Jim Langevin

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chair, our military is the finest in the world, but there must be accountability and the Department must live within its means. Mr. Chair, I commend Chairman Smith for striking an appropriate balance with this NDAA, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise with deep sadness to remember a luminary in the field of cybersecurity. Michael Assante passed away last Friday. The many tributes that have poured in from people in the ICS security community are a testament to his pioneering work and his kind soul. I, too, have been touched by Mike's work. Mike and his colleagues at Idaho National Laboratory first briefed me many years ago on the Aurora vulnerability that showed how a bad actor could use malware to cause physical damage to the electric grid and potentially knock out power to millions. That brief first piqued my interest in cybersecurity and led to my cofounding the Congressional Cybersecurity Caucus with Congressman McCaul. Mike was many things--a brilliant researcher, a loving husband, a ferocious fighter of the cancer that eventually claimed his life--but I will always remember him, as will so many who went through his SANS Institute courses, as an educator. I cherished my time with Mike because I knew he would help me understand how Congress could better secure the operational technology underlying our daily lives. Michael Assante made a difference. He can never be replaced, but I will continue to honor his legacy by fighting to improve our Nation's cybersecurity.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chair, I would like to begin by thanking the Rules Committee for making my amendment in order, as well as Chairman Visclosky and Ranking Member Calvert for their hard work on this division of the appropriations package. Madam Chair, I offer this bipartisan amendment with my good friends and colleagues, Mr. Lamborn and Mr. Lieu, in support of electromagnetic railgun, a technology that has been described as ``revolutionary'' and a potential multimission ``game changer.'' The electromagnetic railgun truly transforms naval power projection. This technology can rapidly launch high-velocity projectiles capable of precision strikes at a range of more than 100 miles, all without the need for combustible propellants or motors. Ships deploying with this system will have longer ranges, deeper magazines, and lower cost-per- shot than conventional naval artillery. This technology has already received initial investments; however, current and future investment is absolutely vital to ensure the railgun module being designed is built to meet the needs of the Future Surface Combatant specifications and can be tested aboard existing naval vessels. The additional $10 million provided by this amendment will help keep delivery of an integrated prototype mount system on its original timeline of being ready by 2021. Continued investment in this program will also support live-fire engagement testing using hypervelocity projectiles and the next generation of shipboard compatible pulsed power. While I believe the United States continues to lead the way, our adversaries are not resting on their laurels, as they are also investing, researching, and developing these groundbreaking technologies. Earlier this year, for instance, reports emerged of the Chinese Navy fielding an electromagnetic railgun. So it is absolutely critical that we not allow them or anyone to beat us to the punch. Given the maturity of the technology and the urgency impressed upon us by our competitors, I hope the House will send a well-funded railgun program to the Senate. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Chair, I have no further speakers, and I am prepared to close. I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Chair, first of all, I want to thank Chairman Visclosky and Ranking Member Calvert for their comments and their support and for their hard work on the consideration of this division of the appropriations package and all they have done and continue to do to advance our national security and make sure that our warfighters never enter a fair fight. This bipartisan amendment supports game-changing technology that is already demonstrating tactically relevant capability. Just last month at White Sands Missile Range, the Navy fired a railgun on a 34-degree trajectory at 6 megajoules and will be firing at 20 megajoules in September. By building upon years of development and investment, the Navy railgun will be tested as early as next year aboard surface vessels, firing explosive and nonexplosive projectiles at air- and sea-based targets. Along with my colleagues Mr. Lamborn and Mr. Lieu, I urge support of this amendment. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chair, my amendment would provide $2 million for civics education grants under the Department of Defense National Defense Education Program as authorized by the House fiscal year 2020 National Defense Authorization Act that was reported out of the Armed Services Committee last week. Madam Chair, it is not an exaggeration to say American democracy is under attack, and we need to shore up our defenses. Foreign governments, particularly Russia, are actively engaged in efforts to undermine our democracy and sow seeds of discord among the electorate, and they have been frighteningly successful. In the special counsel's report on Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential election, Director Mueller described Russia's election- meddling operations as ``sweeping and systemic.'' Russia systematically waged a misinformation campaign to weaken our confidence and participation in the democratic process, including by discouraging voting, undermining confidence in our institutions of government, promoting false political narratives, and widening social divisions. Madam Chair, we need to increase our resilience to these attacks on our democracy, and I believe civics education must be a major part of this strategy. Civics programs provide students with an understanding of American law, how government works, and the skills to participate in democracy. A citizenry armed with a civics background, I believe, is absolutely crucial to a healthy democracy; and in the context of the threats that we face today, I believe it