation relates to the issue of racial discrimination in California higher education. The Department of Justice under Attorney General Bondi is investigating several California universities to assess compliance with the 2023 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that ended affirmative action in college admissions. This is notable because not only is this now the supreme law of the land, per the recent Supreme Court decision, that there must be equal access but it is also overwhelmingly the expressed will of California voters. Just a few years ago, in 2020, the supermajority legislature tried to repeal an existing State constitutional provision that forbade racial discrimination in college admissions. They put it directly on the ballot. By a supermajority, they passed a measure to put it on the ballot. The people of California said no. Despite the fact the campaign for this initiative had a massive 10-1 spending advantage, the people of California voted 57 percent to 43 percent to say, no, we want equality under law to continue to be the policy of our State. This investigation by Attorney General Bondi is not only about assuring compliance with Federal law but it is also going to protect the clearly expressed will of the people of California. Investigation Relating to the Crisis of Anti-Semitism at Universities

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, the fourth investigation relates to the crisis of anti-Semitism at our universities. The Federal Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism has announced that the Department of Justice has opened a civil pattern or practice investigation into the University of California under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The investigation will assess whether the University of California has engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination based on race, religion, and national origin against its professors, staff, and other employees by allowing an anti-Semitic hostile work environment to exist on its campuses. Attorney General Bondi said: ``This Department of Justice will always defend Jewish Americans, protect civil rights, and leverage our resources to eradicate institutional anti-Semitism in our Nation's universities.'' We have seen over the last 1\1/2\ years or so absolutely abhorrent, outright anti-Semitism at many universities throughout the country, including at California universities, which our Committee on Education and the Workforce did a lot of work to expose through a number of hearings. While there have been some positive reforms that have occurred on some campuses, there are still many ongoing and very severe problems. These issues are aided and abetted in a lot of cases by university faculty and administrations. This is an investigation into the full gambit of that activity. Then there is a related set of investigations that are looking at the extent to which students who are here, international students, are actually working to advance not only anti-Semitic but pro-Hamas activity. Related to all of these anti-Semitic incidents on university campuses, we saw illegal activity with encampments that violated the law, violated university policies, and violated the civil rights of other students. We saw buildings being taken over, and we have seen connections between these activities and the agenda of Hamas and groups affiliated with Hamas. Recently, the administration has revoked about 100 student visas at universities across California, including the University of California, Berkeley, which is part of a broader assessment of individuals who are involved in activities deemed contrary to U.S. interests. This is actually a small number--100 out of 140,000 international students--that are in California. We do know that there are people who are here and not from this country. They have participated in these illegal activities because, as the President's order cites, Federal law bars noncitizens from being in the U.S. if they support terrorism. Any connection with pro-Hamas activity falls under the purview of those statutes. Indeed, the executive order from the White House quotes the President as saying that his intention is to deport Hamas sympathizers and revoke student visas. In a similar vein, UCLA been sued in Federal court in a case alleging that it enabled protesters at an encampment to block Jewish students from accessing certain campus pathways. To the extent that folks who are here on a visa were involved in that sort of illegal, pro-terrorist activity, the administration is doing an assessment to take appropriate action. investigation into potential illegal policies relating to california's high-speed rail

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, the sixth investigation against some of the insane and potentially illegal policies in California relates to high-speed rail which is the biggest public infrastructure failure in United States history. I was at Union Station in L.A. a couple of weeks ago. We were with Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy. He announced this investigation specifically into the Federal money that has gone into high-speed rail. The review that we launched on that day will help determine whether roughly $4 billion in taxpayer money should remain committed to the project to build high-speed rail in the California Central Valley between Merced and Bakersfield. I have also requested an investigation by the FBI into how exactly it is that California has so far spent some $17 billion on this project, which was approved