Doug LaMalfa

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, I am going to report on the situation of California's water supply, which really is the Nation's water supply, as so much of our food source comes from California. Mr. Speaker, 90 to 95 percent of our specialty crops--tomatoes, pistachios, almonds, walnuts--come from California if we are allowed to grow them. Water supply is a core part of that. We have a situation in northern California where each year it is a challenge to refill our lakes. Lake Oroville holds 3.5 million acre- feet; Lake Shasta, 4.5; Trinity Lake, 2.5 million--which is a total of about 10.5 million acre-feet. That is a lot of water. We have the potential to build Sites Reservoir, another 1.5 million acre-feet. We could raise Shasta Dam and gain another 600,000 acre-feet for a total of 12.5 million acre-feet. Yet, we aren't allowed to store that water. There is so much water now being devoted for other purposes that aren't for people, that are not for hydroelectric power. Indeed, they are tearing out hydroelectric dams in my district right now at a time when we want to go green with more CO2-free power and electrify everything. We have to do much better with corralling and saving our water supply for people's needs in California so it benefits the whole country.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, there is a proposal by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, often coupled with EPA as well on this topic, regarding corporate average fuel economy. This is a standard that was developed many years ago in order to increase the fuel efficiency of automobiles and trucks sold in America. They have been cranking up that standard over the years, including a giant leap during the Obama era, where the manufacturers basically came into hearings and acquiesced to these really far-reaching standards they would have. This basically means the fleet of vehicles that the manufacturers would sell has to meet a certain level of average miles per gallon for cars and for light trucks. Years ago, when it was first established, these were within reach, with work, with new technology, with the efforts modern manufacturers were making. During the Obama era they wanted to raise it from the ultimate goal of, I believe, 27 miles per gallon by X year to 55 miles per gallon by, I believe, 2025 at the time. Think about that a minute, 55 miles per gallon. This is before any of this electric car mess we are talking about right now being forced upon consumers. How many cars do you know of today that get 55 miles per gallon that are not electric assist or electric in total, which gets, I guess, infinite miles per gallon in that sense? Now, the electricity still comes from somewhere, whether it is a coal plant, a natural gas plant, or a windmill that runs only when the wind blows or a solar plant that is taking up many hundreds of acres of land that only works when it is daylight or not cloudy or rainy or snow covering the solar panels, but I digress a bit. Basically, during the Obama era they wanted to double it to 54. There are not a lot of cars that most people want to drive day in and day out that get 54, 55 miles per gallon. Indeed, right now, the fleet, when you average trucks and cars, at this moment is about 26.4 miles per gallon across the board. This is after some years of fuel efficiency since this first came out. Consumers have voted for what they want. They vote with their wallets, and that is where the average is right now. Some folks want a high-mileage car for their commute or that is what they use every day, or what have you. Some folks want electric cars. They think they are being part of an ecological solution. However, a lot of Americans have shown already that they don't want to have electric cars forced upon them, the EVs. Indeed, we are seeing the manufacturers, after all this enthusiasm, the CEOs coming out and saying, Oh, it is the wave, it is the future; they are finding that after an initial jolt of people buying these vehicles, that market has more or less become saturated for this moment. It has taken a lot of incentives, a lot of government money thrown around to help manufacturers put these out, and then giant incentives to buyers to buy these electric cars. Now we have the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration trying yet again to push even harder on these fuel standards to be what might take 58 miles per gallon to reach the goals that they set out. They say ``our'' goals. Whose goals are these? This is government, this is not people's goals. You are going to be even availed less choice of vehicle to drive and use, and it has shown by sales. People are less inclined to want to buy an electric vehicle unless they are forced to. They like internal combustion engines. What has not really been given a whole lot of credit is that in the last 30, 40, 50 years there has been an incremental gain. When electronic fuel injection really started hitting in the 1990s on more and more, and pretty much all vehicles, the efficiency jumped up as far as MPG; it improved. Emissions dramatically improved, as well. However, nobody really gives credit for that. It is like, oh, no, that doesn't count because we have the California Air Resources Board in California just dreaming up a new regulation every month because that is what they do. They just grind them out. Other States follow along blindly and say, oh, let's be like California, the so-called progressive States. We find out that we are going to have fewer choices. We find out that we are going to have an issue where people can't buy what they need. If a person needs an F-150, F-250 truck to do their job, it is not going to be solved by buying four Priuses, okay? Other people just like what they like. I personally am a car enthusiast. I like a Mustang with a V-8. It feels good, and it is fun to drive. I don't want that taken away from me or even the people who drive Camaros. They may not have as good a taste. I am kidding. It is a deal where the car enthusiasts have this thing they like to do together, whether it is a rivalry, but it all works together, car shows, the whole thing. That is an important part of Americana, including politicians who like to ride in these cars in parades. Who doesn't like a 1972 Cadillac convertible to use in a parade? No, I am going to go back to using my Prius or acting like I am later on. This corporate average fuel economy is going to take away choices that people want, that people can afford. This forced mandate of electric vehicles by NHTSA is basically what they are doing here. They are not even supposed to be using electric vehicles in calculating the corporate average fuel economy standard, yet they are sneaking that in there in this proposal. They take away consumer choice via this.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, yet another California law forbidding residents of the State from carrying guns in most public areas has, thankfully, been blocked from taking effect, at least for now. This is good news for California, for other States that tend to copy our bad ideas, and for the constitutional right to bear arms. This is not, however, Governor Newsom's first unconstitutional attack on our Second Amendment, and it is certainly not going to be his last. The law, SB 2, would increase California's requirements for trying to lawfully obtain a concealed carry permit and also ban carrying concealed weapons in most public areas. Many county sheriff's offices throughout the State, including in northern California, opposed the law. Sutter and Yuba Counties made the decision to ``exercise [their] common sense and discretion to ensure the law is not enforced in a way that would violate the rights of our citizens.'' Good on them. As the Member of Congress representing Yuba and Sutter Counties, I applaud their decision to stand up against the State's unconstitutional attack on the Second Amendment. Law-abiding concealed carry permit holders are not the problem. It is the criminals that are the problem. Start going after the bad guys and leave the good guys alone. Mr. Speaker, other States that are watching this should not act like we do in California.