is vital to the stability of our democracy. Unfortunately, only 17 percent of Americans say they can trust the Federal Government to do what is right at least most of the time; only 26 percent of Americans can name all three branches of government; and less than 30 percent of fourth, eighth, and twelfth grade students scored proficient on the 2014 National Assessment of Education Progress civics test. Furthermore, in 2016, only 56 percent of the United States voting-age population voted in the Presidential election, a number lower than most other developed democratic nations. It should come as no surprise that we are vulnerable to misinformation campaigns. Too many of us do not fully understand or engage in the democratic process. Madam Chair, I believe that we need to increase participation and improve civic knowledge, and education is, I believe, the way to do it. $2 million for civics education is just a start, but it will fund the development of innovative, evidence-based civics programs at the Department of Defense schools to start with. Working with colleges and universities or expert nonprofits, DOD schools will help pilot new curricula targeted to improving longitudinal metrics, including democratic participation and media literacy. This will allow us to build new programs, test their efficacy, and, from there, chart a broader path forward. Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and encourage the development of more effective civics education programs. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Chair, I have no further speakers, and I will close by just thanking Chairman Visclosky and Ranking Member Calvert for their work on the Defense Subcommittee portion of this package and for their commitment to our national defense. As I said, I am troubled by the work of our enemies and adversaries to try to undermine confidence in government, sowing divisions among the electorate. I am hoping that by strengthening our civics education, starting with our young people, we will build resiliency into protecting our democracy and everything that we love about this country. Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chair, my amendment supports the 43 million family caregivers nationwide who provide long-term services to their aging or disabled loved ones. These individuals provide the vast majority of long-term care in our country. In fact, AARP, if you had to put a dollar figure on it, has estimated that family caregivers provide some $470 billion a year in uncompensated care. Respite care services provide short-term relief for these family caregivers and is one of the most frequently requested services. Let's face it, if a caregiver can't take care of their own health or get a break and look out for their well-being, they certainly will have a very hard time providing the very best care for their loved ones in need. Access to respite care has been shown to improve caregiver health and well-being, promote family stability, and avoid or delay the need for admission to costly institutional settings, resulting in significant savings for both the healthcare system and taxpayers. The Lifespan Respite Care Program is the only Federal effort that provides respite care services regardless of age or disability. The Lifespan Respite Care Program is often the only open door for families affected by conditions with an earlier onset, like multiple sclerosis, since other Federal programs are focused on children or seniors. Madam Chair, 37 States and the District of Columbia have used Lifespan Respite Care grants to coordinate and streamline respite services as well as provide direct resources to help families pay for planned or emergency respite care. Providing an additional $4.5 million for the Lifespan Respite Care Program will allow the Administration for Community Living to award additional grants to States and allow existing grantees to reach more families. By investing in the Lifespan Respite Care Program, we support family members who perform the rewarding but demanding task of caregiving and empower individuals to live at home, where they are most comfortable, while reducing costs to the healthcare system. Madam Chair, in closing, let me thank my good friend Ms. DeLauro, the chair of the subcommittee, for her years of leadership fighting to improve the healthcare system for the underprivileged. By adopting this amendment, we will be setting the appropriation at the highest level since the program was authorized in 2006 by legislation authored by myself as well as Congressman Mike Ferguson. It was a bipartisan bill. I deeply appreciate the chairwoman's attention to this issue, among many others, and I would again like to thank her and the ranking member for their work on this bill. Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to show their support for family caregivers by voting in favor of this amendment. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Connecticut.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Chair, I yield myself the balance of the time. Madam Chair, I want to, again, stress the importance of providing respite services to our Nation's 43 million family caregivers. Respite care has been proven to save both the healthcare system and taxpayers money, and the lifespan respite care program is the only Federal effort that provides these services regardless of age or disabilities. We can make a difference for these family caregivers by giving them additional support and respite. It is the right thing to do. It will help them to preserve their own health and preserve the family unit so that they can stay strong to provide further care for their loved ones. Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Speaker, in the wake of yet another tragedy, I rise to recognize the month of June as National Gun Violence Awareness Month. On Friday, yet another 12 people lost their lives to gun violence, this time in Virginia Beach. Twelve more families were ripped apart, another community forever changed. I know firsthand the devastation a gun can cause. The accidental shooting that left me a quadriplegic was life-shattering. And yet the pain of losing a parent, a child, or a friend is forever unimaginable. I have said too many times to count that we must address the gun violence epidemic head-on. We owe it to the family members, the friends, and the neighbors who lost their lives in Virginia Beach and the thousands more who will die this year. We know the policies that work. Now we must have the courage to enact them.