in 2008. We are talking over 15 years, and it has yet to lay any track. At this point, even The New York Times has said that the project isn't going to be completed this century at the current pace. The overall cost has ballooned over $130 billion. That is more than $100 billion more than it was supposed to have been. The whole thing was supposed to be completed by now, per the initial projections, but at this point, even the first segment from Bakersfield to Merced, a very modest segment, they are saying isn't even going to be completed by 2033. Indeed, just last week, there was a report from the nonpartisan legislative analyst that there is another $9 billion funding gap, and they are continuing to rely on Federal funding. This is an investigation that is ongoing, and I fully expect it will result in those funds being clawed back and hopefully then used on infrastructure projects in California that will actually serve to move people and goods, create jobs that have positive economic value, and actually be helpful in improving the quality of life for folks in our State. The seventh ongoing investigation relates to California's cap-and- trade program. An executive order from the President has directed Attorney General Bondi to identify State and local acts that may be unconstitutional or preempted by Federal law. It singles out California's cap-and-trade program, which sets limits on greenhouse gas emissions and then has companies buy and sell credits. As the order says, California punishes carbon use by adopting impossible caps on the amount of carbon that businesses may use, all but forcing businesses to pay large sums to trade carbon credit to meet California's radical requirements. What is the result of this? Even as we have seen gas prices that have gotten much lower across the entire country, Californians continue to pay astronomical prices when they fill up their cars. Indeed, California is now some $1.60 above the national average. We have the highest gas prices in the country, higher than even Hawaii. The major cause of that is the State's taxes and regulations and other requirements, foremost among them being this cap-and-trade program, which adds substantially to the price of each gallon of gas. The eighth ongoing investigation relates to the homelessness crisis in California. California is the national leader in homelessness. It is not even close. We have roughly one-half of the unsheltered homeless in the entire country, despite spending absolutely staggering amounts of money. Indeed, over the course of the last 5 years, we have seen $24 billion spent on homelessness, and homelessness has continued to go up significantly. A recent audit actually found that the State has lost track of the money and can't even tell us where it went or what outcomes it has produced. Now, the new United States Attorney for the Central District of California, Bill Essayli, has announced the formation of a homelessness, fraud, and corruption task force, which will investigate fraud, waste, abuse, and corruption involving funds allocated toward the eradication of homelessness within the seven-county jurisdiction of the Central District of California. The task force will be comprised of Federal prosecutors from the major fraud section, the public corruption and civil rights section, and the civil division's civil fraud section of the U.S. Attorney's Office. It will specifically look into what is going on in Los Angeles, where recently a court-ordered audit found that homelessness services provided by the city and county were ``disjointed'' and contained ``poor data quality and integration.'' There is a lot of Federal money at stake and at issue, by the way. During COVID, the Federal Government sent $100 million in emergency aid to L.A. County to address homelessness, and last month, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development awarded more than $200 million to address homelessness in L.A. Now, there is a Federal investigation ongoing led by the U.S. Attorney's Office into exactly what has happened to all of this money. The ninth ongoing investigation relates to concealed carry. As part of a broader review of restrictive firearms-related laws in California and other States, the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division has announced an investigation into the L.A. County Sheriff's Department to determine whether it is engaging in a pattern or practice of depriving ordinary, law-abiding Californians of their Second Amendment rights. The release from the Attorney General's Office notes that a recent Federal court decision found that the law and facts were clearly in favor of two private plaintiffs who challenged the lengthy, 18-month delays that the L.A. County Sheriff's Department had imposed when processing their concealed handgun license applications and that the Civil Rights Division has reason to believe that those two plaintiffs are not the only ones in this county of some 8 million people experiencing long delays that are unduly burdening or effectively denying the Second Amendment rights of the people of Los Angeles. The release from the Attorney General goes on to note the ways in which the Second Amendment rights of Californians have been unduly burdened in countless ways. They call California a particularly egregious offender. In response to recent Supreme Court caselaw, California enacted new legislation to further restrict the ability of ordinary, law-abiding Californians to keep and bear arms. Many California localities appear to be imposing additional