Kevin McCarthy

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. The only reason I brought it up is your statement at the end was that you voted for it.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, then why did he vote ``present''?

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I know he misspoke earlier on a couple of things, and I think he may have misspoken again. He made a comment. He said we are autocratic. He said we are the most closed. So I just want to go to facts. This Congress has a 20-year high for bills enacted with bipartisan cosponsors, a 20-year high. Those are not my words. That is from Quorum, a company that only deals with data and measures all. So that means we are the most bipartisan Congress in more than 20 years. Mr. Speaker, does the gentleman want to know something else, just on facts? He said we close everything. There have been over 1,650 amendments. 745 of those were Democratic amendments. So I looked back to Speaker Pelosi. She allowed less than 1,000 amendments in the entire 111th Congress. So, I am sorry, those statements were not correct. Now, we can have differences of opinion. He has a right to vote ``present.'' If he gets mad about it, he can get mad about it, but that is what the Record shows. And he said because what were the resolved clauses. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman knows that bill was on suspension. The rules of suspension have a higher threshold to pass, but it also means there are no amendments. If you want to be fair, instead of just the bill that was coming forward, I offered to bring a Democratic bill up that would abolish ICE. So, for the American people to know, let's see what the resolved clauses say, because this made so many Democrats vote ``no'' or ``present.'' Resolved. That the House of Representatives expresses its continued support for all United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, ICE, officers and personnel, who carry out the important mission of ICE; Denounces calls for the complete abolishment of ICE; and Supports the efforts of all Federal agencies, State law enforcement, and military personnel who bring law and order to our Nation's borders. That is what the resolved said. That is what moved the other side to vote ``present.'' That is what we voted on. He may be upset. I am upset he voted ``present,'' too. But I don't know what in this clause drove all the Democrats here, because you know on suspension he helped it pass. But is it because that announcement denounces calls for the complete abolishment of ICE, because that is the bill he put across the desk? If that is what he is asking for, he can stand with his convictions. Don't put a bill across the desk, cosponsor it, and then when he has something on the floor that is only positive, that is only standing with the people of ICE, say he has to vote ``present.'' I don't know where the courage is there.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I do not know at this time. I know they are continuing to work. As soon as they get their work done, I will advise the Members. I will bring it to the floor then.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, the Appropriations Committee has now passed all 12 bills out of subcommittee. By next week, all 12 bills will have also cleared the full committee. By passing the Interior and Financial Services bills today, the gentleman knows the full House has adopted for the full-year appropriations half of those, six bills, making up over two-thirds of the discretionary budget authority. House and Senate conferees on the first package are working to produce a conference report, and I look forward to continuing work on FY19 appropriations in the weeks to come. As soon as the items are scheduled for the floor, I will be sure to inform all Members. As the gentleman knows, this is a different year, as just last year we were able to pass all 12. But what is different about this year is, over in the Senate, there is action being taken, which is positive for us. That is why we are already into conference. I look forward to having those conference reports coming back and moving those bills to the President's desk to be signed. I am proud of the fact that two-thirds of all the discretionary spending will have already passed this floor as of this day.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the House will meet at noon for morning hour and 2 p.m. for legislative business. Votes will be postponed until 6:30 p.m. On Tuesday and Wednesday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for morning hour and noon for legislative business. On Thursday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for legislative business. Last votes are expected no later than 3 p.m. On Friday, no votes are expected in the House. Mr. Speaker, the House will consider a number of suspensions next week, a complete list of which will be announced by close of business tomorrow. In addition, the House will consider several bills aimed at giving Americans more affordable healthcare choices: First, the Protect Medical Innovation Act, sponsored by Representative Erik Paulsen. This bill would permanently repeal ObamaCare's burdensome medical device tax. Doing so will create jobs, promote research, and allow for innovation that could lead to the next generation of lifesaving medical technologies; Next, the Increasing Access to Lower Premium Plans and Expanding Health Savings Accounts Act, sponsored by Representative Peter Roskam. This package would expand access to lower cost healthcare options, encourage healthcare savings, and put a 2-year delay on ObamaCare's health insurance tax, which drives up costs of insurance for almost every American; Finally, the Restoring Access to Medication and Modernizing Health Savings Accounts Act, sponsored by Representative Lynn Jenkins. This bill would transform and modernize health savings accounts and allow for more innovation in healthcare delivery. I look forward to the House passing all three of these critical bills without delay. Mr. Speaker, we also hope to vote on the conference report to accompany H.R. 5515, the National Defense Authorization Act.

