Joseph Morelle

Mr. MORELLE

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an exceptional young man from Rochester, New York, whose dedication to leadership, service, and academic excellence has earned him admission to the United States Air Force Academy: James Kester. Throughout his years at Fairport High School, James distinguished himself as a leader both in the classroom and in his community. As an Eagle Scout, he dedicated countless hours to serving others, demonstrating a commitment to teamwork, responsibility, and selfless service. He further developed those leadership skills as captain of his football team, where he learned the importance of setting an example, supporting his teammates, and fostering success through collective effort. Balancing these responsibilities with an outstanding academic record, James consistently embodied the values of hard work, integrity, and perseverance. For James, a commitment to service is deeply rooted in family tradition. Coming from a five-generation military family, he was inspired from an early age by the example of those who answered the call to serve our Nation. Drawn to the Air Force Academy's mission of developing leaders of character, he recognized an opportunity to continue that legacy while preparing himself for a lifetime of service. His dedication to duty, leadership, and country makes him exceptionally well-suited for the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead. Mr. Speaker, I am confident that James Kester will continue to make the Rochester community proud as he embarks on his journey at the United States Air Force Academy. I congratulate him on this remarkable achievement and extend my very best wishes for continued success in the years ahead.

Mr. MORELLE

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6028, the Legislative Branch Agencies Clarification Act. The bill updates the appointment process for the heads of two legislative branch agencies, the Library of Congress and the Government Publishing Office, and creates a new Presidential appointment, subject to Senate confirmation, for the Register of Copyrights. I thank the sponsor of the bill and my colleague on the Committee on House Administration Mr. Griffith, Chairman Steil, and both their staff for working with us to improve prior versions of the legislation. For the legislative record, I will probably repeat some of the things that my colleague has said. The amended bill makes clear that the U.S. Copyright Office, currently part of the Library, remains in the legislative branch. It protects the Copyright Office workforce. All of them will continue to enjoy the same rights, privileges, and protections they hold today as Library employees. That was very important to us. I have long said that the Librarian of Congress should be appointed by Congress. Still, we must make this change thoughtfully and be mindful of the consequences, particularly, again, for the Copyright Office. Copyright authority is enshrined in Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the Constitution, and the Copyright Office has resided in the legislative branch for well over one century. I appreciate Mr. Griffith's comments about the 19th century, how different things were and the importance of doing all of this work. This bill is really very important, particularly because so much of the work is legislative and because of the ability for the modern legislature to have responsibility here. All of that should remain within the legislature and remain within the Congress. That is the intent of this bill. The copyright economy contributes, and this is somewhat of an astounding figure, more than $2 trillion to our economy each year. It supports more than 11 million American jobs, and only with a stable, reliable, and apolitical copyright system will we continue to have the benefits of that economy. The bill helps preserve it at a critical moment for copyright stakeholders and the millions of Library users. I particularly point that out in the midst of the emergence of AI, which uses a great many materials for learning that are copyrighted. These issues continue to be in the public eye, and they will continue to be important. The Library and the Copyright Office have operated in partnership for more than 150 years. The Copyright Office depends on the Library's infrastructure, and the Library builds its collections through copyright deposits. Severing that relationship would harm both institutions, something we clearly do not want to do. The revised bill recognizes that. It establishes a significant transition period. It allows the Copyright Office to continue using Library support services and requires the Register to consult with the Librarian before taking any action affecting the Library's access to Copyright Office deposits. It safeguards the rights of Copyright Office employees, as I indicated earlier, and keeps the office in the legislative branch, where it belongs. Again, I thank Chairman Steil and certainly the sponsor of the bill, Mr. Griffith, for accepting these changes and for working in a cooperative, collaborative, and bipartisan spirit. It has taken a little while, but I think the final product has improved as a result of it. For too long, Congress has allowed its own authority and capacity to atrophy. The Library, the Copyright Office, and the other support agencies we rely on are funded from a legislative branch budget that amounts to roughly four-tenths of 1 percent of all Federal discretionary spending. If we are serious about legislating on questions as complex, as I mentioned, as AI and copyright, we must be serious about sustaining the institutions that make that work possible. There are challenges. I think this was the work of compromise, so there are some changes that I think both sides would like to make, but this does ensure that the Librarian of Congress can be hired and fired only by Congress and does so while preserving both the Library and Copyright Office as the preeminent institutions in their fields. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes,'' and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, again, let me thank the sponsor of the bill, my friend Mr. Griffith, for his hard work. I thank Chairman Steil for his partnership in working together to protect these important legislative branch agencies and Congress' Article I prerogatives. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this very fine piece of legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MORELLE