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, I guess the question here is: Yes, is it going to be buy American or not? Now, these components we are talking about are, indeed, being force- fed upon the public with the whole big push for electrifying vehicles. As we are seeing, the market has softened dramatically since the additional influx of electric vehicles has been pushed forward. We are seeing them sitting on dealers' lots, so chargers probably still need to be made to catch up, to a certain point. We don't need to be in such a giant hurry that we have to instead send all this business to the manufacturing leaders in China. Let's let Americans catch up to this. Indeed, since we are going to spend the money that is in the trough anyway from the measure I did not vote for--that many of us did not vote for--at least spend it on American jobs and keep the spirit of producing electric vehicle chargers in the United States. We can catch up and we will catch up, especially if these artificial mandates to force electric cars are relaxed somewhat. Now, we see the Biden administration setting the goal of half a million chargers by the year 2030--and they say that their goal has been met so far--but a recent article says that they have only built one charger under this program in the last 2 years. There is a long way to go to get to half a million. Instead of realizing that the goals are unworkable and let the rules be what they have been on keeping Buy America, Make It In America as the priority, they are force-feeding something in such a hurry that hasn't been thought out for a market that is dramatically softening after the initial wave of electric vehicles. Instead, let Americans work and not favor the Chinese Communist Party and their workers.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the time to be able to weigh in on these issues in a little more relaxed manner here and spend some time. I want to talk a little bit about legislation we are working on here known as S.J. Res. 38. In this case, it would ensure our taxpayer dollars are used to buy American-made products, something that has had bipartisan support, nonpartisan support, in the past around here. Certainly, when we are talking about having something domestically produced or buying it from a foreign competitor or ally, one thing we shouldn't be doing is buying more and more things from China. What is the sense of exporting so many of our dollars over to somebody who is such an adversary in so many things on the world front, with the funding of countries that are helping to sponsor terrorism and the unrest they are helping fund in the Middle East? There are constant threats to Taiwan and the other islands in the South China Sea that are possessions of Japan and others, constant aggression on that. They sink many other smaller countries into huge debt by dangling out loans they know they can't repay, and pretty soon, they can take over the resources of that country. As the United States of America, we can produce anything we want here. We can produce it well, usually of the best quality, using the best practices, by far, yet what are we doing? We are hamstringing our own ability to strengthen our own economy with the energy we need to produce in order to do that, with environmental policies that 50 years ago were well intentioned but have been completely weaponized against industries and farming, mining, and timber. The West burns each year massively. In California and Utah, it is endless. A lot of this currently comes from Biden administration policies, and I jump back 3 years to 8 years to the Obama-era policies that have put us in this spot. Currently, President Biden wants to shoot down the waiver to eliminate the buy in America requirements for, in this case, electric vehicle chargers. That is what this bill, S.J. Res. 38, is about, which would be purchased under the Infrastructure and Jobs Act, another boondoggle itself. If the money is going to be forced to be spent, and we have to buy these electric chargers for electric cars, at least can we have them be American produced, American made. Don't get me mixed up with the electric car crowd. I don't think we should be forcing that on anybody. At the same time, they are tearing down the California power grid with the dams they are removing on the Klamath River up in the north part of my district and one across the border, and then threatening the Snake River farther up and one down in Mendocino County. It is just one thing after another, getting rid of hydroelectric power and also the ability to store water and for the water to be retained during flood control season and for some recreation--yes, even water available to let out for fish when they need to. When they tear these dams out, we lose that green, renewable, clean, CO2- free power by these policies. An addendum to that, CO2 is not a problem. It is only 0.04 percent of our atmosphere. The left wants to keep playing these games like we are talking about here. They want to export jobs to China to build these electric car chargers. They want to tear down the dams that produce CO2-free, green, renewable power and try and build even more batteries and more windmills that chop up the birds and only run when there is a little bit of wind and the solar plants that only run during the daytime when it is not a cloudy or rainy or snow-covered day. It is amazing how dumb these ideas are. In 2021, the Democrats included $7.5 billion of taxpayer money for electric vehicle charging stations in their pie-in-the-sky idea that we are going to electrify everything in the next few years. This is the Infrastructure and Jobs Act. I don't support the forced purchase and proliferation of electric vehicles, but doggone it, if we are going to do this, we need to buy American. Why do we have to steamroll our own laws? Why is the administration backstabbing our American manufacturers and sending billions over to China and other Asian markets? In the process, it also destroys our immigration laws and fosters more chaos at the border when we have this continued policy by the Biden administration of basically ignoring the border. As mentioned earlier, 64 of my colleagues went to the border. I have paid a couple of visits myself in Arizona and California and such. It is indeed chaos. They are just walking right past you when you go visit the border. Some of these are nice folks from Central America, families and such. We keep putting out the magnet, the green light to come across. We have talked many times about the numbers coming across the border, like 10,000 per day just in the month of December, 300,000 for a month. The burden is being borne even by our Democrat-run cities, even they are starting to cry uncle. We have the Governor of New Jersey saying we need to check with these bus companies and see where they are all coming from. No, you need to check over here