Richard Neal

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. I want to thank the sponsors for their hard work. I urge colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Judy Chu), a very knowledgeable woman from the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett), a well-regarded member of the Ways and Means Committee. We are certain he will add clarity to this debate.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am discouraged to come to the floor today as we squander the valuable time of this body arguing over a pointless resolution that will accomplish nothing for the people of America, whether it is accepted or rejected--nothing. Let's be clear about what this resolution does and does not do. We are not arguing today over whether this body will or will not adopt a tax on carbon emissions. This resolution, and I am quoting, expresses the sense of Congress about a carbon tax. So what we are trying to achieve, apparently, this morning is a discussion of the mood of Congress. Well, we should hold some hearings about the mood of Congress, because I would submit that it is not a very pleasant time to be working on Capitol Hill. Nothing in this exercise is going to have anything to do with a carbon tax. This is better suited to a high school debate than it is to the United States House of Representatives. There are plenty of people across the country who need real help and real action from this Congress. Every day, American families, people far from this building, far from this city, are struggling with real problems and real challenges. They feel their standard of living has not improved. They want to feel some security, security that their jobs will stick around--how about holding some hearings on pensions?--security that they can count on health insurance, security that one day they will be able to retire with dignity, security that they will be able to launch their kids into a successful and happy life. So, on this Thursday morning, the Republican leadership has brought up a sense of the mood of Congress on carbon. We could choose to bring forward legislation that actually would help American families today. We could help them meet many of the challenges that they have. Instead, we are using our precious remaining legislative days to hold an amateur hour on a debate about something that is not going to happen. This is a vacuous gesture, empty in every form. It is a political stunt. It is not worthy of the time or the attention of this body. When I go home and talk to my constituents and my neighbors, they want to hear what I, along with the Members of this Chamber, intend to do to ensure that their hard work still translates into a decent life. Something around us is clearly out of step. There is a growing anxiety around the country that is bigger than our political differences and divide. It is a building sense that, at some point when we all perhaps were not looking, the system became stacked against ordinary people; the rules changed, and hard work isn't enough any longer to guarantee that you can make it in America. The unemployment rate, for sure, is low, but 65 percent of Americans worry about having enough money to pay their bills. Yes, we can say this morning that downward pressure on wages, essentially, has kept those wages flat for the American people despite the fact that the unemployment rate is advertised at about 4 percent. One in five Americans has more credit card debt than emergency savings. Less than 40 percent of the people in this country have enough savings to cover a $1,000 emergency room visit or, for that matter, car repair. It is plain to see in my own district. We have seen the challenges that the people back in western Massachusetts face every single day. Despite the talk of growth in the stock market--which, by the way, has been going up since October of 2009--their salaries have barely moved. Home prices have gone up by 9 percent in our market last year. A gallon of gas costs 28 percent more than last year. Electricity bills in Massachusetts are up 21 percent over last year. Childcare, saving for college, and, again, retirement and pensions, healthcare premiums-- Mr. Speaker, people are having trouble keeping up. Teachers have to pick up jobs waiting on tables or driving for Uber. Families need to juggle multiple jobs just to get by. But today's economy, apparently, isn't hard on the top 1 percent in America. Last year, the average bonus on Wall Street--and listen to this number, average--$185,000. It rose 17 percent after our Republican colleagues passed their tax bill last year. That is three times what most American families bring home in an entire year. It seems like things used to be easier. Do you know why? Because they were easier. Americans born in the 1940s had a 92 percent chance of earning a higher income than their parents had at age 30. Those born in the 1980s have a 50 percent chance of doing so. The tax bill that Republicans passed last year, without a single hearing in all of 51 days--and not, incidentally, with one Democratic vote--will make things substantially worse for these families. People don't really need to hear these statistics. Intuitively, they know what has happened. Three out of four Americans are not confident that their children will grow up to be better off than they were, and they have every right to be worried. Healthcare used to be easier to afford. The new Republican tax law raised premiums by 15 percent and weakened protections for millions of Americans with preexisting conditions. Then Republicans wanted to slash $500 billion out of the Medicare program so that many of our family members who depend on it