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1952, the Intercountry Adoption Information Act, and thank my colleague from Georgia, Representative Collins, for his partnership on this bipartisan effort. I would also like to thank Chairman Engel and Ranking Member McCaul for working together to ensure its expeditious consideration by their committee and by the full House. Whether adopting at home or abroad, every family should have the information they need to navigate the process successfully. Yet, families hoping to adopt from foreign countries can be unaware of political and legal obstacles that may prevent them from doing so. Russia's adoption ban in 2012 and the Democratic Republic of Congo's intercountry adoption ban in 2013 are just two examples of policies that left families in limbo while they were already in the process of adopting. More recently, more than 200 American families and Ethiopian children with pending adoptions were stuck in heartbreaking uncertainty--unable to unite their families--when the Ethiopian government halted all foreign adoption processing. As countries like Russia and Ethiopia change intercountry adoption processes, or ban adoptions to the United States altogether, families must have up-to-date information regarding policies that could make the adoption process difficult, or even impossible. No family members should be left in the dark, oceans away from each other, wondering if they'll ever be united. Under the Intercountry Adoption Act of 2000, the State Department is required to provide an annual, public report on intercountry adoptions. H.R. 1952 is simple. It would ensure that this report also includes information on policies that may prevent or prohibit adoptions to the United States. This information would help families navigate the adoption process successfully. I'm proud to lead this effort with Congressman Collins, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of Stronger CAPTA, which includes provisions from the Safe Home Act, which is bipartisan legislation I introduced with Representative Don Bacon. These provisions address unregulated custody transfers. This is the frightening practice of transferring a child, usually an adopted child, to a stranger outside the safeguards of the child welfare system. Known as rehoming, this phenomenon occurs when parents lack the supports to meet their children's needs and, instead, place them with individuals who haven't undergone background checks, home studies or supervision, where they are at risk of further abuse. Unregulated custody transfers are a form of child abuse and neglect, and Stronger CAPTA removes any ambiguity that might prevent child welfare agencies from being able to investigate these cases. So it will give States the tools to prevent, identify, and respond to such dangers so that they can safeguard our most vulnerable youth. Madam Speaker, I thank Congresswoman Schrier for her leadership, and I urge my colleagues to support Stronger CAPTA.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, as a proud member of the LGBTQ Equality Caucus, I rise in strong support of the Equality Act, a bill championed by my good friend and fellow Rhode Islander, Congressman David Cicilline. Mr. Speaker, every person deserves to be treated equally, no matter who they are or whom they choose to love. But the simple fact of the matter is that LGBT Americans face discrimination in this country every day, whether it is in the workplace, the foster care system or the housing market. Mr. Speaker, discrimination is never justified, and we cannot let it stand. As a person who lives with a disability, I know what discrimination feels like. I have experienced discrimination many times in my life. I don't like it when it happens to me, and I don't want it to be experienced by anyone else. It is just plain wrong. So, Mr. Speaker, let's celebrate our diversity by promoting a culture of tolerance, inclusion, and acceptance, instead of one of fear and hate. Let's treat LGBT people with the dignity and respect that they deserve. Let's honor the strength and the courage of the LGBT people throughout history, and let's pass the Equality Act to forever secure the civil rights of members of the LGBT community. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, Congressman Cicilline, for his leadership on this issue.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I hope that I won't take the whole 3 minutes. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 312, the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe Reservation Reaffirmation Act. This bill will have enormous impacts on my home State of Rhode Island. The intent of this bill is to allow for the construction of a new casino resort near the State line between Rhode Island and Massachusetts, which would rival the existing casinos in our State. The Twin River Casino Hotel and the Tiverton Casino Hotel of Rhode Island generate $300 million each year, representing the State's third largest source of funding. These dollars support vital education and infrastructure programs in Rhode Island. Rhode Island would suffer tremendously if H.R. 312 became law. Beyond the economic damage that would occur to Rhode Island, the precedent that would be set by this bill is fundamentally unfair. The bill would overturn a 2018 decision by the U.S. Department of the Interior, and it would reverse a 2016 ruling by the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. If Congress grants the Mashpee Tribe this exception, then other Native American Tribes would seek individual relief. Congress would be creating an unbalanced patchwork process for Tribes to put land into trust. Such a system would be based on lobbying, not on firm principles or deliberative rulemaking. The process to take Tribal lands into trust is complex and requires careful consideration of the interests of our indigenous peoples in conjunction with local communities. We know this complexity firsthand in Rhode Island, as the Supreme Court decision Carcieri v. Salazar directly concerned our State. But the solution is to create a uniform standard for the whole country, not a haphazard process wherein Congress chooses winners and losers, again, based on lobbying. This is why I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill. The bill creates evident harms to our State revenues in Rhode Island, but it also represents a slipshod way of addressing the very real issues of how Tribes have land taken into trust. My friends in the Massachusetts delegation insist that this issue be handled with alacrity. I respectfully disagree. The urgency they express is grounded in the dollars and cents of gaming development, money loaned on the promise of casino riches. Those loans may have been imprudently granted, but we cannot allow imprudent financial dealings to force our hand. Rather than rush a Tribe-specific loophole, I ask my colleagues to vote ``no'' on H.R. 312 and to, instead, update the Indian Reorganization Act to make this process more transparent and fair. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise during National Infrastructure Week to highlight the importance of investing in a skilled infrastructure workforce. Rebuilding our Nation's infrastructure will require more than investments in bridges, roads, and waterways. It will require a workforce that can design, build, and maintain them. The Brookings Institution estimates that 3 million more workers will be needed to support our infrastructure over the next decade. This is a great opportunity for millions of Americans who are out of work or underemployed. However, without adequate training, these workers won't be prepared to fill open jobs and carry out high-priority infrastructure projects. That is why my Career and Technical Education Caucus co-chair, Congressman G.T. Thompson, and I are urging congressional leadership to prioritize workforce development in any infrastructure investment package that comes to this House. CTE and apprenticeships are absolutely proven strategies that provide workers with the skills and training that they need for in-demand jobs, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to advance them in the coming months.

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, Americans with disabilities have always faced significant barriers to healthcare. A decade ago, an insurer could charge a family an exorbitant amount to cover a child, merely because the child had asthma. An insurer could tell an amputee that they would cover her medical equipment except for treatment related to her amputated limb. Or an insurer could flat-out deny coverage to the victim of an accidental shooting at the age of 16 simply because he had a spinal cord injury. Essentially, insurers could legally discriminate against individuals with disabilities and face no consequences. That is absolutely outrageous, Mr. Chairman. Then Congress finally passed the Affordable Care Act and started to bring those barriers down. For the first time, people with preexisting health conditions, including the one in four Americans living with a disability, no longer had to worry about whether they would be denied comprehensive health insurance. Coverage of essential health benefits meant a mother with a traumatic brain injury could obtain rehabilitative services and learn how to walk, a man with Parkinson's could access medication to control his tremors, or a child with a vision impairment could visit an eye doctor to prevent further vision loss. This access to healthcare is vital because, when Americans with disabilities are healthy, they can stay active with their families, pursue fulfilling careers, and engage in their communities. Unfortunately, the Trump administration is, once again, working to raise barriers to health coverage instead of working to eliminate them. The administration's October 2018 guidance encourages States to allow insurers to offer short-term, limited-duration plans that do not have to provide coverage of preexisting conditions or essential health benefits. This means insurers offering these junk plans can discriminate against disabled individuals by charging astronomical prices, excluding necessary treatments from coverage, or denying an individual health insurance altogether. This is outrageous. If you are having deja vu, it is because this is exactly what was happening to Americans with disabilities before the passage of the Affordable Care Act. The amendment that I am offering today makes clear exactly what people with disabilities have to lose if States act on the administration's guidance. I have spent my near two decades in Congress championing efforts to eliminate barriers to access and integration for people with disabilities and helping my fellow Americans understand their great potential. But, fundamentally, none of that matters if people with disabilities are not healthy because insurers deny them coverage to treat their conditions. The damage from the administration's guidance would be borne disproportionately by the disabled community, my community, and my amendment makes that clear. Whether someone is born with a disability, develops a disability, or becomes disabled due to an accident, that disability--I assure you-- happened by chance, not by choice. Even the healthiest 30-year-old today could be in a car accident tonight and wake up with a lifelong disability tomorrow; and, if that 30-year-old had one of these junk plans, much of the cost of that care would fall on his or her own shoulders, and they would be on their own. I had hoped that, 9 years after the passage of the Affordable Care Act, I would no longer have to come here and defend the idea that quality, affordable healthcare is a right and not a privilege. But, once again, here we are. Mr. Chairman, I support my friend Congresswoman Kuster's underlying legislation, and I ask my colleagues to support my amendment to make clear the damage the Trump administration's guidance would cause to people with disabilities. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I just want to, in reference to the gentleman from Oregon's comments, state that the plans under the Obama administration were supposed to be very short in duration, for a 3- month period, while individuals sought more comprehensive, appropriate health coverage according to their needs. It wasn't supposed to be a replacement for a good quality, affordable healthcare plan that would cover preexisting conditions and essential health benefits to identify problems early on, a potential lifelong or a very serious illness with long-term health consequences that could potentially even lead to losing one's life. They took what was supposed to be a stopgap, and now they are trying to make that a permanent plan. That is just wrong.