at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. That is where the policy is coming from. It isn't bus companies from Texas or Florida or something. That is who you need to be talking to because that is where the problem is. Indeed, the administration is shifting from pushing our jobs overseas to then having our jobs here filled by people who are coming here illegally. It is the chaos they have had at the border coupled with these other policies and fentanyl coming across the border. Who knows what kind of terror cells are being built by people coming across the border illegally and the gunrunning and everything else that can happen? It has even resulted in the housing of illegal immigrants in our National Park System, including a national park right there in New York City, so people can't use it. Now, you have seen the stories more and more recently that they are going to be housing them in schools. Kids are getting kicked out of schools in New York right now because they have a supposedly temporary problem where they have to house them in the gym. The kids can go online, back to Zoom learning, like during the height of COVID, which was manipulated in my own home State of California, which took an extra year to allow kids back into school. What a mess. Why are these people entrusted with power? When you talk to the American public, this is all preventable. We don't have to live like this, when we are talking energy, when we are talking domestic production. No, we would rather export it, I guess, and have kids in Africa mine the products in order to have your electric car and electric gadgetry. The National Park Police have testified that these encampments on our National Park lands endanger the people that would normally enjoy and use them. Also, in the wintertime, these areas can end up being a floodplain, like the one in New York City, endangering the illegal immigrants that are being attracted--until recently, when it seems maybe the light is starting to turn around for the Governor of New York and the mayor of New York City and such. I don't know. I don't know. Mr. Speaker, we have a porous border. We have a massive problem with the encounters that we have at the border here that are overwhelming our demoralized Border Patrol folks. How are they supposed to do their job? On my visit down to Arizona, they actually had, and still have today, government-provided vans go over and just pick people up at the gaps in the border and get them to the processing center sooner. We know that 85 percent of them are not going to be heard at their asylum trial any time soon. One thing after another is wrecking our economy, wrecking people's confidence in government, and the ability just to conduct their own lives. There is no reason we need to have such costly ways of doing business with energy, with procuring food; everything else that is happening under this Biden administration. Mr. Speaker, just 3 years ago, things were looking pretty good on the cost of fuel, cost of groceries, and employment until they used COVID as a weapon to attack our economy at that time and tried to make it look bad in order to win the 2020 election. We have a lot of complex issues, but the solutions really aren't that tough when you get down to it: enforce the border laws that we have. We don't need comprehensive immigration reform. We already know what we are supposed to do about the border. We just need to enforce the laws that we have and have common sense applied to asylum. At the same time, let's not exploit American jobs that we could be doing if we have to produce these electric vehicle charging stations. At least let Americans produce them instead of sending them to China.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Madam Speaker, for the new year, I have done a survey with my constituents and asked what the issues are that they want to be focused on in 2024. The top answer they submitted in my northern California district was the border crisis, a Biden and Democratic Party-created crisis. Republicans and Democrats agree there is a crisis at our border, and it is President Joe Biden's fault. During his first 100 days in office, he took 94 executive actions on immigration, including halting the construction of the border fence. Under his administration, there have been 8 million illegal border crossings nationwide and over 6.7 million encounters at our southern border. The Biden administration's continuous open border policies are to blame for this historic crisis. We need action now. We need it yesterday. We must pass, over in the Senate, H.R. 2, the strongest border security bill in congressional history, immediately. We must complete the wall, change the asylum rules to not be such a joke and prevent millions of illegals from being attracted here by a magnet, streamline deportations, and end parole in the United States. We cannot continue to allow this to stand any longer. It is killing our country and our economy.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, the Biden administration's proposal to federally limit milk options to the unpopular fat-free and low-fat types and prohibit students from drinking flavored milk only starts our children off on the wrong foot. Whole milk contains 3.25 percent fat, making it 96.75 percent fat- free as compared to the common 2 percent or 1 percent or skim that we see. This is not an incredibly great amount of fat for what the perception would be out there. Whole milk is nutritious and simple. Whole milk doesn't contain any more sugar or carbs than skim or low-fat milk, but it does contain essential nutrients that children need to grow. Mr. Speaker, 8 ounces of whole milk provides 8 grams of protein. That is 16 percent of the daily recommended value. This high-quality protein builds and repairs muscle, keeps us fuller longer, provides energy and focus, and helps maintain bone health and a healthy weight while supporting a healthy immune system. An 8-ounce serving of milk, flavored or not, gives children the same amount of calcium as 10 cups of spinach, the same amount of potassium as in one small banana, the same amount of vitamin A as in three- quarters of a cup of broccoli, and the same amount of vitamin D as in three-quarters of an ounce of cooked salmon. Parents of picky eaters know how hard it is to convince their kids to eat that every day. Whole milk is a good thing.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, Mr. Calvert, for leading this appropriate time here today. Mr. Speaker, it is with a heavy heart that I come forward to be part of this. It is also with optimism because I have known Kevin for 21 years, and he was always and is always the optimistic one in the room. He always sees what we can do. He always sees the vision for each of us as elected Representatives and, more importantly, the country. He always thinks of the country. He always thinks how we are going to better the institution, whether it was in the California State Assembly as we were cutting our teeth in politics there or here on this national and international stage. Mr. Speaker, I am somber right now because what has happened really is a waste, as my good friend and colleague, Mr. McClintock, mentioned. There were only 269 days of what could have been a really great thing. Kevin will be part of everything we do in a different form and in a different venue because he still loves and cares about this country. He still is a great friend to his colleagues, even though he exits this area for a time. I am grateful to him for his friendship. Anything I have ever asked, he has always helped in his leadership role for me as a Member in either one of the bodies, the State Assembly or here. He is always optimistic and has a smile. He has a lot of funny stories to go with it that I can't tell here. He has always reached out to our families, making sure they are included. He always thinks of everybody. He is an amazing talent and will go far in leading his next enterprise, which is going to be based on our values and making our country stronger yet again. We will get there. I am proud to call him a friend. I hope I can always have his friendship, his guidance, and his playing a major role as we go forward in saving and strengthening our great country. Kevin McCarthy, I thank you for everything you have ever done for me, and for all of us, as a friend. I am blessed to know you. To Judy, Connor, and Meghan, the sacrifice has been big, but we are always very grateful. My family understands that, as well. God bless you.