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor the West Henrietta Fire Department as it celebrates its 100th anniversary of dedicated service to the Henrietta community and Monroe County, New York. Founded on February 13, 1926, the West Henrietta Fire Department has spent a century answering the call to protect lives, homes, businesses, and families throughout the community. What began as a volunteer fire company serving a growing rural area has evolved into a vital part of the Henrietta Fire District, continuing a proud tradition of neighbor serving neighbor through courage, sacrifice, and selfless dedication. For one hundred years, the firefighters of West Henrietta have stood ready at all hours of the day and night to respond to emergencies and assist residents in times of crisis. Through fires, accidents, medical emergencies, severe weather events, and countless other challenges, generations of volunteer firefighters have exemplified professionalism, compassion, and unwavering commitment to public service. Their work has earned the admiration and gratitude of the entire community. The West Henrietta Fire Department's legacy reflects the very best of the volunteer fire service tradition. Beyond emergency response, its members have strengthened community bonds through outreach, education, and civic engagement, helping make Henrietta a safer and stronger place to live, work, and raise a family. The Department's centennial celebration is a testament not only to its remarkable history, but also to the enduring spirit of service carried forward by its firefighters, past and present. It is with profound respect and gratitude that I recognize the West Henrietta Fire Department on the occasion of its 100th anniversary. I thank all of the firefighters, volunteers, officers, and families who have dedicated themselves to protecting the community over the past century, and I extend my best wishes for continued success and service in the years ahead.

Mr. MORELLE

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor the West Webster Volunteer Firemen's Association as it celebrates 100 years of dedicated service to the Webster community and Monroe County, New York. Established in 1926 by a group of committed local volunteers, the West Webster Volunteer Firemen's Association was founded to provide reliable emergency protection to a rapidly growing community. Over the past century, the organization has grown into a highly respected fire service institution, while remaining proudly volunteer-led and deeply rooted in the spirit of public service and community responsibility. For generations, the firefighters and volunteers of West Webster have answered emergency calls with courage, professionalism, and compassion. Whether responding to fires, medical emergencies, rescue operations, or marine incidents along Lake Ontario and Irondequoit Bay, these dedicated men and women have consistently placed the safety and wellbeing of their neighbors above their own. Their service reflects the highest ideals of volunteerism and civic duty. The Association's impact extends far beyond emergency response. Through fire prevention education, community outreach, youth engagement, and participation in local events, West Webster firefighters have built lasting relationships throughout the community and strengthened the bonds that make Webster such a special place to call home. Their century of service stands as a powerful testament to the enduring importance of volunteer fire departments across our Nation. It is with great pride and appreciation that I recognize the West Webster Volunteer Firemen's Association on the occasion of its 100th anniversary. I thank all current and former firefighters, volunteers, officers, and their families for a century of extraordinary service, sacrifice, and dedication to the people of Webster, and I wish the Association continued success for generations to come.

Mr. MORELLE

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Jewish American Heritage Month to recognize an exceptional arts educator, theater producer, and community leader from Rochester, New York: Freyda Schneider. Freyda Schneider is best known as the founder and longtime director of TYKEs (Theatre Young Kids Enjoy), the children's theater program at the Louis S. Wolk Jewish Community Center of Greater Rochester. A lifelong member of the Rochester JCC community, she co-founded TYKEs in 2004 with a vision of providing high-quality theatrical experiences that foster creativity, literacy, empathy, and self-expression among children and families. Under her leadership, TYKEs grew into one of the region's leading children's theater organizations, offering professional productions, school programs, summer camps, and youth workshops that have enriched the lives of countless young people across the Rochester community. Through her work as a producer, educator, and collaborator on original theatrical works, Freyda has consistently demonstrated the power of the arts to bring people together and strengthen community bonds. Her contributions have also helped preserve and elevate Jewish storytelling and cultural education. As co-producer of SURVIVORS, a theatrical production sharing the testimonies of Holocaust survivors in the Rochester community, she helped ensure that these important stories continue to educate and inspire future generations. Freyda Schneider's career reflects a deep and enduring commitment to education, creativity, and Jewish communal life. During Jewish American Heritage Month, it is especially fitting that we honor individuals who have gone above and beyond to strengthen our communities and preserve shared cultural heritage. I am proud to recognize her and extend my deepest gratitude for her continued service.