Mr. McCARTHY. So you voted against the funding----

Mr. McCARTHY. If I can finish, you had stated at the end of your last statement that you voted for that funding. I was just correcting. By voting against the omni, you voted against the funding for that.

Mr. McCARTHY. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. McCARTHY. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you voted against the omni, correct?

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I am thankful that he is back with us, but at times I wish he weren't as healthy as he is. I am just joking. (Mr. McCARTHY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. McCARTHY. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chairman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, last week, Democrats introduced a bill to abolish ICE. That is the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. In doing so, I think we should first review the agency's record. As it turns out, ICE agents are on the front lines in the battle against crime. In 2016, they arrested nearly 2,000 human traffickers, criminals who are involved in modern-day slavery. You wanted to abolish that. Last year, they arrested more than 4,800 gang members, including more than 800 members of the MS-13, one of the most vicious gangs operating today. But you wanted to abolish that and put it into our communities. They intercepted more than 1 ton of fentanyl that was headed for our communities. Now, we all should know what fentanyl will do, because we just debated more than 50-some bills on this floor, because 172 people who are Americans will die today because of an addiction. Fentanyl is so deadly that just a few grams will kill you. But you wanted to abolish that, to allow it into our communities. Still, the Democrats say, not only will they want to introduce it, people will cosponsor it. But there is a problem, and I actually think there are two problems with this. The first problem is that most Americans disagree with you. They actually support ICE. According to a recent poll, just one in four Americans thinks we should abolish it. The second problem is that Democrats don't even agree with their own bill they introduced. They lack the courage of their so-called convictions, because when we offered the ability to bring up the bill, abolish ICE, that they put into the hopper and cosponsored, Democrats said they would vote ``no.'' They wanted the glory of introducing a bill to the far left of their own party, but they didn't have the guts to accept the consequences. That is the kind of leadership that the Democrats have to offer. Mr. Speaker, I am even more confused listening to the Democratic leadership. I was here. I was on the floor. I listened, Mr. Speaker, to the leader on the Democratic side when she said: I recommend voting ``no,'' or maybe vote ``present,'' or vote however you want. I am not sure what position she was requesting when she said all three. And I am not sure exactly what the author wanted to do when he put his bill across the aisle and asked the other Members of his own conference to cosponsor it, when he said he would vote ``no,'' when he had the offer to bring it up on the floor. Does that mean that every bill Democrats put across they really don't want to support? I am just not sure. Now, we are about to vote on a resolution of the opposite. We want to support the law enforcement officers of ICE and will renounce the activist campaign against them. The danger these officers face is no joke. So for those in the back who would like to speak, Mr. Speaker, during this, I would ask that they get quiet for one moment, because six officers of ICE lost their lives defending those. The danger to these officers is real, and it is not a joke. Six officers have died in the line of duty: Special Agent Brian Beliso; Special Agent Timothy Ensley; Special Agent Lorenzo Gomez; Special Agent Scott McGuire; Special Agent David Wilhelm; and Special Agent Jaime Zapata, who was killed by cartel hitmen in Mexico. These agents gave their lives in the line of duty. Thousands more of these agents risk their lives every day on our behalf. I want you to pause for one moment and I want you to think about those agents, think about those families, but think about those thousands of agents who are defending our border. What do they think about a bill that comes across the desk that says you want to abolish them? How much support do you want to give them? How much support do they feel when the leadership, Mr. Speaker, of the Democratic Party says: Vote ``no,'' vote ``present,'' just vote how you want? Well, do you know what? When they risk their lives and they stop another human trafficker of modern-day slavery and they save another child, I will vote to support them. Or when they stop an amount of drugs coming across and they save American lives, I will support them. Or when they stop MS-13 gang members from coming into any of our communities, I will support them. If only for this reason, agents deserve our gratitude and support. Mr. Speaker, I am confused. I understand there is this growing socialist movement in the Democratic Party, but when does this socialist new Democratic Party believe we should have no borders? I guess it is today. Mr. Speaker, that is not what the Americans have asked for, and that is not what America supports. But then again, Mr. Speaker, I am not sure I understand what the other side supports when they offer a bill and they ask people to cosponsor and then they won't even vote for it. That is why I am happy to offer Congressman Higgins' resolution and stand with the women and men of ICE, because I want a safer America. And for those who gave their life for us, I will stand with them, even if it means standing up against a new socialist Democratic Party.