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, I know my colleague has been covering a lot of very important subjects here. I know he is frequently in the area of immigration and the invasion of our border, so I appreciate Mr. Grothman's strong efforts on highlighting that so the American people understand. It really boils down to when we are looking at the border invasion that we have quite a battle. I do not understand why the Biden White House is simply sitting by watching it happen, even having personnel propping the gates open to allow this to happen. We do not understand fully who is coming in. It is not just people from Mexico or even Central America. There is a lot of very dangerous people coming across the border. They apprehend many people on the known terrorist or mayhem list, at the very least, and I wonder whose side are they on. Whose side is the administration on when they allow this to happen? Whether it is the drugs coming across, the fentanyl, the people who are setting up and going to be the potential terrorist cells that are going to hit this country at some point, and we see all these protests going on over Palestine. Mr. Speaker, they are just waiting for the green light on this. It is completely irresponsible and antithetical to the constitutional vows we take what is going on with the Biden administration and their nonenforcement of the border. Much work needs to be done.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, it can't be overestimated the value and the need for water in our lives, in what we consume foodwise and what it provides in flood control, what it provides in hydroelectric power, just water at the tap, and even environmental water. As a Representative from California, we certainly go through a lot of gyrations and a lot of fights over water. Mark Twain is quoted as saying: ``Whisky is for drinking, and water is for fighting over.'' There is plenty of that in California. What is going on? Back in the 1930s and the 1960s, two major projects were built to turn California into the blooming land that it is of so much bounty, so much great agriculture, so much opportunity, with the Federal water project started in the 1930s and the State water project conceived in the 1950s and much of it built in the 1960s. In my own district, we have two very large dams--Shasta Dam at 4\1/2\ million acre-feet and Lake Oroville at 3\1/2\ million acre-feet. Those have made so much possibility for people in California, but not just California. It has helped the whole country. I will tell you why. Because agriculture is a key element of the sustainability for this country. It is strategic for being able to feed itself, defend itself. You can't overestimate how important that is as well. What we currently have happening in California and in the Western States is the extreme environmental left is moving to remove more and more dams as we speak. Right now in the Klamath River, up in the north end of my district, there are four dams in the target sites for that. They make hydroelectric power. Now, as a sidebar here, what do we hear constantly in this Chamber? Almost every conversation is filtered through climate change. When you have sources of power that are zero CO2, such as hydroelectric power, as well as nuclear power, and very clean efficient power such as natural gas, which is being phased out or pushed out by the Biden administration as we can't explore or build pipelines for it, where are we going to get the power if you tear these dams out? Why would you take all of these inputs for producing electricity in this country, while at the same time, you are forcing more and more things to be powered by electricity, vehicles, big trucks? I see on the internet there is a major cargo carrier saying we need to electrify our aircrafts. How heavy will an airplane be when you load it up with batteries? Will it have any cargo capacity remaining? A big semi-rig for the highways is 80,000 pounds GVW. By the time they electrify it and add two 8,000-pound batteries to that, that is 16,000 more pounds of cargo you will have to take off. That means five trucks will have to now do the job of four trucks. This is where we are going. Hydroelectric power is extremely important to fuel whatever levels of electricity we are going to be using. They want to ban gas stoves. They want to ban gas heaters. If we are going to have more and more of a reliability on the electric grid, which I hope we don't go through with these crazy policies, we are going to continue to need this power. Why are we tearing dams out? They want to tear them out in the State of Washington. We just visited the Colorado River, the Western Caucus, over the weekend. The Hoover Dam, what a mighty structure that is, with eight great big power plant turbines in there. Above that, Lake Powell; they are talking about maybe we don't really need Lake Powell anymore because we are in the middle of a drought situation. We are in a tough drought, but what if we didn't have those to begin with? We wouldn't have stored that water that has helped us sustain through many years of drought, actually. Back in my own district with a full Lake Shasta and a full Lake Oroville, under the regional conditions, that would get you through 5 years' worth of drought. Still storing water for agriculture, for people at the tap, for hydroelectric power, and even recreation. What is the agenda? They want to force more and more electric vehicles and electric everything, but at the same time, they want to rip out the means to make the power. It doesn't make a lick of sense. I just see where Ford Motor Company lost about $4\1/2\ billion last year electrifying. They had the original influx of people buying those electric vehicles, but now that has fallen off because once the incentives go away or once you can get a sticker to drive it in the fast lanes in certain areas in California, the rest of the market probably isn't too interested in that. Their F-150 Lightning, they are pulling back production by at least half, maybe more, because people aren't buying these vehicles like they supposedly are projecting. Stored water is an incredibly good thing. Why it matters to the rest of the country as well is California has grown so many amazing crops over the years with the innovation and ability to farm the lands that we have had in the San Joaquin Valley. We would not have the food that the whole country eats since 90 percent to 99 percent of these crops are grown in California.