will be even more challenged. What have families gotten from the Republicans on healthcare? Higher deductibles, higher costs, and plans that cover much less. The cost of a 4-year degree at a public college has doubled since 1996. The basic ticket into the middle class is out of reach for too many of our young people today. The ones who do manage to scrape by far too often accumulate debt that makes homeownership or starting a family a long way off. Other family budget essentials just keep climbing, too. As I noted, gas prices are up 27 percent from last year. Childcare costs rose for the fifth year in a row. This year, a week of infant childcare at a daycare center is $211. Mr. Speaker, there are concrete actions that we might take right here in this Chamber to support these families. We could spend today working on college affordability. How about some pension hearings to talk about what is happening in the central States as well as the challenges that retirement faces for the American family? And how do we help more people afford that first home or help their parents, once again, prepare for a secure retirement? We are nearly out of time to get things done in this Congress. We are down to less than 25 legislative days before the midterm elections. If we plan to do anything about the pressing issues facing Americans, this is the time to step it up. But, instead of trying to broker solutions or offer ideas, the Republican leadership has opted to hold a shadow debate. It doesn't matter how this vote turns out. Let me repeat that. It doesn't matter how this vote turns out. The outcome is going to be identical. Nothing on this issue will change because of what we are doing this morning. Nothing will change. That contentment with the status quo may be fine for my Republican colleagues, but it is not going to help the families whom I represent. In fact, it pretty much reinforces their doubts about the very work of Congress. Listen, if you want to debate a carbon tax, let's hold some hearings. Let's hold some discussions about a carbon tax. Let's find out what it would mean for the economy. We might use that moment to test what offshore drilling does for oil as part of the carbon tax discussion or for the families in western Massachusetts. Let's find out what impact it would have on fossil fuel emissions and economic growth. Let's think strategically about how it might affect our geopolitics. If you want to have this debate, then let's have a real debate through hearings in the regular order. This resolution is really meaningless. The outcome will be nothing, no matter what the final vote turns out to be. It is a waste of all of our time this morning, and we ought to be devoting that time to meeting the challenges that the American people expect us to meet. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson), a very important member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I wonder what the Farm Bureau says about the tariffs on agricultural products across the country. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson), my neighbor and good friend, a well-informed member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I don't think anybody was demeaning the work that people do, on this side. I think we were talking about the challenging nature of our economy. I don't think the gentleman would dispute the fact that the gig economy has created a downward pressure on wages. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis), the voice of Chicago and a well-known and well- regarded member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. I want to compliment the previous speaker, my friend, Mr. Shimkus, on the notion of process, calling up the notion of process. So here we have had a debate where we have sparred for the better part of an hour, and we are debating a topic on which there have been no hearings. Now, let me guess. This is consistent with how the tax bill was done in, incidentally, 51 days, without a hearing or without a witness. So we are being asked to vote on something today, here, on which there has been no opportunity to place the magnifying glass of critical scrutiny on the proposal that is in front of us because, the truth is, what is in front of us is a question about the mood of Congress. I think all 435 of us could testify to what the mood of Congress is right now, so I don't think it would be one of the more challenging events that we would confront. But the idea that this is brought in front of the Congress without any opportunity for anybody to examine the underlying legislation and the thrust of what the regular order might impel contributes to the frustration that the American people feel about the institution and its priorities. So as we have wrapped up this debate over a piece of legislation that will accomplish zip, zero, nothing, it literally does not matter how the vote turns out because the sole purpose of this resolution is to express, once again, the mood of Congress. I am happy to express the mood of Congress any time that they want, happy to have a hearing on the mood of Congress if that is what they think might get us to a more sound proposal of energy independence, the use of renewables. But no, instead they bring up a piece of legislation here that is going to test how we feel about things this morning. I think that the mood we should focus on is the mood of the American people. The people I talk to are under stress. They are tired. They are exhausted from working one, two jobs. Labor participation rates at 62.9 percent, 2 million people with opioid addictions, I wonder what their mood is as they listen to the discussion that we have had here