Mr. MORELLE

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Jewish American Heritage Month to recognize two outstanding community leaders and preservers of Rochester's Jewish culinary heritage: Jason and Alex Rheinwald. Jason and Alex Rheinwald are the co-owners of Fox's Deli, a nearly century-old Rochester institution that has long served as a cornerstone of the region's Jewish community and cultural life. After taking over the deli several years ago, the brothers committed themselves to preserving its traditional Jewish deli identity while thoughtfully modernizing and expanding the business for a new generation. Under their leadership, Fox's Deli has continued to serve as a gathering place for Rochester families and a living connection to the city's historic Jewish community. Their stewardship of this important institution earned Fox's recognition by New York State's Historic Business Preservation Registry, reflecting both the deli's cultural significance and the Rheinwald brothers' dedication to preserving its legacy. In recent years, Jason and Alex further expanded Rochester's Jewish culinary traditions through the opening of The Bagel Shop By Fox's on Park Avenue, bringing traditional hand-rolled New York-style bagels and Jewish deli culture to new audiences while maintaining the quality and sense of community that define Fox's. Jason and Alex Rheinwald's work reflects a deep and enduring commitment to preserving Rochester's Jewish heritage, supporting local business, and strengthening community connections. During Jewish American Heritage Month, it is especially fitting that we honor individuals who have gone above and beyond to preserve shared cultural traditions and enrich our communities. I am proud to recognize them and extend my deepest gratitude for their continued service.

Mr. MORELLE

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Jewish American Heritage Month to recognize a dedicated community leader and volunteer from Rochester, New York: Herb Skerker. For decades, Herb Skerker has been a respected and active leader within Rochester's Jewish community through his longstanding involvement with Temple B'rith Kodesh, one of the region's historic Reform congregations. Through his service and leadership, he has helped strengthen Jewish communal life in Rochester across generations, supporting the synagogue's religious, cultural, and philanthropic initiatives. Herb's commitment to Jewish education, congregational leadership, and preserving the traditions of Rochester's Jewish institutions has earned him the admiration and gratitude of countless members of the community. In addition to his work with Temple B'rith Kodesh, he has supported broader charitable and civic efforts that reflect his deep dedication to service and community engagement. Widely regarded as a thoughtful and devoted presence within Rochester Jewish life, Herb has consistently contributed his time, leadership, and energy to ensuring the continued vitality of the local Jewish community. His example demonstrates the profound impact that dedicated volunteerism and faithful service can have on generations of families and congregants. Herb Skerker's service reflects a deep and enduring commitment to faith, leadership, and Jewish communal life. During Jewish American Heritage Month, it is especially fitting that we honor individuals who have gone above and beyond to strengthen our communities and preserve shared cultural heritage. I am proud to recognize him and extend my deepest gratitude for his continued service.

Mr. MORELLE

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Jewish American Heritage Month to recognize an exceptional civic and sports leader from Rochester, New York: Naomi Silver. Naomi Silver serves as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Rochester Red Wings and Rochester Community Baseball, where her leadership has helped strengthen one of Rochester's most beloved institutions. Throughout her groundbreaking career in professional baseball, she has demonstrated a steadfast commitment to civic engagement, philanthropy, and youth development, carrying forward the community-centered legacy established by her father, Morrie Silver. In addition to her accomplishments in professional sports, Naomi has long been deeply involved in Rochester's Jewish community through leadership and volunteer service with organizations including the Jewish Federation of Greater Rochester and Hillel Community Day School. Her dedication to strengthening educational, cultural, and nonprofit institutions has had a lasting impact across the region. Widely respected throughout Rochester for both her professional leadership and her service to others, Naomi has become an important advocate for community-centered leadership and civic responsibility. Her work reflects the values of service, inclusion, and compassion that continue to strengthen the Rochester community. Naomi Silver's career reflects a deep and enduring commitment to civic leadership, philanthropy, and Jewish communal life. During Jewish American Heritage Month, it is especially fitting that we honor individuals who have gone above and beyond to strengthen our communities and preserve shared cultural heritage. I am proud to recognize her and extend my deepest gratitude for her continued service.