burdens beyond those required by California State law, including by subjecting ordinary, law-abiding Californians to expensive fees and lengthy wait times associated with applications for concealed handgun licenses. Now, there will be some counterweight to these measures that are restricting the rights of Californians. In fact, there was even a recent proposal in the legislature that went to the very core of the Second Amendment that would have said that you are no longer allowed to defend yourself against an intruder who breaks into your own home. Luckily, that bill was defeated, Mr. Speaker, but it just shows you how far California has gone from what is protected by the Constitution. Finally, of course, there is ongoing Federal action, this being the 10th Federal action related to California, when it comes to sanctuary jurisdictions. The Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, pursuant to an executive order from the President, are, to the maximum extent possible under Federal law, evaluating and undertaking any lawful actions to ensure that so-called sanctuary jurisdictions which seek to interfere with the lawful exercise of Federal law enforcement operations do not receive access to Federal funds. Further, the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, per the terms of the order, are evaluating and undertaking any other lawful actions, criminal or civil, that they deem warranted based on any such jurisdiction's practices that interfere with the enforcement of Federal law. When it comes to sanctuary policies, California has been the very worst offender in the country. The State has a sanctuary State policy that was passed in 2017 and is responsible for many tragedies that have been documented throughout our State. We even have jurisdictions like Los Angeles, San Diego, and San Francisco that were already sanctuary jurisdictions on top of being within a sanctuary State but are now even going further. One of them is even passing what they are calling a super sanctuary jurisdiction ordinance. Those of us who represent districts in California that are not sanctuary jurisdictions have also asked the administration to be sure to recognize those counties and jurisdictions that are, in good faith, trying to comply with Federal law, very much unlike jurisdictions like Los Angeles, San Diego, and San Francisco. These are 10 ways in which we see, finally, something of a check on the runaway lawlessness of the Newsom administration and a number of jurisdictions in California. In Congress, we are very much a partner in those efforts. Indeed, I am working on a number of measures here in Congress in the House of Representatives that are seeking to push back on the radical, harmful policies of the Newsom administration. For example, we recently introduced legislation to overturn Newsom's ban on gas-powered vehicles. I have introduced legislation called the No Medicaid for Illegal Immigrants Act, which will seek to preserve Medi-Cal benefits for American citizens at a time when the policy of expanding those benefits to everyone in the State illegally is literally bankrupting the system. In addition to Secretary Duffy's investigation into high-speed rail's staggering failures, I have introduced legislation to ensure that the high-speed rail project will be ineligible for any Federal funding going forward. California has a long way to go toward restoring sanity, but these actions are very important steps, and I look forward to following these investigations as they protect the civil rights of Californians and protect our citizens against truly radical and failed policies. tax credits for charter schools

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, today, I am excited to announce new legislation that I am introducing, along with Representative Claudia Tenney, called the High-Quality Charter Schools Act, which is going to be among the most significant pieces of legislation for school choice that we have had in this country in a very long time. What it will do is create a new tax credit for charitable contributions to nonprofit charter school organizations. Specifically, it will establish a 75 percent Federal tax credit for qualified charitable contributions made to nonprofit charter school organizations with a proven record of success, incentivizing donations to support the development of more high-quality charter schools. This could be truly significant, allowing perhaps millions more kids in this country to gain access to charter schools. That is because the reality that we see right now is that we have very successful charter schools that get tremendous results for students. For example, Success Academy in New York is the number one school system in the entire State, but there are a limited number of seats and it costs a lot of money to start a new school. A lot of times, especially in States like California or New York, you are disadvantaged under State law. We have politicians like Gavin Newsom or the supermajority in California who do everything possible to try to stop us from helping our students succeed. There are all of these obstacles that exist, often under State law, as well as the inherent obstacles that exist to starting up an enterprise as complicated and complex as a school, and the Federal charter school grant program has actually been critical to helping a number of charter schools start. What this legislation seeks to do is to help those that have proven to be successful to expand and replicate their model. That is because the ones that are really successful