on this floor. They are anxious about their future. They are feeling squeezed because, for years now, the economy has been leaving them a little bit further behind. And I say that about wage growth. Wages have flatlined for the better part of almost 13 years in America. And now, even as we see some glimmer of hope, the truth is the cost of gasoline and the cost of inflation is going to stagnate their wages again. So paychecks have been stuck at the same level, and all the things that families need to get by have been getting more and more expensive. Housing, healthcare, college, childcare, utilities, those bills keep growing, but the salaries somehow don't keep up. Why don't we have a hearing about the mood of people who have not seen any real wage increases--then we would get a better flavor for the debate that we are having today--rather than the mood of Congress on a piece of legislation that has had no hearings and no vetting? So what about a hearing on the mood of our retirement system? What about a hearing on the mood of a child's education? Why don't we begin to talk about some of those issues? Why don't we just have some hearings on some of these issues? Young people are going tens of thousands of dollars into student loan debt just to try to get a decent start in life. What about their mood? Seniors are seeing their fixed incomes stretched until they break, forcing far too many to choose between paying for their prescription drugs and their groceries. Let's have a hearing on their mood. Parents cope with high childcare costs that can eat up most of their paycheck, but the small margin that is left over is important to keep that family going. Let's have a hearing about their mood. The people I talk to, they are not asking for too much. Their expectations for their families aren't out of line. Nobody is asking for a handout. They are asking for a hand up for opportunity. Everybody is working hard, but people feel like they are running as fast as they can up the down escalator. Let's have a hearing on how they feel about those costs. It takes us an unreasonable amount of effort to stay in exactly the same place. Getting ahead feels more challenging and more difficult all the time. Last December, Republicans passed a catastrophic tax bill that gave away $2.3 trillion over 10 years--without a hearing, without a witness--in 51 days. What about the mood of the American people as they examine it? And we have seen the mood in public polling. The legislation we have today could have offered some relief to low- and middle-income families, but Republicans chose to leave them out in the cold. In fact, it did so little for the average family that their cuts won't begin to keep up with the rise in healthcare premiums or, for that matter, gasoline prices at the pump. Instead, the tax bill heaped giveaways on people who are already completely comfortable and thriving--more concentrated wealth. The people who elected us sent us here to do a job on their behalf, and we ought to take into consideration their mood. They have hired us to get things done for them, and we all take, I hope, that responsibility seriously. Our activity today has been unworthy of the trust they have placed in us. It has really been a hoax. They have just wasted all this time arguing over a sense of Congress about a carbon tax and the mood of Congress. I could have told them what the mood was here; they just have to ask me. This is going to be a pointless vote, meaningless in stature, and there will be no outcome whatsoever. This is political theater. It is not governing like responsible Representatives. I urge my colleagues in the majority to focus this body on accomplishing things in the future that really might help people who sent us here to do precisely that. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize and congratulate Dowd Insurance on the occasion of its 120th anniversary. Established in 1898, Dowd is one of the oldest, largest, and most experienced insurance agencies in Massachusetts. Since its founding, the group has been under continuous Dowd family ownership for four generations, providing counsel and insurance protection for a diverse range of clients. In 1865, James J. Dowd, an immigrant from County Kerry, Ireland, arrived in Holyoke, Massachusetts with his wife and fourteen children. He began working in a textile mill in hopes of building a better life for himself and his family. A few decades later, one of his sons, who bore his name, went on to found Dowd Insurance--laying the foundation for a family legacy that has spanned multiple generations and continues to flourish today. James J. Dowd, II gave up his career as a professional baseball player and joined the firm in 1916 after his father passed away, and James J. Dowd, Jr. and John E. Dowd entered the family business in 1947 and 1951 respectively after each serving in World War II. The fourth generation of the Dowd family was ushered into the business in 1974 when James J. Dowd, III became a member of the agency. He was then joined by John E. Dowd, Jr., Dowd Insurance's current President and CEO, in 1982. After more than a century of operation marked by profound growth and success, including having joined the International Network of Insurance and opening multiple new branch offices, it is evident that Dowd Insurance has made numerous positive contributions to the community of which it takes pride in being an integral part. Mr. Speaker, over the course of its history Dowd Insurance has demonstrated exemplary service, leadership, and dedication. Those traits are hallmarks of the agency's long and admirable tradition of service in western Massachusetts, and are certainly worthy of recognition. On the occasion of Dowd Insurance's 120th anniversary, I wish the Dowd family, the agency's partners, and the dedicated men and women who work with them all the best and much continued prosperity.