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, as co-chair of the bipartisan Congressional Caucus on Foster Youth, I rise to recognize May as National Foster Care Month. Mr. Speaker, it is time to bring front and center the more than 400,000 youth in our foster care system across the country. These young people are courageous, and they face and overcome many challenges. Let's raise up their voices because they deserve to be heard, and they deserve a seat at the policymaking table. May is also a time to recognize the foster care professionals, advocates, and families who devote themselves to supporting foster youth every day. These individuals deserve our utmost respect and our gratitude. I am proud to cosponsor Representative Karen Bass' resolution recognizing Foster Care Month. To the foster youth and those who support them in Rhode Island and across the country, you matter, and I am here to be your advocate in Congress. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 9, the Climate Action Now Act. The simple fact of the matter is that climate change is real, and it is creating enormous consequences for the United States. It is a threat to coastlines and property values, to public health, and to our economy. But it is also affecting our military readiness, our national security, and it is changing the strategic environment in which our country and our troops operate. That is why I added language to the fiscal year 2018 National Defense Authorization Act making it clear that Congress acknowledges climate change is a threat to our national security. My amendment also requires the Department of Defense to assess the military bases most threatened by climate change, including an analysis of future costs of how to deal with and mitigate those challenges. Only through sober and rigorous analysis can we recognize the true cost of climate change to American strength and capabilities. Madam Speaker, it is absolutely imperative that we address the impacts of climate change now, and we have more work to do. This year, on the Armed Services Committee, we will continue to require the Pentagon to better assess and report on the climate threat. Madam Speaker, the Climate Action Now Act is about honoring our global commitments. As Americans, we rise to meet our challenges; we do not hide from them. We solve problems. We develop new technologies, and we innovate to create a more sustainable world. That is our Nation's proud heritage, and that is the spirit that we should bring toward engaging this climate threat. The Paris Agreement was crafted through the work of American negotiators with other countries around the world. It was signed by an overwhelming 174 countries, plus the European Union. This agreement represents a clear consensus to get serious and combat climate change. Madam Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill. The threat is real. Time is of the essence. The time to act is now.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the decision by the Corporation for National and Community Service, or CNCS, to close all State and territorial offices and replace them with eight regional offices. If this plan is implemented, just by way of example, the office in my home State of Rhode Island will close. If this happens, we will lose the local experts who understand the histories and cultures of the communities they serve, and with them, the years-long relationships that they have built up in our communities. The closures will particularly harm smaller organizations that rely on CNCS, like New Urban Arts, the Rhode Island Free Clinic, Federal Hill House, and Riverzedge Arts. That is why I have joined my colleagues in sending a letter to CEO Barbara Stewart opposing the plan, and why I am cosponsoring Representative McCollum's Keep Community Service Local Act. At a time when Americans, particularly our young people, report feeling evermore disconnected from their government, programs like national service and civics education are crucial in helping to repair the fabric of our democracy. Let's not let this decision stand. Let's see it turned around. Keep these offices open.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Speaker, this year marks the 160th anniversary of the founding of the Church of St. Michael the Archangel in Providence, Rhode Island. St. Michael's parish reflects the vibrancy and diversity of Rhode Island, and its social programs continue to make a positive impact in the community. In 1859, St. Bernard's Parish, which would become St. Michael's, was founded in Rhode Island. Within a year, it became the home of the St. Vincent de Paul Society, serving Irish immigrants who fled the Great Famine. This was the start of St. Michael's dedication to community service, a tradition that has continued for 160 years. Since its founding, St. Michael's has provided a welcoming and inclusive community for the successive waves of immigrants who have arrived in Rhode Island. Beginning with Irish, Italian, Portuguese, and other Western European immigrant populations, the St. Michael's community has expanded to include members of more than 40 nationalities or countries of origin, with mass celebrated in five different languages. The multicultural, multilingual community exemplifies Rhode Island's founding principles of inclusion, acceptance, respect, religious tolerance, and the celebration of our common humanity. St. Michael's mission of service has long brought parishioners together to meet the needs of its members and of the broader community. Through their tireless advocacy, commitment to service, and partnerships with local nonprofits and other faith-based organizations, the people of St. Michael's have helped countless individuals and made an indelible mark on the state. St. Michael's 160th anniversary is an incredible milestone for one of the spiritual and charitable pillars of Rhode Island, and I look forward to congratulating the parish on many more anniversaries to come.