Jim Langevin

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer my amendment to restore funding for the southern New England estuaries program. I plan to offer and withdraw this amendment in hopes that we can continue this discussion and work out a solution that will continue support for this program that is deeply meaningful to our region. I am honored to be joined in this amendment by Congressmen Cicilline, Keating, and Kennedy, all of whom know how important this EPA funding is to Rhode Island and Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, estuaries support life. They are the fragile but vital ecosystems where saltwater and freshwater mix together, and they support a robust number of species. In Rhode Island, these coastal and tidal areas provide environmental balance, but they are increasingly threatened by human activity. We need to continue to support their restoration, less they regress and become permanently damaged. Over the past several years, we have seen the success of EPA's southern New England program. With projects since fiscal year 2014, these funds have helped protect and restore watersheds in the Narragansett Bay, Mount Hope Bay, and Buzzards Bay. They have supported coastal areas in South County, Rhode Island, and along Cape Cod and the islands. The EPA's geographic programs have worked in other parts of the country as well, from the Puget Sound to the Chesapeake Bay, and they are working in New England. Mr. Chairman, as I have said in the past, our estuaries are the lungs of our coastal areas. These EPA funds continue to help our New England estuaries recover and to thrive. While I plan to withdraw this amendment, I hope that Chairman Calvert and I can work together to preserve this needed program.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chair, I am grateful for the chairman's comments, and I hope we can, as the gentleman said, work together on this, and I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. Chair, I withdraw the amendment.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, on Friday, Special Counsel Robert Mueller handed down the most significant hacking indictment targeting a foreign power in history. Director Mueller alleges that 12 Russian military officers were responsible for breaking into political organizations, stealing sensitive documents, and disseminating them to undermine faith in American democracy. Friday's indictment will further shape the norms of responsible state behavior in cyberspace, and demonstrates our commitment to holding malicious actors accountable. Yet, today, Mr. Speaker, not 3 days later, President Trump said he didn't see any reason to think that Russia carried out the election meddling. Well, the President set it up as whether you believe U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies or Russia. However, this isn't a matter of belief, this is matter of fact; and the facts say the Russian government hacked us. I hope that the President will finally acknowledge this, and I pray that my Republican colleagues will hold him accountable if he doesn't. And I thank Director Mueller for his ongoing work.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, today I offer an amendment with immense importance to Rhode Island fishermen. My amendment would provide voting representation for Rhode Island on the Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Management Council, which regulates numerous species found in the waters off our coast. I want to emphasize that this is not a provincial matter. This is about providing fair representation and a sense of equity for those invested in our regional fisheries council system. It only makes sense that those who haul in these fish species should have a seat at the table. Mr. Chairman, despite our location in New England, we do haul in these so-called Mid-Atlantic species. Using the most recent statistics, Rhode Island lands half of all squid caught on the East Coast. Let me repeat that, Mr. Chairman. Half of all squid caught on the East Coast is landed by Ocean State fishermen. These squid are the key ingredient in the famous Rhode Island calamari, a dish that many of us undoubtedly enjoy. Beyond squid, Rhode Island lands 85 percent of all East Cost butterfish, far exceeding any other State. Butterfish is regulated by the Mid-Atlantic Council. We haul in more scup than any other East Coast State. Scup is also regulated by the Mid-Atlantic Council. Additionally, we are among the top three States for landing bluefish, summer flounder, and monkfish. Mr. Chairman, bluefish, summer flounder, and monkfish are all regulated by the Mid-Atlantic Council. For our recreational fishermen, summer flounder, black sea bass, bluefish, and scup comprise the bulk of the recreational harvest in Rhode Island. So, Mr. Chairman, it should also be noted that the Rhode Island Sound is a part of the Mid-Atlantic Bight. In other words, Mr. Chairman, we are a part of the same marine ecosystem that stretches down to the Outer Banks of North Carolina. The same species live all along these waters, and they are regulated by the Mid-Atlantic Council. While this inequity already exists today, the threat of climate change will only make this worse as species migrate northward in search of colder waters. So, Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out to my colleagues that there is precedent for such a change. In 1996, we amended fisheries law to ensure that North Carolina could sit on two regional fisheries councils. All we ask is the same consideration be provided to Rhode Island. It is only fair. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, once again, I would point out to my friend, whom I have deep respect for, that there is precedent for such a change. In 1996, we amended fisheries law to ensure that North Carolina could, in fact, sit on two regional fisheries councils, so what we are asking is not unprecedented. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my colleague from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline).