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to mourn the loss of a great American patriot, Major General George W. Keefe, former adjutant general of the Massachusetts National Guard who passed away last week at the age of 79. A lifelong resident of Northampton, Massachusetts, which I had the honor of representing for 20 years, General Keefe dedicated his life in service to our country, his community, and protecting the freedoms we all hold so dear. He was called an airman's airman and wore the uniform with great honor and, indeed, distinction. I knew General Keefe well and got to see firsthand what an exemplary leader and decent person he was. Beyond his military accomplishments and commendations, he was a loving husband, a dedicated father and grandfather, and, indeed, to many of us, a very good friend. General Keefe enlisted with the 104th Fighter Wing at Barnes Air National Guard Base as an airman in 1956 at the age of 17. He continued to work his way up the ranks, becoming an officer and eventually serving as the wing's vice commander. In 1999, General Keefe was asked to serve as adjutant general of the Massachusetts National Guard, the first Air Force officer and western Massachusetts resident to hold that post in more than 200 years of history. He retired in 2005, ending what is deemed a remarkable military career. The motto in the Air Force is: ``Aim High. Fly-Fight-Win.'' George Keefe did that for nearly a half century. On behalf of the United States of America, I want to thank him for his distinguished service to our Nation. My thoughts and prayers today are with his sons, Gary, Jim, Patrick, Tim, and their families. May he rest in peace.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, I want to close by thanking Chairman Kevin Brady and acknowledging Chairman Walden and Ranking Member Pallone for their hard work on what is really a good step forward. As I said earlier in my remarks, this bill is not going to solve the opioid crisis tomorrow, but it does include a number of important provisions that will expand access to treatment and recovery options for all Americans. This was a bipartisan piece of work in our committee. I think we can be proud of it. We know many who need treatment now cannot access it, and this bill will take significant steps to change that. I want to thank Jessica Shapiro and Karl Hagnauer from the House Legislative Counsel for their hours of work in helping us to put together H.R. 6; the staff of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Office of Legislation, in particular Ira Burney and Jennifer Druckman; and the staff of the Congressional Budget Office, including Rebecca Yip and Lara Robillard. Finally, I want to thank the Ways and Means Republican staffers led by Emily Murry, the Energy and Commerce Democratic staff led by Tiffany Guarascio, the Energy and Commerce Republican staff led by Josh Trent, and my own Democratic staff at Ways and Means, which is always superb, led by Amy Hall, Melanie Egorin, and Rachel Dolin. A lot of hard work goes into this sort of legislation and a lot of complexities have to be addressed during the process, and oftentimes that is not the sort of information that finds its way to the public light. But acknowledging here those people who helped to put this together as well as the men and women of the committee, I think, frequently is missed, and we want to do that so that they receive the, I think, due praise that they are entitled to. I hope that this, when matched with Senate provisions, will quickly become law. One of the things that unites every one of us in this Chamber is that we all know somebody--a family member, somebody who lives down the street, or a coworker--who has an opiate addiction. I think that Congress taking this step today in this direction will provide some sense of hope for those families and friends who find themselves, for a variety of reasons, suffering from the pain economically and physically that comes from opiate addictions. I think, as we close here, this is a good day for the Ways and Means Committee, Energy and Commerce Committee, and, I think, for the members and the staffers whose work is reflected in this product. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 4 minutes. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 6. It has become all too clear that the ongoing opioid epidemic has gripped our Nation's families and communities. It crosses social spectrums and is a public health, safety, and economic crisis as well. In Massachusetts in 2016 there were 2,083 confirmed cases of opioid- related overdose deaths. This is a 26 percent increase from 2015 and a 54 percent increase from 2014. In 2017 there was a small decrease, but clearly there was still a strong need to address this devastating trend. This week, the House has considered opioid bills in committee and on the floor, and some of these, in fact, will expand treatment options for the care that is necessary. However, a number of the Democratic priorities here, I think, really provide real investment and opportunity. For example, it incorporates a bill I introduced that would expand Medicare coverage for opioid treatment programs. Currently, Medicare does not cover this sort of treatment. This would give Medicare beneficiaries access to a broad range of treatment options, leading to opportunities for lasting recovery. Although many think of opioid use disorders as a problem faced by young