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, there is a saying in the trucking business: If you got it, a truck brought it. We need to work to make the ability to deliver the products, the raw materials, all the interactions of commerce that trucks bring easier and more streamlined. The regulatory load that the Biden administration as well as my home State wants makes it harder to buy trucks. They have had an unnecessary Federal excise tax since World War I on trucks to help pay for the war that costs $20,000 to $30,000 for every new vehicle, yet we want them to replace trucks, so they are cleaner, more efficient, and safer. They want burdensome regulations on driver duty time, putting speed limiters on them so that trucks can't stay with traffic. All these burdens make it much more difficult to deliver what you want. We need to reel in the Biden administration and have them actually listen to the people out there on the roads, the truckers and the people that rely on them to deliver raw materials and finished products. More regulations are not going to help that. Taking away the internal combustion engine is not going to help that. Electrifying every truck is not going to help that. Let them truck.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, several hundred private aircraft have left Dubai after a couple of weeks of wining and dining in the hot climate there in order to tell us how we should live our lives. They want to tell us how we should cut back or eliminate meat in our diets and how we should change our agriculture in this country to just be less of it. I guess they want to put us all on a forced diet, according to their view of the world. What does that really mean for us here? Less agriculture and fewer products grown in this country and in the European countries that want to play along with the Paris accords and such. One interesting little fact that gets in the way of all that is that the U.S. and Europe have already reduced their CO2 emissions down 10 to 15 percent in the last 2 years. This is without the Paris accord even having come fully into effect yet. It is other countries, like Asia, where numbers are dramatically increasing on CO2. That assumes that CO2 is actually a problem. CO2, carbon dioxide, is only represented by 0.04 percent of our atmosphere. That is 4/100ths of 1 percent is what CO2 makes up. I talk to people on the street or at gatherings and events where I am speaking. How much of the air do you think is actually CO2? They have been hyped so much since grade school. They have kids scared to death. They say that CO2 is somewhere between 20 and 50 percent. No. It is 0.04 percent. It is not a poisonous gas. I have had the argument of, well, it is like having fentanyl in your cereal or something like that. No, it is a necessary gas for plant life. We are all breathing it in right now. We are exhaling it right now. There are plants somewhere gladly absorbing it. If we go below 0.02 percent, plant life starts dying off. We would be in a pretty bad way. Yet, the hype over CO2 continues as they have the COP28 in Dubai. They sit there hatching plans to control our lives, especially in the Western countries. The plans for China and places like that continue to ramp up with more coal power plants and much more use of oil and gas. Oil and gas have been villainized by California, the EPA, and so many, including an idea over there that the Arab countries have produced so much petroleum, so they were supposed to have that conversation at COP28. They kind of put that off as getting rid of oil and gas. If we were even to contemplate that, you couldn't do it for at least four or five decades because we are so engrained with using that product to do anything--planting crops or transporting anything. If you got it, a truck brought it. It is probably a diesel-powered truck. You see so many failed efforts to electrify vehicles, cars, trucks, et cetera. There are a few out there getting around, yes, but not on a dependable basis to keep our supply chain going. What we keep learning is that you have elites over at conferences like this saying that we need to cut back on meat, cut out agriculture. They want us to cut 30 percent of our agriculture. There is already a food shortage in much of the world, and even in some of our urban areas in this country, what we call food deserts. What is their reality with that? There is no reality to this. This is a way to control our lives, our choices, as they want to phase out meat and agricultural products grown in this country. Do you want to depend on it coming from somewhere else? That works really great. Wait until they have a food embargo like the fuel embargoes we had in the 1970s. The rest of the world does not look out for the needs of the United States like we do ourselves. It is about time we put aside this nonsense of getting to some kind of zero output of carbon by 2035 or 2050 or whatever round number they dream up as a goal. Like my home State of California, they do it all the time. At the same time that they are saying less carbon, they are also taking away the means to produce carbon-free electricity, such as tearing out the dams on the Klamath River and other dams up in Oregon and Washington that make clean hydroelectric power, low-cost power. Why do we need to have our electricity cost so much because of some people's wild dream, and controlling dream, on eliminating CO2, which is really not a problem? It is not a poisonous gas. It is not negative. Carbon is a building block of all of what we have and what we do. That isn't talked about a lot. Instead, we hear this side of the room half the time--it is all about carbon. Every conversation, every committee has to filter something through climate change. Climate change is a constant in our lives and on our planet. That reality doesn't get talked about, it is just hype, hype, hype. Czar Kerry comes back with more and more ideas on how to control us and take away the basic sustenance that makes this country strong with its energy and self-provision of food that keep us strong.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, it should be obvious and common sense, but border security is national security. President Biden's open border policies have incentivized this historic surge in illegal immigration at our southern and northern borders. Since taking office, over 6.4 million illegal crossings have happened at our southern border; 1.7 million known got-aways have evaded U.S. Border Patrol and are now in our country. Every State is now a border State. Every town is now a border town. They are living in New York. Democrats are proposing that our national parks be used not for people to enjoy but to house illegal immigrants, which will only further encourage this crisis. Republicans and Democrats alike have condemned Biden's border crisis, but we must stop incentivizing further waves of illegal immigrants by providing them with free housing. House Republicans will continue to fight to secure our border and eliminate the financial burden illegal immigrants are putting on American taxpayers and our institutions, our towns, our States. That is why we passed H.R. 2 to secure the border, which is the strongest border security package in American history.