Mr. MORELLE

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I have said it before, and I will say it again: The Smithsonian American Women's History Museum is long overdue, and it deserves a place on The National Mall, period, end of sentence. The National Mall is America's front yard. It is the place we welcome visitors from all over the world. The Smithsonian is where we gather the stories, ideas, inventions, and memories that make us who we are. It is where we keep what matters to our large and, yes, very diverse American family. It is where our Nation tells its story, and American women have shaped every chapter of that story. This is why I enthusiastically supported the bipartisan version of H.R. 1329, produced by my Republican colleague and friend from New York, Representative Nicole Malliotakis, along with her companion bill, H.R. 1330, related to the National Museum of the American Latino. Together, those bills would resolve a statutory anomaly that has stalled both museums and allow them to move forward on The Mall as Congress intended. The bipartisan legislation is a simple, straightforward fix with 231 cosponsors in this House, including over 100 Members from each side of the aisle. For some reason, that is not the bill we are debating. I am saddened and disappointed that the Republican majority has needlessly politicized what has for years been a bipartisan priority. The hyperpartisan museum bill we are debating right now differs from the original legislation in four primary and important ways. First, it omits the National Museum of the American Latino, which has been paired with the women's history museum since they were both authorized together in 2020. Second, for reasons that pass all understanding, it grants the President of the United States unprecedented, unilateral, and unchecked authority to disregard the Smithsonian's recommended site and the Congress' recommended site for any reason, or for no reason at all, and pick his own. Third, it hands control over design and construction to boards stacked with political loyalists who have already shown they will rubberstamp whatever the President wants. To see evidence of that, look no further than the pile of rubble that used to be the White House East Wing. Fourth, it inserts an ideological poison pill intended to dictate what the museum can and cannot say about women's history. Mr. Speaker, we deal with a lot of complicated issues around here that require complex solutions. This is not one of them. There is a Republican-led bipartisan bill just sitting here with 231 cosponsors, including 104 Republican Members. We could pass that bill on suspension right now. The American people will be baffled, as I am, that my Republican colleagues have chosen this route instead, especially since, in 2019, Democrats accepted a Republican amendment requiring the museum to reflect ``the diversity of the political viewpoints held by women of the United States.'' Virtually identical language appears in this bill--ironically, right next to the provision that explicitly excludes political viewpoints held by women of the United States. I guess it should have explicitly read: the diversity of political viewpoints held by Republicans alone. If the goal were actually to move this museum forward, we would not be abandoning the yearslong bipartisan process that has brought us to the brink of construction. We would not be considering a bill with a cynical, ideological poison pill. We would not exclude the Latino museum. We would not allow boards filled with Trump loyalists to have final say on the museum's design and construction. We would certainly not be giving President Donald Trump, of all people, unchecked authority to pick a location for the women's history museum. We would not be spending time debating a bill destined to fail. Ask yourselves: Who should decide what appears in a Smithsonian museum, where it goes, and what it looks like? Should it be historians, scholars, and curators who, for 180 years, have made the Smithsonian the premier museum complex in the world, hosting 15 million visitors per year? Is that who it should be? Or a politician who complains publicly that the Smithsonian focuses too much on ``how bad slavery was'' and who has taken a literal wrecking ball to some of our most dignified and important landmarks in this country, a politician who uses our cultural institutions to rewrite history and hand out no-bid government contracts to his friends? That is the question before us. If House Republicans want the museum to succeed, the path ahead is straightforward and easy. Bring the clean bipartisan fix with its 231 cosponsors to the floor, pair it with the Latino museum as we have done for years, and let the historians and experts do the work of telling the full and complex story of American women. This legislation does the exact opposite. It takes a bill, the narrow purpose of which is to specify a museum location, and throws even more uncertainty into that very question. It makes literally no sense. Mr. Speaker, I will conclude where I began: The National Mall is where we welcome visitors from around the world, of all types. Everyone comes here. The Smithsonian is where we mark what makes us who we are. They belong to the American people, and the American people deserve both the women's history museum and the National Museum of the American Latino on The National Mall that tells their stories without political interference. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill, and I urge the majority to bring the bipartisan bill that 104 Members of their Conference have cosponsored to the floor. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I certainly appreciate my colleague and friend, Ms. Malliotakis, and her comments. But the truth is, I don't, first of all, think anyone who lives in Rochester, New York, the home of Susan B. Anthony, just to the west of Seneca Falls, needs to be told about the history of the women's suffrage movement in the United States or the fact that Susan B. Anthony was arrested in 1872 for voting in a Presidential election. We are well-steeped in it, and we think this ought to be a museum that is curated by scholars and by women and those groups. The location of this, which was identified in a bipartisan bill--and the suggestion that somehow we now are not supporting or withholding our support for a bipartisan bill is simply wrong. Actually, that would be the simple thing to do, to put the bipartisan bill on the floor. I don't know what the objection to it is, except that it doesn't have the following language, and this is really what it is all about, and I will read from the bill: ``The site for the Museum is hereby designated as the South Monument site, located on The National Mall, bordered by 14th Street Southwest, Jefferson Drive, Southwest, Raoul Wallenberg Place Southwest, and Independence Avenue Southwest, except that the President may designate an alternative site for the Museum within 180 days of the date of the enactment of this subsection.'' The extraneous portion that was added basically takes away everything the previous sentence said. Everything the bipartisan bill was intended to do is identify this location. But for reasons, as I said earlier, that surpass all understanding, we are now going to give the President of the United States complete, unilateral, unchecked power to make this decision. It makes no sense. It is not a bipartisan bill. In fact, if you want to have this resolved, you could eliminate that portion of the bill, and we could just do the simple sentence under the bipartisan bill, which has 104 Republican sponsors of it. We could do that. We could do that right now. That bill is already in print. Ms. Malliotakis is actually the sponsor of that bill, so I would be happy to support that bill of hers. But don't suggest for a minute that this is a bipartisan bill because it is not. It is actually the most hyperpartisan of bills, all intended to make sure that the President is happy with the location of the museum and give him the complete power over Congress to make that decision. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute the gentleman from California (Mr. Takano), my dear friend.