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet on Monday, June 25, 2018, when it shall convene at noon for morning-hour debate and 2 p.m. for legislative business.

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding. My friend made a lot of points. Sometimes facts get caught up in them. So, Mr. Speaker, the gentleman talked about the floor and the willingness of this side to allow Democratic amendments, or bipartisanship. As of June 7, Republicans in the 115th Congress--and we are not done with this Congress yet--have provided for the consideration of over 1,200 amendments on the House floor. Now, that includes 570 Democrat amendments. And I don't want to compare apples to oranges, so let's do apples to apples. So in the entire 111th Congress--that was their entire Congress when my friend was majority leader--Speaker Pelosi allowed less than 1,000 amendments to be considered on the floor. Now, despite the unified Democratic opposition, Republicans are still getting the work done, and we will continue to do that. Now, my friend made a few statements, said there are things I did not say. Maybe there were some things I did not say about the economy, but they are different than what he would, because there is some really good news, and it is not far from here. Mr. Speaker, you could go to my friend's district. Each of the counties that make up Maryland's Fifth Congressional District has seen a drop in unemployment since 2016. St. Mary's County is down over a full percent to 3.7, Calvert County down to 3.5, Charles County down to 3.8, Prince George's down to 4.1, and Anne Arundel County down to 3.2 percent. Now, the other point I did not make--and I thank the gentleman for bringing it up to me that I missed points--do you realize in America today, if you are African American, this is the lowest unemployment has ever been; if you are Hispanic, the lowest it has ever been. Yes, there are things we had to do on our own, but the numbers prove it is worth it. And what is even more telling about this and something that makes me prouder, it doesn't just help Republican districts, it helps everybody's districts. It helps all Americans. And that is what we are here for. My friend brought up that there are issues. Yes, there are. That is why we want to pass the immigration bill. We think there should be a border and the border should be protected. We think children should be with their parents, and that is what we are working on. So I look forward to next week, to us passing an immigration bill that solves a lot of these problems. And, Mr. Speaker, I hope my friend from the other side of the aisle would look at the bill and understand not everybody gets what they want, because in that bill there won't be everything that I want, not one person in this room will get everything they want. But will America be safer? Will America be better in the future? Will we have a system that works? Those answers will be yes, and that is how I will cast my vote.