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, the United States' debt has grown by $2.5 trillion over the last year. Over the last 20 months, thanks to Biden- led policies, $4.8 trillion. This is a massive driver of inflation and lack of credit on the market out there for regular people. On top of the omnibus bill done a year ago and many other big spending ideas that were gotten through in the previous Congress, now the President wants to add $6 billion more for high-speed rail in California, $3 billion for the project, that is already 15 years late and four times its budget price, and $3 billion more now for what was going to be a private concern from LA to Las Vegas, the gambler special. We need highways to be rebuilt. We need less debt causing people to not be able to make ends meet. Why are we putting it on these boondoggles in southern California? It is crazy. Put it toward highways that people can use or something else.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Colorado with almost the same name as me. I appreciate him leading this important time for us here tonight, especially as we encroach upon Christmas, which a lot of times can be made into something else besides the celebration of our Savior. The Bible serves as a compass, guiding us through life's journey, illuminating the path of its teachings, parables, and wisdom. It is indeed more than a collection of words. It is a living testament to the grace, power, and unwavering love of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Its narratives reveal the depth of God's faithfulness, His miraculous interventions, and His promise of salvation--if we would just ask for it. The Bible has played, of course, an integral role in shaping the values, principles, and visions of the early pioneers who sought freedom in this country, who did not want to be dictated by a monarch as to what religion they would follow. We have that freedom in this country. We don't have a state-sponsored religion. We don't have a preferred one, even though many based the founding of this country on Christian and Biblical values, the Judeo- Christian ideal. They don't force it on anyone in this country. We hear a lot of fuss about the separation of church and state. That is really a misnomer. It is not in the Constitution, and it is not what everybody is about. No one has to prescribe to any particular type, but we encourage it because there is salvation in it. As we celebrate the week of the Bible here, it is the inerrant Word of God, inspired. The teachings in it are positive values for anybody. They stand the test of time. They stand above the whims of Congress, of people, or of governing. If we embrace that, it is indeed better for all of us and for all of our families. The Pilgrims sought that religious freedom 300-plus years ago, and many have been seeking it since. As we see more and more persecution of people's religious beliefs, we have to put a stop to that and, indeed, honor what is so formative in this country and its basic freedoms. As we honor National Bible Week, we do recognize the impact extends far beyond individual faith practices. It is indeed part of our Nation's story. It serves as an anchor, offering solace, hope, and guidance in the world--indeed, inspired by God, given to mankind. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate this time and opportunity to put the spotlight on this because it is a very selfless thing. We hope you will take time to read it. It will inspire.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, today, as you know, marks the 82nd anniversary of the dirty attack on Pearl Harbor, where the U.S. was thrown into war by the Imperial Japanese military. Indeed, we should never ever forget, and we should always have vigilance and readiness. At the time right now when our world is in great peril, I worry about the readiness we have in order to do what we need to do to protect ourselves and those allies we care about. Some of my best memories are with some of the people I knew who were involved in Pearl Harbor, such as my dear friend, Mel Fisher, and his wife, Cathy, on the 69th, when I was able to attend Pearl Harbor ceremonies with them on the USS Arizona. That was a great moment for me to be involved. I also think of a great patriot, over 100 years old and still living in Grass Valley, California, my good friend, Lou Conter, the last surviving member of the USS Arizona. I think of people like that, and I think of these brave folks who stand in the gap for us and for our country on this day. We should honor them as we honor them every day, by being good citizens for freedom in this country.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, what it really boils down to is choice for Americans, affordable choices. Just because we want to be part of this green agenda here, constantly crying about climate change doesn't mean it is going to be good for Americans. These mandates, for example, on trucks will add 16,000 pounds of weight that is no longer part of the cargo capacity for trucks. On automobiles, it is adding about $13,000 to the price of a car. Little credit has been given for how efficient and clean internal combustion engines run these days. This is all a big CO2 scam. I remind you; CO2 is only 0.04 percent of our atmosphere. Let's go back in the direction of allowing people to have choices of the best manufactured cars that come from right here in America instead of giving it over to China, which is what will happen on the mined products, the labor, so many other things. Americans can figure out what they like. They certainly don't need California mandates that have already failed in the past and the Federal Government dictating to them what their choices are in driving. H.R. 4468 is a good, righteous bill. Let's support that and help people continue to have the choices they want in this country and not be mandated by Congress or certainly California.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, importantly, where we get our data from is extremely useful and key to making wise decisions around here. Since about half the focus of the speeches at this place and at every committee and at every agency of the Federal Government seems to be on what they call climate change, it is good to know where we are getting our data. It tends to follow what percent of the atmosphere is CO2 and what the temperatures are. Well, here is an interesting little piece from the EPA on their data and on the climate stations they have. They have all sorts of weather monitoring devices across the country, a little over 1,060, I believe it is. In some cases, the way they are set and where they are placed is a whole conversation unto itself. The old rules require that they be placed in areas that are not skewing the temperature one way or another, but sometimes, you will find them on rooftops next to air-conditioning units, parking lots, areas that are going to be more prone toward heat sinks and to keeping temperatures higher. Nonetheless, a recent set of data that EPA themselves has allowed to get out is that, since 1948, only 19 percent of those weather stations have shown a mild increase in temperature. That means 81 percent did not show an increase in temperature as per their own data. Over 800 of those stations, I think 863, reported either a decrease or no change in the number of hot days. Interesting, isn't it? You would think that we are melting down. We hear all this talking--even the committee I was just in--oh, sea level rise. Well, you look at pictures, and the sea level hasn't risen; certainly not to the extent that we are being threatened in the way they are not asking us but forcing us to change our lives. It is one thing if you want to buy an electric vehicle because that might work for you in your commute. Hey, great. When you see my own State of California forcing these mandates by 2035, or whatever round year number they make up, as to when we have to get to what they call net zero on CO2, it