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I will say I find it rather astonishing that we feel the need here to give a lot of advice and counsel to the Smithsonian Institution about how to appropriately build and operate a museum, to curate a museum--I don't know if anybody has been--and, by the way, they do museums really well. We are supposed to pass legislation, which we don't even do that well, and now we are going to tell them how to run museums. I would just encourage my friends, if you haven't, the Smithsonian runs a number of museums in town--one on American history, one on African Americans, one on American Indians, one on natural history, one on air and space. Fifteen million people come to them. In the 8 years I have been privileged to be a Member of Congress, I have never once had a constituent or anybody else stop me and say, you know, I really have some advice to give to the Smithsonian Institution about how to run museums. I think they do it exceptionally well. In fact, I would argue that the Smithsonian Institution is the greatest museum complex anywhere in the world. It is an extraordinary place, free to Americans and others who come from other places to see the American experience. I don't think they need, really, a whole lot of help from Members of the United States House of Representatives on how to run museums. Let's let them do that. Let's let academicians, scholars, historians, and museum curators do that. All we are supposed to do here is say where the location of the museum is to be located. That is the one issue in front of us. Talk about making complex a simple issue. People will be baffled and scratching their heads to watch this debate should they ever watch this debate because this is a simple, simple matter, and we should not complicate this. Let's identify the location, and let's let the Smithsonian Institution do what they do better than any other organization in the world. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Randall), my dear friend and colleague.

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. To quote Mrs. Cammack, whom I have great respect for, women's history ``is American history, full stop.'' I completely agree, and I am delighted to see her and her daughter in her maiden speech in front of the House talk about the importance of women in American history. I completely agree with that, as well. What I find perplexing is that the construction of this museum has been held up now for several years since its authorization, because Congress could not reconcile the fact that we hadn't fully identified a location for the museum. That is the only thing that prevents the construction of this museum from moving forward. We have a bipartisan solution to address just that, the exact location of where this museum should be built. I think the question that needs to be answered in this moment is why we are not doing that bill. It has 231 cosponsors, a majority of this House, and over 100 Members on both sides of the aisle. It is simple and straightforward. Why aren't we doing that? Why are we here? Why do we have to debate for the balance of an hour a bill that is so simple to pass and has broad support? It is because this bill was rewritten by the White House. This bill was rewritten so that not a woman but a man, and, frankly, a man with something of a questionable history toward women, would have the final say. By the way, if he didn't like the location that we have identified in this bill, he has a way to raise his objections called veto the bill. He could veto it if he didn't like the location, and then we would negotiate. The Article I prerogative of the Congress is to pass laws. That is what we should be doing, but what we have done is, we have managed to twist ourselves into a pretzel just to satisfy the President so that the President can look at the location that Congress by, law would, like to make clear and say: I don't like that after all. Sorry, Congress. Thank you for your input, but go away. I, Donald Trump, will decide unilaterally where the women's history museum will go. Forget about the 435 Members of the House. Forget about the 100 Members of the Senate. We appreciate your input, like little children. Now, go away. I will make the decision. That is what is going to happen. That is what this bill is. If that is not the case, I would love to hear a single word of explanation about why we are not doing the bill that has broad bipartisan support that specifically says where this museum will be located on The National Mall, on America's front yard. Why is that not the case? Why are we here? We can dance around it. We can talk about the contributions of women. Certainly, no one on this side of the aisle would ever, ever spend any time disputing that. We are in complete agreement, which is why we have over 100 sponsors for the bill on our side of the aisle, as well. The question is, and the question that people watching will want answered, is: Why aren't you doing that bill? I will be eagerly listening for an explanation as to why the bipartisan bill with 231 cosponsors, which specifically says where this museum should be, the exact location, and why we are not doing that bill. I will sit quietly and listen. Maybe not so quietly, but I will sit and listen. I am looking for one word of explanation about why that is not the case. Until that time, I will reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I appreciate the gentlewoman's comments. It is interesting she began her comments by citing the bipartisan bill that isn't before the House, the bipartisan bill that I am urging us to pass, the bipartisan bill that has over 100 sponsors on the Republican side of the aisle and over 100 sponsors on the Democratic side of the aisle. She used that frame even though that is not the bill before the House. Of course, she could not offer an explanation as to why the bill that she cited actually isn't before the House, and instead, we have a hyperpartisan bill that gives Donald Trump unilateral power to decide where this museum is going. I would also note that among the rights that she talked about for women, the right to vote, et cetera, she didn't mention the right to control their own bodies. You know why? Because we have taken that away from women. This Supreme Court and this President have taken away the right of women so that my grandchildren, my granddaughters, have fewer rights than my mother did, than their grandmother and their great- grandmother had. We didn't talk about that if we are going to talk about the rights of women and how important it is to support women in this country. We didn't talk about why this bill is going to end up with no museum being built because we insist on giving unilateral power to Donald Trump to decide all things that the Congress should be deciding. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Chu).