Mr. McCARTHY. I know he likes to make long speeches before he gets to a question, and I know he likes to go back in decades for the decades that he has served, but I was only referring to this Congress. I was moving to the answer, but I was building and explaining why the answer is what it is. He doesn't think the actions prior don't take place until now. We have sat in those rooms and we talked about border security. The interesting part, though, Mr. Speaker: The other side of the aisle that said they were for border security, they were going to perpetuate the problem we currently have because they did not want to end this catch and release. They are going to put families in harm's way. They question whether you could actually have a border of a wall. That is really the philosophical debate that we are talking about. Now, we will work through this bill. There are some other parts of the bill that we are working on this weekend. Any changes that come to a conclusion, of course, we will let you know. But much of what this bill is is the same thing that we talked down at the White House about and we talked for those numbers of hours inside my office about. But, Mr. Speaker, the gentleman on the other side said that he was never going to shut down the government, but he voted to do it this time. They said that they were concerned about CHIP, but they would vote against it when we bring it to the floor. Do you know what we had to do? We had to carry it on our own. And do you know what happened for the American children? The longest it has ever been renewed: 10 years. So, yes, we want to work with them. But if the idea is to stop anything from happening for the American public, do not expect me to stop. It is too important. If we have to push through on our own, we will. And my friend made a statement that this body is one-sided. Don't take my word for it. Let's go to Quorum, a company that only focuses on data, that only focuses on measurements. Do you know what they said about this Congress? Seventy percent of the bills signed into law this Congress have one Republican and one Democratic cosponsor, the highest rate in the past 20 years for bipartisanship. The bills that we bring to the floor, despite the leadership's push, every week, Mr. Speaker, we can see the actions. What was the action that they held everybody until the last minute for those 23 people who wanted to vote for the appropriations bill? They had to wait until the Republicans carried it, then they released them to vote for it. Or we talk about the farm bill. Every day, Mr. Speaker, I come back here, I see the ranking member on the other side put a letter out to her Members to not vote for whatever comes. And, yes, we on this side of the aisle want to solve DACA. But I know. I read your tweets just as well: Dreamers can still apply to renew DACA protections. But, do you know what? In our bill, we deal with the DACA situation. Do you know what else we also deal with? We deal with the border, and we deal with security, because we do not want to be back here in another 2 or 5 years with the same problem we have today. Even if you won't work with us from the children's health insurance, from funding of government, from appropriations for our veterans, you want to hold those votes back, I don't think the public wants to hold those back. And you know what? If we have to push forward, we will. And I will not apologize for it. This country is too important, the problems are too big. And I can listen, Mr. Speaker, to every argument we make, but I will just think the American public can look at the data. Do you know what today is, Mr. Speaker? The 6-month anniversary of the tax bill passing. You know what else it is? One million new jobs. You know what else it is? Unemployment below 4 percent. And in the last 49 years of this country, unemployment below 4 percent has only been 7 months in 49 years, but two of those 7 months were April and May of this year. Unemployment claims, 44-year low. And for the first time in the history of this Nation, there are more jobs being offered than there are people looking for them. So all that rhetoric, all those arguments you made building up to that tax bill, the Armageddon, the crumbs, how terrible this is going to be, 6 months later, history proves different. And you know what, Mr. Speaker? If we had waited and waited for the Democrats, there would not be a million new jobs, there would not be unemployment where it is, because, Mr. Speaker, there wasn't one Democrat to vote for it, even though a number of them privately told me on this floor they wanted to, but their leadership told them no. So if we have to solve the economy and we have to solve immigration on our own, we will.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I just asked the gentleman if he would allow me the opportunity to answer questions.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, it is quite interesting to me to listen to my friend. He is complaining that somehow he is not involved. Mr. Speaker, he is complaining about the number of hours that he sat in my office, not just himself--Senator Durbin, the chief of staff to the President, the Secretary of Homeland Security as well, and Senator Cornyn--and we worked time and again. But every time, we tried to find compromise. We even went to the point of their number one issue, and the President went beyond what they even asked. But they said: No, we can't do anything else. They said all they wanted to do was go do a discharge petition. That is all they wanted. They didn't want to work through the system. But that was not unusual, because my friend, Mr. Speaker, likes to quote people--I don't have it written. I just have it by memory, the number of times my friend told me he would never vote to shut down the government. He doesn't care about politics; he would never do that. But we found it was a different year and a different time. Then we talked about children's health, CHIP. A number of times, Mr. Speaker, we would go to the other side, we would go to the ranking member, and we would go to those individuals on the committee, but they were told not to work with us. So we would run a bill, Mr. Speaker, with everything that they had ever said they would want in it, and yet they would get to the day and they would vote against it.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I appreciate him watching me on TV. Mr. Speaker, if I could just restate, so maybe I could speak more clearly. The House is also expected to consider legislation relating to border security immigration. So the answer is yes. As I said before, we are bringing that bill to the floor. We have been working very closely with the entire Conference, taking all ideas in. We had a very productive conference last night. We will work through the weekend, and you will see that bill on the floor next week. And I look forward to Mr. Hoyer's support as well.