often have very long waiting lists. We can have thousands of kids on a waiting list for a school. By the way, charter schools are required to conduct lotteries. They can't show any sort of favoritism in their admissions or anything like that. They have to be open to all, so they have a lottery. If a student doesn't win the lottery, unfortunately, then he or she can't go to the school. If their local neighborhood school is not a good one, then the child misses out on the opportunity to go to a high-quality school and has to end up going to a low-quality school. The best and most effective way to expand educational opportunity and excellence in America today is to facilitate the expansion and replication of charter schools that have proven to be successful. That is precisely what this legislation does, and I am hopeful we will get it passed into law, perhaps even as part of the reconciliation process as a way to start to turn around this sharp decline in education outcomes that, unfortunately, is posing such a risk to our country's future. I look forward to hopefully getting bipartisan support, seeing it passed into law, and seeing what it will do for so many kids across this country. Restoring Public Trust in Elections

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, this week, I introduced, along with my colleague Jay Obernolte, as well as Representatives Calvert, Fong, Valadao, and Issa, the Election Results Accountability Act, which will restore some measure of public trust in our elections. The problem in California, one of many problems with our elections in California, is that they take forever. Not only do voters have about a month to cast their votes, but it then takes about a month to actually count the votes, with updates being made periodically throughout what is called a monthlong canvassing period. You see results that flip. Someone is ahead on election night, but somehow, 3 weeks later, they are behind. If you are in a tight race, Mr. Speaker, you are just living and dying with each update: Am I going to be the next city council or school board member? It limits your ability to plan, Mr. Speaker, because you don't know if you are going to be coming into office or you need to find some other job or if you will be planning to run again, whatever the case may be. The voters don't know who is going to be their Representative when they should. It also just fosters a sense of distrust in the process, and it is, frankly, embarrassing to our State. Every other State manages to get its act together. Most of them can give us the results on election night. That is kind of the way it is supposed to work, Mr. Speaker. You go to the voting booth, cast your vote, and find out who won that night. Mr. Speaker, you don't find out a month later and have it change several times in the process. This is beyond embarrassing for California, and it is time we brought some accountability. We introduced this legislation, the Election Results Accountability Act, which will require all States to count and publicly report no less than 90 percent of ballots cast in Federal elections within 72 hours of polls closing. Additionally, it mandates that States complete the ballot count and certify the final results within 2 weeks of election day. These are not onerous requirements. Ninety percent of the votes within 3 days need to be counted, and we need to have the results within 2 weeks. Our State should be more than capable of complying with this. By the way, even though we are requiring it in Federal elections, that likely will mean we will get the results up and down the ballot, as well. This, along with measures that we passed today, the SAVE Act to require proof of citizenship in order to vote, as well as an initiative that I think is likely to be presented to California voters in the near future to require voter ID, will go a long way toward ensuring election security, election integrity, and the sense of democratic legitimacy on which our State and country's political identity depends. Reverse California Ban on Gas-Powered Vehicles

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, this last week, I introduced legislation in the House to reverse California's ban on gas-powered vehicles. This is a special resolution under the Congressional Review Act that provides a fast-track procedure not subject to a Senate filibuster to overturn an agency action. In this case, it is the action of the Biden administration that gave Gavin Newsome special permission to ban gas cars in California. This is a measure that will affect almost everyone in our State. It is set to go into effect in 2035. It is utterly unrealistic, and yet, it has not been subject to a vote of the people, a vote of the State legislature, or a vote of the United States Congress. That will change soon. This measure, I believe, will pass hopefully with bipartisan support, and it will restore the ability of Californians to select the vehicle of their choice. It will also prevent massive increases in costs for Californians who are already burdened with the highest cost of living, the highest gas prices, the highest energy prices, and much more of any State in the country. I think this is a pretty commonsense measure. Unfortunately, California has dragged a lot of other States along with it with this measure, so it is truly an issue of national concern, as well. I look forward to seeing this passed to reverse the Biden administration's waiver under the Clean Air Act for California, and I think this will go a long way toward restoring some sanity to our State. Artificial Intelligence in Education