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time remains.

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, we could do this bill, get this done, and make clear where this museum is supposed to be. All we have to do is pass the bipartisan bill. If we want to amend it with this exact location, if that is what Ms. Malliotakis is suggesting, then I am happy to do that, but there are so many things that she said that I have to respond to. First of all, President Biden couldn't do this because Congress has created in the authorizing legislation this anomaly, so we need Congress to be able to specify the location, which is the point of the bipartisan bill, which has over 230 sponsors on both sides of the aisle. We could do that. This is simple, but that is not what is here. By the way, just to remind the gentlewoman in case she is not clear, the chairperson of the NCPC, which has responsibility here, the chair of that is the current White House staff secretary, William Scharf. It is the President's employee who runs it. By the way, anyone who believes that the President has much regard for the law or how these things should go should just look at the pile of rubble that is the East Wing of the White House, where the President defied tradition, common sense, and appropriateness and just knocked down one of the most historic sections of the most historic building in the world and is building it without anyone's contributions, without any appropriate guardrails, and without any appropriate oversight. That is because, let's face it, that is what this President does. Mr. Speaker, I do want to go back. I am sorry. I thought I read this into the Record, but just to be clear, if people think this is an exact location, then they should read it to the end. After we identify the site, it says: ``except that the President may designate an alternative site for the museum within 180 days of the date of the enactment of this subsection.'' That is a little like when I was in high school, saying to my father: Can I stay out late? He would say: Yes, unless I say you can't. Does that mean I can stay out late? It only means I can stay out late if he gives me permission. We are going to put it at this site. We have it specifically here. Ms. Malliotakis is right. There is an exact location, unless the President says that is not where he wants it. This is the Congress. Article I--when I first came to Washington, Article I, it must have been said 1,000 times in my first few weeks-- Article I prerogatives, the Congress, Article I, the first section of the Constitution, the legislative responsibilities herein lie with the Congress of the United States. Yet, what are we doing, Mr. Speaker? We are passing legislation, which the President does have the right to sign or veto, in which case, if he vetoes, it comes back here for further action by the Houses. He gets one bite at the apple, but we are not content with that. We have to then give him unilateral power over what we have just passed to do whatever he wants. It is insanity. There is no explanation for why we are not doing the original bill-- None. I am still listening, and I still haven't heard it. I will continue to listen for the explanation. Perhaps in the close by my colleagues and friends, we will hear why, finally, there is something wrong with passing the original bill. By the way, this isn't going to clear it up because this bill is not going to become law. I will tell you what, Mr. Speaker, in a new Congress, when there is a new majority, we will put the actual location. We will put it in law. We will send it to the President, and we will see whether or not he insists on not only a bill that has a location, but insists more on the power to unilaterally do whatever he wants. The only way this majority is willing to do anything in this House seems to be to ultimately give the power, complete power, to the President to do what he chooses to do without our input. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, do you want to know why I think so many Americans have given up on this institution? Think about what we are doing right now. Think about this debate. I hope people see it. We were handed something extremely rare in this building nowadays, a finished, bipartisan bill sponsored by more than half the Members with over 100 Members on both sides agreeing to it, and we lit it on fire. We have basically thrown it out and put it in a dumpster. And for what: to stroke the President's ego, to bully a vulnerable group of people who make up less than 1 percent of the population? The worst part is that we are doing it at a museum that is intended to honor women and the enormous contributions of women to this country who succeeded despite a government that failed them at times. They overcame great obstacles. We manufactured ours. They had every excuse to fail and made history anyway. They overcame those obstacles. We have no excuses. Yet, here we are on the verge of failing them, once again. They deserved better then and they deserve better now. Mr. Speaker, I implore my colleagues one last time: Stop with the games. Bring the bipartisan version of this bill to the floor, along with the Latino museum build so we can finally get shovels in the ground on The National Mall for these critically important museums and honor the amazing people in this country who have written the chapter of American history that we all stand on the shoulders of and whose legacy we enjoy. Mr. Speaker, I urge defeat of this bill. Bring back the bipartisan bill. We will enthusiastically build it. We will put shovels in the ground and we will build these national museums as they should be. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MORELLE