is really going to negatively affect a lot of people's lives, not just automobiles, which might be easier, but trucks that haul things. For example, a typical truck, the total vehicle weight is 80,000 pounds, which the tare weight, or the empty weight of the empty truck, is 25,000 pounds. You have got about 55,000 pounds worth of capacity. If you convert that truck to an electric vehicle, it will take 16,000 pounds of additional weight of batteries to make it have any kind of range. The payload has just decreased by about 16,000 pounds or so on a truck. Let's get back to the core numbers. What we are seeing is their own climate stations, their own weather stations, 81 percent of them, have shown as level or a decrease in temperature since 1948. Only a handful have seen an increase. Even then we have got to see how skewed those are with where they are placed, in parking lots or areas that are heat sinks. Let's look at the CO2 numbers since that is supposed to be the killer that so many folks are whining about around here. Carbon dioxide is only 0.04 percent of our atmosphere. Four one-hundredths of 1 percent are what they are making us change our lives for. It is also putting America at a huge disadvantage economically, by exporting our jobs, exporting our extraction of natural resources to places like China or other areas around the world that have the ability to do the mining that is needed to produce copper or, heaven forbid, all the lithium and the cobalt and other things it is going to take to battery and electrify everything. Instead, let's not have mandates to take away our cars, our trucks, and our trains. I even see silly pieces on the internet about one of the major cargo carriers saying we need to look forward to electrifying aircraft. The aircraft won't have any weight capacity to haul anything if you load it down with batteries. Battery technology needs to make leaps and bounds. We don't have it yet. Yes, we should keep researching that, but, by golly, why do we have to hamstring ourselves right now? The internal combustion engines we have now burn cleaner and better than ever. If we are allowed to continue to refine them, they will be even better, just through attrition, over time. By replacing trucks and replacing vehicles with the newer, cleaner-burning ones, we are making giant strides. We have already made giant strides from the bad old days in the 1960s in the LA Basin and stuff with cleaner-burning vehicles. Let's make progress on things that are within our range. Yes, we can look into hydrogen and see if that can power vehicles, but this battery-powered everything is really a farce at the end of it. It has to be heavily subsidized to get people to buy the cars. We are seeing the range. We are seeing the stories in the wintertime, et cetera. Let's take a smarter look at what the heck we are doing instead of just forcing it.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Madam Speaker, if you want to look in the dictionary under the word ``boondoggle,'' you would probably find the California High-Speed Rail project. It was passed in 2008 by a narrow majority with $9 billion worth of State funding by the taxpayers for this project to connect L.A. to San Francisco. Fifteen years later, they still haven't laid any track. They have interrupted the flow of towns up and down the Central Valley and have put some causeways in so far, but many billions have been spent, and it is woefully over time. It was supposed to be completed by 2020. They are going to seek more and more Federal funding. It started out to be a $33 billion project, and now it is a $128 billion project. At most, they would identify $20 billion worth of funding. They are going to come here looking for the rest of it. Instead, why don't we invest in something that can help all Americans, such as food supply and building water storage in California. That would help all Americans, not a boondoggle running up and down the valley stopping at an almond orchard near Bakersfield. That is why I am seeking to get help for Sites Reservoir, raising Shasta Dam, and other water projects that will grow the food that Americans use from California.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, it is a little over 1 month now, 1\1/2\ months, since October 7 and the horrific things that happened to the good and peaceful people of Israel. Many, many deaths and unspeakable demonic actions were taken by Hamas against innocent Israeli citizens attending a festival or other events in their neighborhoods. I can't begin to speak about how ugly some of these things are. The rape, the murder, and the beheadings are beyond polite company. Maybe we need to be a little less polite in talking about just what kind of horrific activity Hamas has been up to. Even the Gazan people are subject to the terrorism of not being able to make a move or make a change in that area they are trying to live in. Nonetheless, Israelis have bent over backwards for decades in so- called land-for-peace deals and so-called two-state solutions. Yet when Israel gives 99 percent of what they asked for to the Palestinian Authority, previously to Arafat, and to Hamas, they aren't really there at the table to negotiate. They are not there to acknowledge the State of Israel as a Jewish state or its right to exist. They want it eliminated. When they talk about ``from the river to the sea,'' there is no room for compromise with them for acknowledging a Jewish state and a Jewish people in the State of Israel. So why are we pussyfooting around saying, cease-fire, more land for peace, more two-state solution? They do not want the existence of Israel. That is the first question we should ask any of them when we sit down: Okay, do you want this solution? Do you want that solution? Do you agree that there should be the existence of the State of Israel as a Jewish state? They will turn away from the table because there is not a negotiation. There is not an agreement. They do not care to have peace. They care to wipe Israel off the face of the map. So what does that mean right now in the short term? Yes, it looks like a seventh day of cease-fire, at least in the Gaza area, but when you squeeze that balloon, Mr. Speaker, then you get other problems like the violence in Jerusalem, on the West Bank, and others that will pop up. Whether it is Hamas here one day or Hezbollah in another area up north, we still know that Iran is sponsoring this terrorism and that Qatar is happy to help finance it. It is time to get very real about this. What Israel really needs to be able to do is to root out the problems, the corruption, and the deep problems that exist within Gaza. Many, many miles of tunnels go sometimes 200 feet underground, the shafts go up inside houses, inside mosques, and inside hospitals and they use the innocent citizens there as shields. All those areas Hamas happily hides behind so they can try to make Israel look bad when they surgically go in and try to remove these evil terrorists. There is a dramatic difference in the two sides even though our universities and the media are duping our young people into waving their Palestinian flags. There is a dramatic difference in the two sides. One seeks peace, one seeks existence, and the other seeks to wipe Israel off the map. They don't want peace. They don't want existence. So I call upon the Biden administration to stand behind Israel in a real way and in a meaningful way. The IDF needs to be able to do what it needs to get the job done in northern Gaza and to finish the job of wiping out the existence of Hamas who will continue to launch rockets and commit terrorism against Israel and even its so-called own people. Allow Israel to finish the job instead of us duplicitously saying, oh, we need to have a cease-fire. That is because there wouldn't be a fire to cease to begin with had not Hamas started, really, with the first moments of deeding the Gaza strip over to that side years ago when the rockets were launched even before the ink was dry on the agreement. That is what we need to have done. The Biden administration needs to show it is firmly behind Israel and what needs to get done instead of these half measures. Israel has a right to exist. Israel needs us as a firm ally. We need to get off our backsides and get the aid to them that they really need that we passed in this House.