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the House will meet at noon for morning hour and at 2 p.m. for legislative business. Votes will be postponed until 6:30 p.m. On Tuesday and Wednesday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for morning hour and noon for legislative business. On Thursday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for legislative business. Last votes are expected no later than 3 p.m. On Friday, no votes are expected in the House. Mr. Speaker, the House will consider a number of suspensions next week, a complete list of which will be announced by close of business today. In addition, the House will continue our work on appropriations by taking up the 2019 Defense Appropriations bill sponsored by Representative Kay Granger. Mr. Speaker, Republicans are committed to national security and rebuilding our military. This bill fully funds a well-deserved 2.6 percent pay raise for our brave men and women in uniform, their largest pay raise in 9 years. It prepares for the future by investing more than $90 billion into the research and development of new defense systems and technology. Above all, it ensures American Armed Forces have the equipment and training necessary to successfully carry out their missions around the world. This bill passed 48 to 4 out of subcommittee, so I hope my friends across the aisle will consider voting for this important bill when it reaches the floor. Speaking of national security, the House will also make a motion to go to conference on the National Defense Authorization Act, which the House passed last month. Finally, Mr. Speaker, additional legislative items are possible in the House, including two bills from the Committee on Natural Resources. First, H.R. 200, the Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act, sponsored by Representative Don Young: This bill would reauthorize Magnuson-Stevens and replace one-size-fits-all regulations with a tailored approach that will ensure vibrant American fisheries. Next, H.R. 2083, the Endangered Salmon and Fisheries Predation Prevention Act, sponsored by Representative Jaime Herrera Beutler: This bill will allow State and Tribal authorities to respond more quickly to predators of the native salmon population. Mr. Speaker, the House is also expected to consider legislation related to border security and immigration. As soon as our schedule is finalized, I will be sure to inform all Members. With that, I thank my friend.

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I want to congratulate the gentleman for his work, his tireless effort, and his passion for those who have been afflicted with the addiction and have lost the battle. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to urge the passage of H.R. 6 which contains more than 50 opioid-related bills which we have considered in the past 2 weeks. We have in this body the opportunity nearly every day to approve legislation of great consequence to millions of people. But rarely do the consequences feel so immediate and so vital as they do for the opioids package we are considering. That is because this legislation has to do with the deadliest drug crisis in our Nation's history. The grim truth is this: More Americans have died from drug overdoses since the turn of the century than died in the Civil War. Yes, you heard that right. In less than two decades, more than 630,000 people have died because of drugs. Half of those deaths had to do with opioids. This death toll is the ``American carnage'' that President Trump referred to in his inaugural address. My hometown of Bakersfield has been devastated by illegal drugs, mostly heroin and meth. In 2016 alone, 54 people in my county died of an opioid overdose. This is a statistic made up of 54 stories of unimaginable sadness. They are stories of happy families torn apart by deceit, abuse, and death; stories of parents robbed of children, children robbed of parents, and friends robbed of friends. My local news talked to one man in Bakersfield who has lost four friends to overdoses in the past few years alone. Of course, these tragic events are not confined to just my district; they are happening everywhere across the country, coast to coast. So I would like to tell you another story, this time from the other side of the country. It is the story of Eamon Eric Callanan, age 28. He did not live to see age 29. Eamon came from a family with deep roots in Rochester, New York. One of his great-grandfathers was a chief of police in Rochester. His grandfather was a judge, and his parents are attorneys. They were the very definition, in other words, of a law-abiding family. But in early 2012, a series of events took place that sent Eamon down a different path and stole him from his family forever. At age 25, Eamon hurt his back--a story that many in America have seen--while he was on his job. He began taking opioid painkillers in response to his pain. When the pills became too expensive, Eamon, like many Americans, switched to heroin. Before long, the loyal, goofy kid his family once knew was gone. Drugs had dampened the beautiful music of his life and turned it into a sorrowful echo. Eamon Eric Callanan died of a drug overdose on June 8, 2016. Last Wednesday marked the 2-year anniversary of his funeral. In many respects, Eamon's story is not unique. He was one of 169 people in his county--42,000 people in our country--to die of an opioid overdose that year. Eamon was just one body in a grim tide of overdose deaths. So why am I telling you this story? I am telling it to remind you that each one of those victims had a name and a life and friends and family whom they loved and left behind. One of those people Eamon loved and who loves him deeply in return is actually sitting in this Chamber right now. Her name is Erin. She is Eamon's sister and my press secretary. Erin was 24 days from her wedding when she learned that she would never see her brother again and that he would not be there to celebrate with her on one of the happiest days of her life. Let that be a lesson to all of us. There is no event so joyful, no place so safe that it is untouched by the drug crisis--even a wedding chapel, even here in the Halls of power, even in my office. Mr. Chair, if we hope to defeat the deadliest drug crisis in history, we will need the biggest response in history. Rest assured that the response is already underway, led by this administration and this Congress. We are wrapping up voting on more than 50 bills to help millions of Americans affected by the opioid crisis. We are about to vote on a package that contains almost all of those bills, H.R. 6. Among others, it contains a bill by Congressman Mike Bishop that will reduce the flow of Chinese fentanyl into our country by giving law enforcement new tools to detect suspicious packages in the mail. It includes a reform to the so-called IMD exclusion, an outdated regulation that restricts Medicaid funding for large inpatient treatment programs, programs with the potential to heal substance abuse patients like Eamon. Those are just two of the important bills that are part of this package. It is no exaggeration to say that they can save lives and save families from the immeasurable grief of losing a loved one to an overdose. Yes, I am confident these bills will help stem the tide of drug abuse, but I will end on a note of caution. If defeating the opioid crisis is left to government alone, then we will surely fail. Healing the wounds of drug abuse will take more than just this body can provide; it will take the commitment by every citizen to fulfill our duties to one another. We have all been touched by this tragedy, so we all have a part to play in its resolution. That means supporting people near us who are struggling with drug addiction. It means rebuilding families and towns torn apart by isolation, addiction, distrust, and death. It means supporting the many charities, ministries, and nonprofits that are already healing the sick in our communities. In Bakersfield, that means groups like The Mission, the Christian charity where I volunteer. The Mission operates a faith-based addiction recovery program that is changing lives, even knitting together families that have come apart at the seams. Because of The Mission, a husband and wife with five children overcame their past of drug addiction and drug dealing, and they did it together. Then they convinced their niece to get clean, too. We need more stories like that. In the days ahead, this House has a chance to do its part to ensure that more stories of abuse and despair have their own happy ending. We will do this work for the healers and protectors, for the suffering, and for all those like Eamon who are now at rest.