people, many may be surprised to learn that it is rapidly growing among our Medicare beneficiaries. Medicare part D spending on opioids for treatment outpaces enrollment, growing 165 percent from 2006 to 2015. In 13 States, the over-65 population has the highest rate of opioid-related inpatient stays. H.R. 6 also expands coverage of medication-assisted treatments and allows nurse practitioners and physician assistants to prescribe or dispense certain opioid treatment drugs. The measure also provides consistent Medicaid coverage for at-risk youth and expands Medicaid coverage for foster youth until the age of 26. These bills are pieces of a large, complex puzzle. We need to find realistic solutions with long-term outcomes. Part of this approach is to protect and strengthen Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act. The ACA guarantees parity and nondiscrimination for people who need substance use disorder treatment and mental health treatment. Thanks to the ACA, millions of previously uninsured adults now have access to health insurance and, I might add, the expansion of Medicaid. There are many efforts here, I think, time and time again, to dismantle the Medicare proposal, as well as cutting back on many of the initiatives that we have proposed in the past. Instead of strengthening and ensuring a sustainable future for the ACA and for Medicaid, some of our colleagues want to cut them to pay for a $2.3 trillion tax plan. Efforts to sabotage the ACA, coupled with premium hikes, slashing preexisting condition protections, and increasing drug prices will lead to more uncertainty. Dismantling current health benefits would damage any progress that we are making today with the opioid crisis. It would also increase healthcare costs and lower coverage and quality of life for Americans and their families. I urge my colleagues to recognize that many families, who are devastated by addiction, are going to need the opportunities that we are embracing today. The impact of the opioid crisis on the labor participation rates in America should concern all of us. According to a recent report, the economic burden from opioids was estimated at $95 billion. The American people are facing two-pronged obstacle health challenges. Uncertainty remains one of them. We want to make sure that we don't sabotage the ACA. And part of the path forward today is highlighted by the achievement we are all about to recognize. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis).

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO) on the occasion of its 25th anniversary. Over the past quarter-century, BIO has served as the leading voice of the biotechnology industry and has been instrumental in fostering new discoveries that help patients around the world defeat diseases and conditions that were unbeatable only a generation ago. Biotechnology has not only helped drive the United States' economy forward through the use of renewable and sustainable fuel sources, but it has also helped the world strive to meet the increasing food demands of an ever-growing planet. For the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, as well as in other places across our nation, the biotechnology industry is an integral pillar of innovation and economic development. As the largest representative body of biotechnology companies, academic institutions, state biotechnology centers and related organizations across the United States and in more than 30 other nations, BIO has contributed greatly to the scientific breakthroughs in biotechnology that have benefitted our world. I would also like to honor the memory of Henri A. Termeer, an early biotech visionary and pioneering scientist who was a resident of Massachusetts and provided remarkable contributions to the biotechnology industry with his exemplary leadership, insight, and dedication. Mr. Speaker, I would like to reiterate that the Biotechnology Innovation Organization's commitment to supporting the growing biotechnology industry in our nation has promoted a vast degree of innovation, helped to build a more robust economy, and benefitted a near countless number of patients around the globe. On behalf of the Massachusetts Congressional Delegation, I wish BIO all the best and much continued prosperity.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, our country is currently experiencing an epidemic of opioid-related overdoses and fatalities. My community and my State of Massachusetts are not strangers to the heartbreak and devastation that we recognize on this occasion. There is a lot we can and should be doing about the opioid epidemic, and I am eager to work with my colleagues here in the House on comprehensive and effective solutions. For today, the bill we are to consider is a good start. The Synthetics Trafficking and Overdose Prevention, or STOP, Act of 2018 shores up the ability of U.S. Customs to target and thwart shipments of synthetic opioids like fentanyl into the United States through the mail. It requires the U.S. Postal Service to collect important information about the contents and senders of packages from foreign postal services. I supported the earlier edition of this bill that was introduced in 2017 because I recognized the enormity of the devastation we face with opioids. I know that there were serious concerns with the earlier version of the bill, especially with respect to the severity of the penalties it imposed on the Postal Service. I am glad that the STOP Act that we are considering today makes important improvements to that original bill and to those penalties and provisions. Let me especially express my appreciation for Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee Ranking Member Bill Pascrell, who has worked together with the Democrats on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, the Senate, and the majority, obviously, to make improvements. I understand there were some continued concerns with the bill, and we certainly want to continue to work with interested parties to address those concerns. Given the urgency of the epidemic at hand, I am glad that we are able to support what is in front of us today, which I believe is a strong and achievable measure in this legislation to at least address part of the opioid epidemic. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), and I ask unanimous consent that he may control that time.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Berkshire Theatre on the occasion of its 90th anniversary. It is one of the oldest continually running theatre groups in the country. Located in the heart of the Berkshire Mountains, the group is an exemplary representation of what Western Massachusetts has to offer. Berkshire Theatre Festival was founded in 1928 in Stockbridge, Massachusetts. Over the course of its storied history, it has been both a significant economic driver in the region and a home to people and events which have greatly contributed to the vibrancy of our country's cultural heritage. In 2010, Berkshire Theatre Festival merged with The Colonial Theatre to form the Berkshire Theatre Group, combining two of Berkshire County's oldest cultural institutions and icons of the American theatre tradition. Berkshire Theatre Group's four total stages have featured many critically acclaimed actors and award-winning productions over the years, and constitute a priceless cultural resource for the community of Western Massachusetts. Moreover, Berkshire Theatre Festival's Playhouse, which is now known as the Fitzpatrick Main Stage, was added to the National Register of Historic Places in 1976. In addition to these remarkable distinctions, Berkshire Theatre Festival also launched a theatrical school in 1929 that continues today to offer internship programs in acting, directing, design, administration, and technical theatre. With these offerings as well as many other educational outreach programs, Berkshire Theatre Group is able to serve over 13,000 students. Mr. Speaker, I would like to reiterate that Berkshire Theatre has been a group of historical importance and cultural renaissance since its founding in 1928. It's admirable promotion of the arts, focus on educational opportunities, and diverse community benefits are certainly worthy of recognition. Berkshire Theatre has undoubtedly been a center for creativity which continues to enrich, invigorate, and transform artists and audiences alike. As Berkshire Theatre celebrates its 90th anniversary, I wish the group all the best and much continued prosperity.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, the majority leader said a couple of moments ago that $15 billion was spare change. Let me tell you what he apparently means by spare change. It means cutting food assistance for working families and taking $7 billion from the Children's Health Insurance Program. I guess that is spare change. The previous speaker just said he was alarmed at the prospect that on the precipice of borrowing we were now going to cut back on our borrowing capacity as it relates to savings. After the same political party borrowed $2.3 trillion over 10 years to pay for a tax cut for people at the top, the strongest in America. Those are the priorities. The priority is: Let's cut taxes for the strongest and the wealthiest. And let's pay for it by taking money from people who need it most in America. We have seen time and again they are more focused on the needs of the wealthiest and the well-connected. We should be addressing the challenges of the middle clas in this session and making sure that they have ample assistance. Now they are after healthcare for children. Now they want to propose $7 billion for their healthcare plan. Let's be clear: that priority, as long as I have been in this Congress, has been taking care of the strongest and the most powerful at the very top. On January 19, 2001, when Bill Clinton said good-bye to the country, there was a $5.6 trillion surplus. They cut taxes by $1.3 in 2001. They cut taxes again by another $1 trillion in 2003. So there was $2.3 million worth of tax cuts, two wars, a million and half new veterans. The answer to that, of course, was: let's have more tax cuts. That is precisely what they did with their tax cut plan. There was $2.3 trillion borrowed to provide for a tax cut for people at the very top. They call themselves conservatives. They pronounce that they are disciples of balanced budgets. It has been reckless spending that we have watched them embrace time and again, and this is but another example of that endeavor.