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. MORELLE

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 4530, a bill that would increase the age to which Capitol Police officers may continue to serve from 60 to 62 when granted a retirement age waiver by the Capitol Police Board. Importantly, this bill does not change the statutory retirement age. Rather, it gives the Capitol Police Board flexibility to allow willing and able officers to remain with the force. I said it when the House recently passed its version of the legislation, and I want to reiterate that the officers of the United States Capitol Police have one of the most critical and demanding jobs in the legislative branch. Last week, we celebrated Police Week here in Washington. At a time when payouts and pardons are being handed to the people who savagely attacked the Capitol Police in this very building just 5 years ago, they need to know we have their backs; not just with words, but with actions. The force has come a long way since then, and I commend Chief Sullivan and former Chief Manger for working to rebuild the force and grow its ranks. We cannot stand in the way of that progress. Threats against Members, our families, staff, people who visit here, and threats against our democratic institutions are growing by the day, and they show no signs of relenting, so we must confront this scourge head-on. We can do that by helping to advance the interests that Capitol Police continue to deal with the challenges they have in terms of recruitment, and we can do it by passing this bill. I thank Chairman Steil, my colleague and friend, and all those members of the Committee on House Administration for making sure that we are able to get this passed. I also thank our colleagues in the Senate for giving us the chance to do this a second time, but I very much appreciate it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I thank the majority leader for sharing his tragic experience. I am grateful to him for his leadership on these important issues. Again, this is, in my mind, a commonsense way to make sure that we continue to have the backs of the members of the Capitol Police who do such an extraordinary job protecting this entire Capitol complex, the men and women who serve here, our staffs, our families, and all the American citizens who get to come and participate in this great democracy. I urge the passage of the bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MORELLE

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the distinguished career of Grant Malone, who is retiring in May after five exemplary years as President of the Rochester Building & Construction Trades' Council. In this role, he proudly represented more than 11,000 unionized construction workers and stood as a tireless advocate for working families. Grant is widely recognized as a towering figure in our construction community, bringing with him an additional 20 years of service as District Manager for the International Union of Operating Engineers. Throughout his career, Grant has embodied the highest ideals of service, leadership, and dedication to community. His deep pride in Rochester's growth is reflected in contributions that have shaped both its physical landscape and its enduring spirit. From overseeing landmark projects, such as the Susan B. Anthony Bridge and the Louise Slaughter Train Station, to ensuring that progress created opportunity for the people of upstate New York, his leadership consistently placed community first. A steadfast champion for local labor, Grant worked to protect local hiring requirements and expand apprenticeship programs that opened doors for young people pursuing meaningful careers in the skilled trades. Through his vision, the building trades became a pathway to long-term community strength, fostering economic opportunity and encouraging sustained investment across our region. It is my great privilege to congratulate Grant Malone on his well- earned retirement and to wish him the very best in the next chapter of his life. His legacy will continue to shape our community for generations to come.

Mr. MORELLE

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with great gratitude for the opportunity to welcome Rabbi Peter Stein as our guest chaplain. One of the privileges of our role in Congress is to introduce spiritual leaders from across the country who reflect the depth and diversity of faith in America. This tradition is more than ceremonial. It is a living expression of one of the most fundamental freedoms: the freedom to worship, to lead, and to serve according to one's faith. Rabbi Stein embodies that calling. As the senior rabbi of Temple B'rith Kodesh, he has devoted decades to guiding his congregation with wisdom, compassion, and deep commitment to justice. He has built bridges across faiths, worked to confront divisions and polarization, and reminded us that even in disagreement there is a responsibility to listen, to learn, and to treat one another with dignity. Rabbi Stein, we are honored by your presence today, grateful for your leadership, and thankful for the example you set. May your words continue to guide us in the work ahead.