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Madam Speaker, earlier this month, we marked 5 years since the 2018 Camp fire struck Paradise and surrounding areas of northern California. It was the deadliest and most destructive wildfire in California history. Recovery has not been easy and will take continued coordination of all levels of government and, importantly, also the citizens. One of the most instrumental people in the recovery efforts was Casey Hatcher, who sadly passed away just days before the anniversary. I especially want to recognize Casey, who was the deputy chief administrative officer for Butte County. We are all grateful for her fantastic work. Ms. Hatcher served in Butte County's emergency operations center during many activations, including the 2017 Oroville Dam spillway crisis, the Wall and Ponderosa fires, the 2017 La Porte and Cherokee fires, the 2018 Camp fire, the 2020 North Complex fire, and the 2021 Dixie fire. There is a theme here of fire. She served Butte County diligently as the Camp fire recovery director, working closely with the California Office of Emergency Services and FEMA. Her dedication, perseverance, and leadership have been paramount to the recovery of the entire region. We would not have gotten this far without her or in as timely a fashion. As I remember the 5 years since the Camp fire, I am also remembering Casey Hatcher, her dedication, and her caring and compassionate approach to helping her neighbors. God bless her and her family.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Madam Chair, this is a preemptive effort. Why fight so hard? If a single penny has not been cut loose yet, good. That means we are taking action here that is going to prevent that. Had the Biden administration not cut loose the $6 billion in frozen assets to begin with, we wouldn't have to do this. Why do we have a nonsensical effort to allow Iran to have the option? That is why we need to head this off at the pass with H.R. 5961, the No Funds for Iranian Terrorism Act. We saw a sophisticated attack launched in Gaza by Hamas, and we are continuing this process to allow Iran to be the biggest state sponsor of terror in the world. We need to head it off at the pass, as I said. It is ridiculous that we have to fight so hard to have this preemptive effort. I just don't understand it. I don't understand a lot of things coming out of the Middle East with the pro-Palestinian efforts all over this country and all over the world when Israel is simply a country that seeks peace. Yes, we got five wrongfully detained American hostages in exchange for these frozen assets, but the President must impose sanctions on the foreign financial institutions involved in processing the transfer of these funds. Head it off at the pass. Don't allow it to happen. Why would we be in the business of helping Iran to destroy Israel?

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the effort here today. Now it is a gun problem. I believe we are moving illegal immigrants into national parks in New York, and I suppose around the rest of the country, because we have a numbers problem. No, it isn't a gun problem. It isn't even that the immigration system is so broken, it is just not being enforced. We have laws in place that would actually work if they were enforced. It is crazy. No wonder people think Congress is out of its mind with some of the stuff that goes on because we, oh, are going to fill up the parks, starting in New York and other areas of the country, and it will end up in the West because we don't have enough space. There is a green light at our open border. We have had sanctuary cities inviting them in, and now they are seeing the results, finally, of Democrat policies that have put us in this place. Indeed, this is not a long-term problem, so much as it has been intense the last 3 years during the Biden administration. This is not a commonsense solution I hear on the other side about guns or filling the parks with illegal immigrants. It is about controlling the border where the root cause is and not trying to gloss over it with this sort of policy. Mr. Chair, this is a good policy to get started in the right direction.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague and friend from Hawaii for yielding. I would chime in as well on the importance of improving and expanding rural health and the challenges faced in the most rural areas of our country, including my own northern California district. We have several high country hospitals that are out on their own pretty much. The connectivity that they need and the challenges that pertain to some levels of equality on reimbursements is extremely important, so I would be happy to join with Representative Tokuda's efforts and that of the Rural Healthcare Caucus. Indeed, as we expand and get more and more telehealth opportunities, something that has worked pretty well for us in our district is teaching health centers; getting young folks as students, and maybe young doctors, interested in working in our communities here, as well. It just helps extend the opportunities for people that do live in these rural areas and don't have nearly the choices. That is part of the cost, I guess, of living in a rural area. We have done a lot of good work with the USDA, expanding fiber optic, getting more and more connectivity. We need to keep doing that in order to be more successful for rural America. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate this effort, and a bipartisan effort it is.

Mr. LaMALFA

Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, as the conversation has been, we know that border security actually is national security. President Biden's open border policies have incentivized a historic surge in illegal immigration at our southern and northern borders and the impact we are seeing lately on our national parks. Since President Biden taking office, there have been over 6.4 million illegal crossings of our southern border and 1.7 million known got- aways who evaded U.S. Border Patrol. Every State is now a border State. Every town is now a border town. Democrats are using the national parks to house illegal immigrants-- think how absurd that is--which only further encourages this crisis. Republicans and Democrats alike have condemned Biden's border crisis. We must stop incentivizing further waves of illegal immigrants by providing them with free housing--again, the latest scheme being housing them in our national parks. We will continue to fight to secure our border and eliminate the financial burdens these illegal immigrants are putting on American taxpayers and our towns. That is why earlier this year we passed H.R. 2, the Secure the Border Act, which is the strongest border security package in American history.