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and pay tribute to the late Mary Katherine Shell, a community leader from Bakersfield, California. Mary served as the Mayor of Bakersfield from 1981 to 1985, and later as a member of the Kern County Board of Supervisors from 1985 to 1997. A trailblazing force in Kern County, Mary K. Shell passed away last week at the age of 91. Born in Bakersfield, Mary graduated from East Bakersfield High School before attending Bakersfield College. Her future in public service was forged at a young age during conversations with her father, who encouraged her as a child to read the newspaper, be civic-minded, and to involve herself in the issues that impacted her community. A keen reader of the news, it was no coincidence that Mary found herself working for the Bakersfield Californian during World War II, covering home-front war stories and Kern County's rapidly-growing agricultural industry. With much of the Californian's workforce serving overseas in the war, Mary balanced an incredible workload, often finding herself immersed in Bakersfield's policy-making discussions, learning and covering topics that would mold her into a city leader herself. Outside of her writing, Mary continued to push herself in other fields, working as a secretary for Skyway Associates at the old La Cresta Airfield and even receiving her pilot's license. She would further her career in journalism working for the Bakersfield News Bulletin in 1965, first as a reporter, and later as editor until 1969. In 1972, she was awarded the Excellence in Reporting Award from the California Trial Lawyers Association for her work at Capitol News Service, and in 1975 was awarded the California Taxpayers Reporting Award for articles published in the Los Angeles Herald. While she loved politics, Mary never once viewed herself as a politician. It took the gentle encouragement of her loving husband, Joe Shell, to inspire her to run to be Bakersfield's mayor in 1979. Mary won in a competitive field of candidates to become Bakersfield's first female mayor in 1980. Upon her election, Shell immediately set out to improve the quality of life of Bakersfield, launching the still-active Beautiful Bakersfield Committee to inspire pride in the Bakersfield community. She commissioned the creation of a city flag, helped establish the annual city prayer breakfast, established one of the first Vietnam War memorials in Bakersfield, and brought back the annual downtown Christmas Parade, which is still a fixture of the Bakersfield Christmas season. After serving a full term as Bakersfield mayor, Shell successfully ran in 1984 to represent Kern County's 5th Supervisorial District. She dedicated her three terms as a county supervisor to reducing government overregulation and advocating for policies that minimized the waste of taxpayers' money. Mary established herself in the boardroom as a consensus-builder, garnering support from both sides of the political spectrum for her straight talk and her relentless love for the community she represented. Above all else, Mary never stopped acting as a one of our city's staunchest advocates, remaining just as civically engaged outside of politics as she was as an elected official. Mary K. Shell was, and will always be, a community icon in Bakersfield. A renaissance woman of her era, she defined to generations of Kern County residents what it meant to be a public servant--someone who listened to the needs of her constituents and acted tirelessly, fearlessly, yet graciously, to address the needs of our communities. Over her life, Mary inspired many, and I am confident that she leaves behind a legacy that will inspire countless others to public service. I extend my deepest condolences to her children, her grandchildren, and a community that will miss her dearly. It could be said that Mary K. Shell ``did it all'' in her life, and I am inclined to agree. Bakersfield will not soon forget her.