Mr. MORELLE

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me begin by offering my appreciation and thanks to the gentlewoman from Oklahoma, my friend Mrs. Bice, for her leadership. I extend my appreciation as well to the chair of the Committee on House Administration, Bryan Steil, for his authorship and his partnership in advancing this bill. I rise in strong support of H.R. 8364, a bill that, as Mrs. Bice indicated, would increase the age at which Capitol Police officers may serve from 60 to 65 when granted a retirement age waiver by the Capitol Police Board. The men and women of the United States Capitol Police have one of the most critical and demanding jobs in the legislative branch. This was once again underscored over the weekend when Capitol Police officers acted to protect Members of this House, including the Speaker and other members of leadership from the latest attempt at political violence-- this time at the White House Correspondents' Association dinner. We are all grateful that everyone who attended the dinner was able to leave safely. Capitol Police officers secure the Capitol campus, investigate threats, provide protective details, screen visitors, respond to emergencies, investigate crimes, monitor demonstrations, secure major events, and more. They do this all in an era of dramatically increased threats and strain on the department, and I commend Chief Sullivan and former Chief Manger for their diligent work rebuilding the force from the low point it reached after January 6. I am pleased that the department has since grown to more than 2,300 sworn officers. This is meaningful progress, but there is still much more work to do. The large cohort of officers who joined the department after the September 11 attacks is now reaching retirement age. That is kind of hard to imagine, but that is the case. The department cannot afford to lose those experienced, fully capable officers solely because they reach an arbitrary age threshold. This bill does not change the statutory retirement age of 57, but it does give the Capitol Police Board discretion to allow an officer to continue serving until the age of 65 when doing so is in the public interest. I want to make sure this is clear to people: Nothing in this bill lessens the board's responsibility to ensure officers granted exemptions remain fit for duty--fully fit and capable of meeting the physical and operational demands of the job. This is a prudent, targeted step to preserve experience, maintain staffing, and help ensure the department has the workforce it needs. For those reasons, I support the bill and urge my colleagues to do the same. I thank my colleague and friend Mrs. Bice, as well as Chairman Steil, for their leadership. Mr. Speaker, this is an important, prudent, thoughtful measure, and it will add to the safety and protection of the people in the Capitol complex, whether it is Members, staff, or visitors. That is something I know both sides of the aisle deeply appreciate and support. Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MORELLE

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the incredible Olympians from the Rochester community who represented Team USA at the 2026 Winter Olympics: Dylan Walczyk, Christopher Lillis, and Haley Winn. These exceptional athletes proudly represented our region on the world stage, competing with determination and excellence at the Winter Games last month. Their achievements reflect the strong tradition of athletic dedication and excellence that our community has long fostered. Our local athletes demonstrated their remarkable abilities in various Olympic events. From the slopes to the rink, these competitors faced the very best athletes from around the world. Two of Rochester's own reached the top of the podium and brought home Olympic gold medals. Haley Winn competed in women's ice hockey and helped lead the team to a gold medal victory, defeating Canada in the championship game. Christopher Lillis competed in the freestyle skiing mixed team aerials competition, securing himself a second gold medal after winning the same event at the 2022 Winter Olympics. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the entire Rochester community, I congratulate these Olympians on their extraordinary athletic achievements at the 2026 Winter Olympics. We are incredibly proud of their remarkable accomplishments and contributions to inspiring the next generation of athletes in our region and across the country.

Mr. MORELLE

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today during Women's History Month to honor an exceptional and influential leader from Rochester, New York: Carla Palumbo. Carla has built a distinguished career as an advocate for justice, a champion for survivors of domestic violence, and a dedicated public servant. She has served as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Legal Aid Society of Rochester, where she has strengthened the organization's mission to provide high-quality legal representation to low-income individuals and families, ensuring that justice is accessible to all. Her impact is especially profound in her work supporting survivors of domestic violence. In 1990, she founded the Legal Aid Society's Domestic Violence Program, creating a critical resource for individuals seeking safety, protection, and a path forward. Through her leadership, countless individuals have found support, advocacy, and a voice during times of crisis. In addition to her legal career, Carla has served the Rochester community in public office, including in the Monroe County Legislature, where she served as Minority Leader, and on the Rochester City Council. Mr. Speaker, Carla Palumbo's career reflects a deep and enduring commitment to justice, service, and community. During Women's History Month, it is especially fitting that we honor extraordinary women who have gone above and beyond to strengthen our communities. I am proud to recognize her and extend my deepest gratitude for her continued service.