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize the students and advisors of Easthampton High School's `We The People' team for their hard work, dedication, and outstanding achievement. These individuals prevailed over a number of highly skilled competitors to earn first-place honors in the 2018 Massachusetts `We The People' academic contest at the Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the U.S. Senate in Boston. They have accordingly earned the distinction of representing the Commonwealth in the national `We The People' competition this week in Washington, DC. The annual 'We The People' competition is an extraordinary opportunity that brings young minds together to discuss and learn about issues of vital importance to today's world and our nation. Not only did the students of Easthampton High School's team display exemplary commitment, ability, and character in preparing for and winning the statewide competition in January, but since then they have worked even harder as they eagerly anticipate competing in the national competition. They have been preparing to testify at mock congressional hearings and demonstrate their knowledge of the U.S. Constitution, issue statements on a variety of topics related to our country's political and historical heritage, and field complex questions from a number of expert judges. I am confident that they will find their experience valuable for years to come--whether that be as a result of the fundamental knowledge that they have learned or the vital skills that they have built. The students have been led by their teacher Kelley Brown who has provided crucial guidance and instrumental mentorship. The outstanding work performed by her class is a testament to the value of quality teachers in the Massachusetts public school system. The victorious students include Charlotte Banigan-White, Tierney Boyle, Ryan-James Bragg, David Brakey, Vincent Catalano, Aidan Chappuis, Carly Detmers, Victoria Drejsa, Chantel Duda, Shane Gravel, Kristin Hartley, Quinn LaFountain, Ambera Mutevelic, Shane O'Donnell, Devon Owens-Heywood, Lucas Patton, David Hunter Pelkey, Carlie Raucher, Nicolas Soucy, Fernando Tenesaca, and Dillan Wilson. Additional advisors of the team include Timothy Wood, Stephen Linsky, Nancy Sykes, and Anuraj Shah. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to once again acknowledge Easthampton High School's `We The People' academic team for their superb dedication and accomplishments. Strong civic education is the foundation of our democracy and these inspiring students have exemplified the finest qualities of informed citizenship. I am proud of this group and I wish them all the best in their upcoming national competition as well as all their other future endeavors.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor of the House this morning to pay tribute to a close friend of mine, Monsignor George Farland, who is celebrating the 50th anniversary of his ordination as a Catholic priest. On May 4, 1968, Monsignor Farland received his ministerial orders at Cathedral of St. Michael the Archangel in my hometown of Springfield, Massachusetts. I know because I was the CYO basketball coach at Sacred Heart upon his arrival. For the next half century, he has been a source of inspiration and comfort to his faithful parishioners at Sacred Heart Church in Springfield. Every Sunday, he provides a strong spiritual message, frequently laced with a special grace and a sense of irony and good humor, but always a powerful message. We have watched and witnessed as he has rebuilt and sustained a vibrant parish in the life of its members. Sacred Heart Church was built by immigrants, and to this day, it welcomes immigrants, as he frequently says in the opening phrases of his powerful homilies: ``No matter what your status or station in life, you are welcome in this church.'' He has found time to serve as a police chaplain for the Springfield Police Department and also a hospital chaplain in the Sisters of Providence Health System in Mercy Medical Center. He has surely reinvigorated the life of the church, and is a son of Hungry Hill, a graduate of Cathedral High School and Saint Anselm College. His spiritual leadership in western Massachusetts has become, in fact, legendary. He has a well-deserved reputation for compassion, humility, and kindness. Again, the welcoming message of his inclusivity continues to deeply resonate with those who worship at Sacred Heart Church. He leads his parishioners up and down that middle aisle, oftentimes in joy and happiness or in grief of the funeral, but he always does it with a special tolerance and grace. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the United States, I want to congratulate Monsignor George Farland for reaching this important milestone in his life, thank him for his decades of thoughtful ministry, and acknowledge the remarkable contributions he has made to the people of all walks of faith in the Diocese of Springfield in western Massachusetts.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I had a productive and informative meeting last Friday, April 13, with Manuel Espina, Guatemala's Ambassador to the United States. We discussed the strong economic relationship between our two countries and our cooperative efforts to address drug trafficking and terrorism. I was particularly pleased to learn that Guatemala has taken strong efforts on border security, including by detaining 44 individuals with possible ties to ISIS who were traveling with false documents with the intention of using Guatemala as a transit point to reach the United States. I look forward to continuing working with my Guatemalan colleagues to strengthen the relationship between our two countries.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. CBO accountants came back the other day and said: Let us tell you right now what is wrong. They gave us hardcore numbers about economic growth, and they gave us hardcore numbers about debt and deficits. Do you know what the answer was? Let's not believe what they have to say. Let's not pay any attention to what they have to say because it doesn't square with the philosophy of tax cuts paying for themselves. So the last point is, if you voted for the tax cuts and you voted for the omnibus spending bill on the Republican side--because I know no Democrat voted for the tax cut--today, when you come in, you ought to wear a mask when you cast your vote because Jesse James would be honored.