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``Yea'' on rollcall No. 269, ``Yea'' on rollcall No. 270, and ``Yea'' on rollcall No. 271. personal explanation

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an outstanding individual, Mr. J. Campbell ``Cam'' Martin, in recognition of his retirement from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). After four decades of Federal service, Cam recently retired from NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base, California. Cam earned his Bachelor of Science degree in Business Logistics from Pennsylvania State University. Later, he received a Master of Arts & Administrative Sciences from George Washington University. A longtime patriot and public servant, Cam served in the United States Navy before beginning his career with NASA Langley Research Center in 1988. While at Langley, he received the NASA Group Achievement Award for the Airborne Wind Shear Flight Operations Campaign foreshadowing a long and fruitful career. In 1994, NASA Armstrong, formerly NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, was fortunate to gain Cam as Chief of the Office of External Affairs, and he has remained an integral member of the Armstrong community. Cam distinguished himself as a man who truly loved what he did, and he never failed to inspire an interest in aeronautical science with those who worked with him. It was this passion that drove Cam to advocate for years to change the name of the Dryden Flight Research Center to the Armstrong Flight Research Center. Cam knew better than most of Neil Armstrong's legacy as a test pilot at the Center from 1955 to 1962, and through his great effort and collaboration with NASA and our community, the site was renamed in 2014 after the first person to walk on the Moon. As Armstrong's Legislative Affairs liaison, Cam has served as an incredible resource on all things space and science-related, always underscoring why NASA's mission is worthy of support. Usually soft- spoken, whenever Cam started to extol the great work being done at Armstrong, I could hear the excitement and passion rise in his voice. He never engaged in hyperbole--he never had to since the work at Armstrong is truly amazing. During Cam's tenure at Armstrong, NASA and Lockheed Martin made significant progress on the Quiet Supersonic Technology X-Plane (QUESST), a program designed to quiet the sound of a sonic boom and offer the world the promise of commercial supersonic air travel. Among Cam's other achievements at NASA Armstrong was his successful advocacy for the Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy (SOFIA) program, which still flies to this day and provides incredible science. During the fatal test flight crash of SpaceShip Two on October 31, 2014, Cam provided on-scene contingency communications support throughout the day directly to the chief executive of Mojave Air and Space Port, who described those contributions as providing ``calm presence'' and having ``professional brilliance.'' Additionally, Cam has routinely served as a member of my Service Academy Panel, offering his expertise as a former Navy man to advise me on my annual appointments to the United States Service Academies. Cam Martin's career at Armstrong will be remembered for his passion and energy, his aviator sunglasses, leather fighter pilot jacket, and of course his classic Mustang. I am grateful to be able to count him as a friend, and while he will no longer be working at Armstrong, I know that Cam will continue to advocate for space, science, technology, and, most importantly the first ``A'' in NASA-aeronautics. After many years of service to our nation, I know that Cam looks forward to spending more time with his wife, Susi, and his children, Scott and Skye. Cam will be missed at NASA, but I salute his dedication to his field and country. I wish him the best as he begins this new chapter of his life.

Mr. McCARTHY

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that, when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet on Tuesday, June 12, 2018, when it shall convene at noon for morning-hour debate and 2 p.m. for legislative business.