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, this last week as chair of the House Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education that covers K-12 education, I held a very important hearing on the topic of artificial intelligence in education. Now, we are in the midst of a truly unprecedented period in which AI is advancing at a mind-boggling rate in terms of its capabilities, and there is truly no end to this progress in sight. We see all of the leading labs introducing new models it seems like every day that demonstrate increasingly astonishing capabilities. There are a lot of risks and concerns that tend to come to mind when people see this progress and a lot of, I think, legitimate fears as it relates to AI and its impact on society. It is very important that we are attentive to these concerns in taking whatever measures we can to make sure we get these questions right. I think that it is equally important that we make sure that the benefits of this technology as it exists now and as it is likely to exist in the future are understood, as well. I think that there is, frankly, far less dialogue and conversation on a national level than there should be about the absolutely enormous changes that could well be ahead of us. I wanted to use this hearing to examine one particular domain where AI holds the potential to dramatically expand opportunity and benefit our country and bring unprecedented opportunities to American kids across the country. I am a former high school teacher, and we have in this country truly shameful achievement gaps when it comes to the educational opportunities that are available to kids depending on their ZIP codes. In my view, much of that is as a result of failed policies, none more so than in California, which has just about the widest achievement gaps of any State in the country. We absolutely need to have policy reforms that bring accountability, that empowers parents, that expands school of choice, and that supports teachers among many other policy reforms. The correct use of artificial intelligence could go a long way in itself toward bridging these achievement gaps. Not only that, I believe that it will very soon be possible for any child in our country to receive a richer educational experience than any child did just a few years ago. This is because of the absolutely incredible capabilities that are now accessible to anyone for free or at very little cost on a computer or smartphone. We saw during our hearing examples of how these possibilities are already being realized in many classrooms across America. You could have, for example, a personalized tutor who knows just about everything there is to know, who knows everything about your own strengths and weaknesses, your own interests, and who engages with you directly to learn any topic. Now, this is no small matter because studies show that having access to a high-quality tutor is one of the most important interventions that improves educational outcomes by a significant degree, potentially moving you a half standard deviation or so or giving you more than a years' worth of additional learning in any given year if you have access to a high-quality tutor. Well, with AI tools, any child will have that access at a level that has never been known before in a more personalized way than has ever been known before. What is more, these tools allow for learning across different modalities through text, through images, through voice, and can engage with different students in different ways. Just to give you another example, they can take on the form of different characters. When you are learning history, you could actually have a conversation with an animated version of a historical figure. If you are reading a book, you can actually have a conversation with a character in the book. If you are learning physics, maybe you can learn physics from a reanimated version of Einstein himself. This is just the tip of the iceberg. When you look at the technologies that are advancing when it comes to augmented reality, when it comes to VR, we are already seeing ways in which AI is being deployed for sort of career training-type learning, whether it is welding or other types of careers or trades where these environments can be simulated in very realistic ways to help students learn regardless of whether they go to a school or you can get hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of expensive machinery. I think that we are still just scratching the surface of what is possible here. One of the suggestions at our hearing is that we need to continue to facilitate ways of sharing best practices; importantly, as well, when it comes to how these tools can be used by teachers because a teacher's role is as important as ever, potentially more important, in the sense that having access to AI tools that can assist students in individual ways actually frees teachers in many ways to provide the sort of mentorship and instruction and teaching that only a caring human can. We saw examples in our hearing of how AI tools have been used to assist with lesson planning, have been used to help grade papers, or to provide direct immediate feedback to students to help with the assessment process and many other ways, as well. For those who think that the AI tool is somehow going to change the role of the teacher, these tools can change the role of the teacher but I think in very positive ways, as well. Of course there are risks in this domain, as well, when it comes to academic dishonesty, when it comes to the potential of further absorbing students into digital worlds and thereby exacerbating some of the harms we have seen in excessive use of smart phones. All of those things we need to be very mindful of, as well, which is why following our hearing we are exploring ways to establish forums where these sort of best practices can be shared so different teachers, different schools, different States can see what is happening elsewhere, see what the results are, and see the impact it is having on the well-being and learning of our students. This is one area where I think there truly is unbounded potential, and I am looking forward to working with our subcommittee to try to assist districts across the country and unlocking that potential. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KILEY of California

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to inform folks throughout California and the entire country of one of the biggest scandals in our State's history, which is that Governor Newsom is literally bankrupting Medicaid in our State. He is driving it insolvent through a policy that exists nowhere else in the country, in no other State, a policy of offering free, comprehensive, universal Medicaid, or Medi-Cal as we call it, to the entire population of illegal immigrants in our State who meet the income threshold. No other State has done this, and in California, it has been an absolute disaster. Initially, it was estimated that this unprecedented expansion would cost just a few billion dollars. It turns out that it is going to cost $9.5 billion just for this year. Because of that enormous cost overrun, because of the resulting shortfall of some $6 billion, Governor Newsom has just taken out an emergency loan from the general fund in order to cover payments. On top of that, he has asked the legislature to appropriate even more money, billions more. Think about what this means over, let's say, the next 10 years. If the cost has grown from a few billion dollars to $9.5 billion just in this first year, what can we expect year over year going forward? We are likely talking about hundreds of billions of dollars of money from California taxpayers that will be spent this next decade implementing a policy that exists nowhere else in the country to provide comprehensive care, comprehensive government-provided healthcare, to those who are in our State illegally. Here is the worst thing. Not only is this fiscally unsustainable, but those are funds that could be going to shoring up Medicaid, Medi-Cal, and improving the system, improving access to care, and improving the quality of care for our own legal residents. If you are a California citizen on Medicaid right now, the kind of coverage that you get, the kind of actual delivery of service that you get, likely is not that good. Doctors throughout the State simply will not take Medicaid patients because the reimbursement rate is so low. This policy of Governor Newsom and the supermajority in California is a conscious decision to put the entire solvency of our system at risk, to diminish access to care for our own residents, and to, in fact, make it harder to get appointments because now there is a whole new population that is looking to get into the system and doing so in a way that has no precedent anywhere else in the country. In fact, in many cases, it actually costs the State more money to provide Medicaid to a person who is in the State illegally because, number one, there is no Federal funding for such enrollees, so the State bears almost the entire cost. Even the overall cost, forgetting about who is paying for it, can be higher. When you look at, for example, the rebates for prescription drugs that are available at the Federal level because the Federal Government negotiates in bulk, that is not available for this population that is covered by State funds, so we are actually paying more than we would for our own citizens. Mr. Speaker, this outrageous policy simply cannot continue. I am calling on Governor Newsom and the State legislature to reverse it immediately. That should be the obvious next step when the system has gone insolvent to the extent that the Governor is forced to take out an emergency loan. Here in Congress, I have introduced legislation that will preserve Medicaid benefits in California and across the country for only those who are legal residents of our country. I think we also have an opportunity to rein in what Governor Newsom is doing through the reconciliation process, and I look forward to doing that in order to protect Medicaid for Californians. Update on California's Failing High-Speed Rail Project

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, I would like to provide an update on the latest unbelievable revelations concerning high-speed rail, the high-speed rail disaster in California. Yesterday, California's legislative analyst testified before the State legislature that the project faces a $7 billion budget gap and that the funds must be secured by next June. The legislative analyst's spokesperson said: ``There is no specific plan to meet that roughly $7 billion gap. We also think there is some risk that that gap could grow.'' Indeed, the hearing at which the legislative analyst testified was very brief because the California High-Speed Rail Authority submitted an incomplete update to those who had organized the hearing. The high- speed rail authority can't manage to complete anything on time, even its own reports to the legislature, let alone a