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the Rules Committee for making my amendment in order, as well as Chairwoman Granger and Ranking Member Visclosky for their hard work on this important Defense Appropriations bill. Mr. Chairman, I offer this bipartisan amendment with my good friends Mr. Correa, Mr. Lieu, Ms. Shea-Porter, Mr. Ratcliffe, and Ms. Stefanik in order to support the DOD Cyber Scholarship Program. Since 2001, DOD has funded the Information Assurance Scholarship Program, or ASP, in order to boost the Nation's cyber workforce through scholarship and capacity-building grants. Scholarship recipients are required to fulfill a service obligation by working in a cybersecurity position at DOD upon graduation. This program has been extremely successful, bringing nearly 600 students into the DOD workforce. However, due to budget constraints, the Department reduced funding for the program beginning in 2013 and stopped recruiting new students. Now, this program received $7.5 million in 2005, its peak funding level, but for FY 2017, it received a mere $500,000. The cybersecurity challenges that we face, Mr. Chairman, are growing every day. This scholarship program will help ensure that students are encouraged to pursue degrees in cybersecurity-related fields and that more of them can then work defending our Nation. Across every industry, across the public and private and nonprofit sectors, qualified cybersecurity professionals are, indeed, in short supply, and the Department of Defense must compete for this very small pool of candidates. These funds will assist in alleviating the challenges that the Department of Defense is experiencing in recruiting and retaining cybersecurity personnel by providing additional opportunities to develop a qualified cyber workforce and expanding awareness at public educational institutions. Mr. Chairman, in last year's National Defense Authorization Act, we reinvigorated the funding while simultaneously expanding it to include students pursuing associate's degrees so as to tap into a larger candidate pool. The committee also made in order a similar amendment in last year's appropriations bill to ensure the newly reauthorized expanded program would be appropriately funded. It was passed by the whole House during amendment consideration, and we aim to do the same this year to finally get this critical program back off the ground. Cybersecurity, Mr. Chairman, is the national security and economic security challenge of the 21st century, and every armed conflict today and in the future will include a battle in this domain. It is incumbent upon Congress to recognize this fact and appropriately support USCYBERCOM and our other cyber defenders. All the policies in the world, though, are meaningless without personnel to execute them, and this amendment makes vital investments in our human capital. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan effort. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that my amendment be withdrawn.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I spoke a little bit earlier on the cyber scholarship program, so I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for her support and her work, along with Ranking Member Visclosky's work on the Defense Appropriations bill, and in particular their support of the Assurance Cyber Scholarship. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I want to thank the ranking member for his work on this Defense Appropriations bill as well as Congresswoman Granger. In particular, I want to thank my colleague, Mr. Courtney, for his tireless work as the ranking member of the Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee and Mr. Wittman for his tireless work. Our submarines are the true unsung heroes of our naval fleet, and I know from firsthand experience because much of the critical fabrication work of these amazing submarines is done by my constituents in my home State of Rhode Island. Admirals continuously tell us that they cannot get enough submarines, which are desperately needed across the globe to protect the interests of the United States. In fact, they are only able to meet some 60 or 65 percent of the demands of the requests of the combatant commanders for the use of these submarines. Despite this urgent need, the number in our fleet is actually dropping. By 2028, it has been reported the number of submarines will drop from 52 to 42. So how can we support this near 20 percent drop when we have the ability to do something about it? Thankfully, there is a plan to close at least some of this gap by procuring additional submarines in 2022 and 2023. But we can't increase our sub production by 50 percent on a dime. We need to make investments today if we are to be in a position to help reduce the bottoming out of our sub fleet. The hardworking employees of our defense industrial base need to build additional capacity now. We need to act immediately if we are going to be in a position to provide more submarine reactors in the out-years. This amendment will ensure that we have the flexibility going forward. That is why we included similar language in this year's National Defense Authorization Act, which overwhelmingly passed this Chamber. Mr. Speaker, the urgency is particularly evident because our adversaries are not standing still. DOD has estimated that China will have an estimated between 69 and 78 submarines in 2020, and the CSBA has estimated that they will have between 80 and 100 submarines somewhere between 2022 and the 2030 time frame. We cannot, in good conscience, ignore the startling growth of this adversarial fleet. Mr. Chair, subs not only deter our adversaries, but they also build up our allies and ensure a more prosperous, secure world. Funding our Virginia-class and Columbia-class programs must remain an absolute priority. Anything less is an affront to our national security. This amendment continues our practice of robust investment in our submarine fleet, and I urge my colleagues to support it. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding the time.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I would like to, first of all, thank the Rules Committee for making my amendment in order, as well as Chairwoman Granger and Ranking Member Visclosky for their hard work on this very important bill. Mr. Chairman, I offered this bipartisan amendment with my good friend and colleague, Mr. Gallagher, in support of the electromagnetic railgun, a technology that has been described as ``revolutionary'' and a potential multimission ``game changer'' for long-range land-attack, ballistic missile and cruise missile defense, and antisurface warfare. In brief, this weapon system uses magnetic fields to launch a guided projectile with sufficient kinetic energy to travel significantly farther than conventional explosive propellants. Railguns also have more lethality at range than traditional gunfire. They are considerably more cost effective. Whereas low-cost kinetic defenses run around $400,000 per round, surface-to-air interceptors and guided hypervelocity projectiles can cost less than 10 percent as much. Mr. Chairman, these technologies have matured to a point where they can provide military capabilities for the warfighter now for Army, Marine Corps, and Navy applications, addressing critical gaps in U.S. air defense against growing threats from peer and near peer competitors. Mr. Chairman, we must recognize that the best mix of air and missile defense will consist of complementary kinetic and nonkinetic weapon systems, enhancing our capability to defeat larger salvos of air and missile threats. So railgun has already demonstrated the capability to launch projectiles at higher velocity than conventional naval guns, which provides extended range, improved response time, and enhanced lethality. Appropriating the transition funding for these efforts will sincerely help in achieving these objectives for both our ground and naval forces. For the last several years, this amendment has been passed out of the House with bipartisan support in order to give the Department the appropriate resources to continue development and integration of this extremely promising technology. I hope the House will do the same this year. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the gentleman's input, but I will remind the gentleman that significant progress has been made on directed energy as well. And although the gentleman raises the point that there are additional funds for directed energy and, potentially, for railguns does not guarantee that the funds are going to be used for railgun itself. Right now, the Army, Navy, and Air Force have made significant progress in directed energy capabilities that have been under R&D in the labs for years and are at the point where they are ready to mature and be deployed in the hands of the warfighter. What this amendment ensures is that the funds actually will go to railgun and see that technology, as well, mature so we can more quickly get it into the hands of the warfighter, whether it is for the Navy or for the Army. I would also mention to the gentleman, point out, that our adversaries are not standing still on this technology. China is, in fact, fielding an electromagnetic railgun as we speak, and the United States, in my opinion, could be falling behind in that technology. So while I appreciate the gentleman's input, I strongly disagree, and I hope that my colleagues will join with me in supporting the amendment, enhancing support for electromagnetic railgun so that America continues to lead in this vital technology. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I would remind my colleagues this is a bipartisan amendment. I encourage my colleagues to support the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5094, the Enhancing Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative Act. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5094 would require the Department of Homeland Security to develop a strategy to improve the training, outreach, and information it provides on Suspicious Activity Reporting to prevent acts of terrorism. Since the September 11 attacks, we have seen that sharing information regarding suspicious activity can help local, State, and Federal law enforcement connect the dots about threats in the communities that they serve. While it is important that ordinary citizens say something when they see something that could be a threat to their community, we must recognize that there have been instances where there have been abuses. On occasion, we have seen allegations of suspicious activity made against individuals solely based on biases regarding race, ethnicity, or religion. H.R. 5094 seeks to prevent such discriminatory reporting by directing DHS to disseminate examples of reporting that meet the guidelines for action. Further, it instructs DHS to outline the types of suspicious activity reporting, including reporting based on race, religion, and nationality, that is prohibited. More broadly, H.R. 5094 seeks to build numerous safeguards for privacy, civil liberties, and civil rights into the suspicious activity reporting regime. It requires the establishment of an outside working group to provide advice to the DHS Secretary on matters such as outreach, information sharing, protecting personally identifiable information, protecting privacy and civil rights, and training for emergency response providers and the private sector. Additionally, H.R. 5094 enhances congressional oversight of privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties by requiring the department to furnish Congress with copies of the materials it disseminates to stakeholders. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this security measure. Mr. Speaker, as the terrorist threats evolve, so too must our counterterrorism efforts. Since the September 11 attacks, we have seen that raising public awareness about reporting suspicious activity can be effective at detecting, deterring, and combating terrorism in the homeland. I encourage my colleagues to support H.R. 5094 to ensure that DHS strategically engages stakeholders to improve suspicious activity reporting. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5081, the Surface Transportation Security and Technology Accountability Act of 2018. Mr. Speaker, every day, millions of Americans engage with surface transportation across various modes, including passenger and freight trains, commuter rail, mass transit, and buses. These systems, which so many of us rely on, are often viewed as soft targets, so it is more important than ever that we intensify efforts to secure these critical systems. H.R. 5081 is a step in the right direction. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my colleague from New York (Mr. Katko) for his hard work and dedication in putting this bill together and seeing that it gets to the floor this evening. This bill authorizes the Transportation Security Administration to form a Surface Transportation Security Advisory Committee to advise on surface transportation security matters, including the development and implementation of policies and security directives. This committee will include stakeholders from each mode of surface transportation, including pipelines, as well as representatives from labor organizations, law enforcement, and the first responder community. Importantly, H.R. 5081 requires TSA to consult with the advisory committee in the development of its technology investment plan to ensure that TSA develops new and effective security technologies for surface transportation and that we are investing in the right technology at the right time, at the right place. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan piece of legislation. Again, I commend the gentleman from New York (Mr. Katko) for his hard work on this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to, again, also echo the words of my colleague from New York in that there is great bipartisanship on the Homeland Security Committee. I have often said that if there is one place we are going to find bipartisanship, it is when it comes to protecting the homeland, protecting our national security, and certainly it has been evidenced by this particular bill and the several bills that we will have before us this evening. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5081 will enhance the security of mass transit and other critical surface transportation modes. This legislation is sorely needed, and I thank the chairman of the Transportation and Protective Security Subcommittee, Mr. Katko, for his efforts. I encourage my colleagues to support H.R. 5081, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5730, the Transportation Security Technology Innovation Reform Act of 2018. H.R. 5730 authorizes TSA's Transportation Security Administration Systems Integration Facility, or TSIF. Threats against the transportation system are constantly evolving. They demand the TSA be proactive in developing new and innovative technologies. By authorizing the TSIF, H.R. 5730 directs TSA to evaluate, test, collaborate on and, ultimately, deliver advance screening technologies. H.R. 5730 also includes language to ensure that TSA has the necessary staff and resources to develop the best and most cutting-edge technology. Importantly, the bill includes language authored by the Ranking Member, Mr. Thompson, to enhance the level of support TSA provides to small businesses throughout TSA's technology testing and procurement process. Greater participation of small businesses, really, where innovation happens, in the security marketplace, will not only help ensure that promising technologies are pursued; it will also help TSA move away from its reliance on a handful of large technology manufacturers. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues in the House to support this measure, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. H.R. 5730 is focused on closing security capability gaps and streamlining the technology acquisitions process at TSA. When everything is said and done, TSA's ultimate mission is to ensure the safety and security of the traveling public, and H.R. 5730 would do just that. I commend the gentleman from New York (Mr. Katko) for his work on this legislation. I think it is going to make an appreciable difference in keeping the traveling public safe. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 5730, and I yield back the balance of my time.