high-speed train from Los Angeles to San Francisco or even that very first segment from Bakersfield to Merced, which is now projected to miss the 2033 deadline. Listen to the bipartisan pushback that this is getting. Assembly Member Steven Bennett, a Democrat from Ventura, said: ``We have no plan. We have a good likelihood it is going to get worse, and we have a short time to solve the problem.'' ``The definition of insanity,'' said Democrat Assembly Member Cottie Petrie-Norris, ``is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome.'' The truly amazing thing is the legislative analyst testified that this update that the rail authority provided, even this incomplete update, assumes there will still be Federal dollars. They are saying there is a $7 billion budget shortfall for just the next few months, and that has an unrealistic assumption that goes with it that there is going to be further Federal funding. I can say this right now: There will not be further Federal funding. How do I know that? Because I was at a press conference with Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy just a few weeks ago in Los Angeles, where it was made very clear that this project is a failure. In fact, there is now an investigation that has been launched by the Department of Transportation to claw back billions of dollars that have been granted. I have also asked for an investigation by FBI Director Kash Patel to figure out how it is exactly that they have already spent $17 billion, that the overall cost has grown to in excess of $130 billion, yet no track has been laid after 16 years of some kind of work supposedly being done. Finally, I have introduced legislation to make the high-speed rail project ineligible for further Federal funding at any point going forward, which, again, the rail authority is entirely reliant on the assumption of Federal funding just to get to a point where there is only a $7 billion budget gap for just the first next few months. The fact of the matter is that this project has failed. It is not going to happen. There is absolutely no justification for spending another dollar of taxpayer money, especially when our roads continue to crumble and be rated among the worst in the world. I will be advancing my legislation here, and I am calling on Governor Newsom and the legislature to do the right thing and bring an end to this failed and embarrassing project once and for all. Condemning Classification of Israel as an Adversary

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, today on the House floor, there was an amendment offered that suffered the most overwhelming defeat that I have ever seen in the United States Congress, and for good reason. It is perhaps the most abhorrent legislative proposal I have ever seen in the United States Congress. The Representative from Michigan, Representative Tlaib, introduced a measure that would classify Israel as an adversary of the United States alongside the likes of China, Iran, and North Korea. Fortunately, this proposal was swiftly and nearly unanimously rejected by the House of Representatives. Look at the vote total. A grand total of three people, including the author, voted ``yes.'' Every single other Member, Democrat or Republican, over 400 Members, voted ``no.'' This sent a very important message regarding what was being suggested with this proposal, that one of our most important allies in the entire world, Israel, at this time when it faces so many challenges, is somehow a country of concern, an adversary of the United States comparable to Iran or North Korea, and to single out this one country, Israel, of all the countries in the world. We have seen across America, and in particular on college campuses, deeply disturbing, abhorrent anti-Semitism, which has absolutely no place and that we never thought we would ever see anything like it in this country. I think when you have proposals in Congress that encourage that, that are very much thematically aligned with the pro- Hamas, anti-Semitic encampments that took over universities in the country, it is very important that that is condemned strongly and unequivocally. I am very proud that that is exactly what the House of Representatives did today. Zero Job Growth in California

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, the California Center for Jobs and the Economy has just released an absolutely stunning report that shows how deeply Governor Gavin Newsom has driven our State's economy into the ground. Among the findings was that for the month of January, job growth in our State was nonexistent. The number of net jobs that were added to the California economy was exactly zero for the month of January. By comparison, Texas added 27,900; Florida added 16,500; and even New York added 20,100. California added zero. Indeed, California is one of only five States in the country that has not recovered the jobs that it lost during the COVID shutdowns. As things now stand, our unemployment rate is the second highest in the country. It is the second highest out of all 50 States. Indeed, there are 1 million Californians who are unemployed, and that has been true for 13 straight months. What is more, even those jobs that have been created in the COVID recovery are entirely government or government-dependent jobs. So to quote the spokesperson, or the head, of the California Business Roundtable, Rob Lapsley: ``To put it more directly, other than in trade, California has not grown jobs during the past 4 years of recovery; it has bought them with public funds.'' We would have zero job growth and zero recovery if it weren't for government jobs. What is more, beyond that, even when you look at folks who are employed, Mr. Speaker, the average number of hours per week is shrinking in California as well. This is truly stunning, Mr. Speaker, when you consider everything that our State has to offer, not only being a place that has a greater diversity of natural wonders and attractions and beauty than just about any place on Earth, but it also has so many dynamic and thriving industries, so many incredible companies and employers. It has such a rich history of innovation and of driving the Nation forward. Somehow this Governor and the existing legislature have managed to turn it into the State that does the absolute worst when it comes to jobs of any State in the country. So why is that the case? It is no mystery, Mr. Speaker. You can just look at misguided policy after misguided policy which has served to discourage companies from starting, discourage companies from adding jobs, discourage companies from staying here, and indeed, has made more people leave this State than any other for several consecutive years. I am working on legislation in Congress inasmuch as we can use the levers we have here at the Federal level to try to bring some sanity back to the economic policy environment in California because there are areas where Federal and State policy intersect. For example, we are getting rid of all of these EV mandates or electric train mandates or electric truck mandates or electric lawnmower mandates. I will soon be introducing a Congressional Review Act resolution to end Gavin Newsom's plan to ban gas-powered cars in California. Beyond that, there are a number of State policies that everyone knows are causing immense harm and yet remain on the books. So if our State's leadership has the chance to look at this report and get a little dose of reality and has any inclination to actually try to turn things around and help folks in our State, here are a few suggestions: Repeal AB 5, which has effectively banned independent contracting in our State and has put countless freelancers out of work. Overturn the Private Attorneys General Act, PAGA, which is the bane of many small businesses' existence and accounts for the nonexistence of many that have been forced to close because of the harassing lawsuits that it leads to. Reexamine every mandate that we place on employers, especially those that don't exist in any other State, and evaluate the impact they have on the incentive to hire. Take a cue from President Trump who has said we are going to repeal 10 regulations for every new regulation that we offer. If there is any place where the regulatory thicket can rival or even surpass that of the Federal Government, it is the bureaucracy that we have in California. Speaking of the bureaucracy, find ways to rein in these massive, unelected policymaking bodies we have in California such as CARB, the California Air Resources Board. These are just a few suggestions, but our State has absolutely enormous potential that currently is being dramatically underutilized. It is truly a sad thing as we see it in every community in this State. You see your favorite restaurant or another cherished small business that suddenly closes its doors for good, and you see so many of our fellow citizens who are lacking the sort of opportunities that a well- governed State would allow them. So I would hope that if anything could be a wake-up call, then this latest stunning report with this very round number of zero new jobs will serve as that wake-up call that can catalyze and motivate some real reform in California. SpaceX Rescue

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate and thank SpaceX and its Crew Dragon capsule for successfully returning the two astronauts, Barry Wilmore and Suni Williams, who had been stranded in the International Space Station for 286 days. Most Americans are now familiar with the story and with the issues that arose with the Boeing Starliner that made them unable to return on that vessel and the delays that ensued after that such that these astronauts had to overstay their planned trip by many, many, many weeks. It was just on March 18, a little over 1 week ago, that they finally were brought home thanks to SpaceX and splashdown in the Gulf of America. This was a great moment for our country, certainly a great moment for the astronauts and their families, and I think it serves as a reminder of how important America's lead is when it comes to the commercial space industry. We saw just this last year repeated efforts by the Biden administration to hold back that progress and to specifically target SpaceX. Now, it needs to be noted that SpaceX accounts for over 90 percent of the total payload brought into orbit in the entire world, and so targeting SpaceX is truly weakening our own country given how important our global dominance in space is. So this latest demonstration of the capacity of this particular company and American ingenuity in general to accomplish amazing feats should hopefully serve as a reminder that we have now turned a page, that we are now encouraging innovation, and that we must never return to the misguided policies and, frankly, discriminatory treatment that prevailed during the administration of President Biden. So I thank SpaceX again and welcome home, a long delayed welcome home, and welcome back to Earth to our astronauts. Artificial Intelligence Announcement

Mr. KILEY of California

Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.