Joe Neguse

Mr. NEGUSE

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, 16 days, that is how much time we have left until the government runs out of funding. Six weeks ago, Mr. Speaker, I stood here on the floor of the House with my colleagues as House Republicans gaveled the House out of session for a 45-day recess. Now, you may recall, Mr. Speaker, the priority that House Republicans were pursuing on that day, as we gaveled out of session. I can assure you it was not to fund the government. It was, instead, a bill targeting the lesser prairie chicken and the long-eared bat, literally. This came on the heels of a summer spent on Republican bills to protect gas stoves. Six weeks later, we are back in Washington. Republicans have gaveled the Congress back into session. Here we are on the House floor yet again. What are we spending our time doing? Perhaps a bill to fund the government? No. A bill to ensure that members of our armed forces are paid, that the operations of our government remain up and running? No. Instead, House Republicans choose to spend the time of this body debating a bill attacking electric vehicles. Electric vehicles, gas stoves, the long-eared bat, and the lesser prairie chicken. Those are the priorities of the House Republican caucus. Sixteen days away from a government shutdown, and this is how House Republicans choose to spend our time. The priorities that House Republicans are pursuing are grossly out of step with the priorities of the American people. You are in charge, Mr. Speaker. You could choose today to put bills on the floor to build safer communities or lower costs or grow the middle class. Instead, we are left with political games, and, oh, that is right, a baseless impeachment inquiry that the Speaker announced 48 hours ago. Maybe we can get back to the basic job of the U.S. House of governing, of passing a budget. Mr. Speaker, there is a good place to start. The Fiscal Responsibility Act that this body passed a mere 4 months ago set out negotiated spending levels. I don't know if the Speaker voted for it, but 149 of your colleagues did in the Republican caucus. The ranking member, my friend from Texas, voted for it. Now, months later, the Republican caucus, the Speaker, they have abandoned, they have revoked, reneged on that deal. Why? Because the far-right members of their caucus have demanded it. Here we are, 16 days away from a government shutdown that many members of the Republican Conference seem fixated on creating. We had a Rules Committee hearing, which the distinguished gentlewoman joined me in, just a few days ago, where one of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle was unabashed, who said: Let's shut it down. Of course, for those Americans watching, they know that we have been here before. They have seen this movie. They have seen how it ends.

Mr. NEGUSE

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today, along with my colleague, Representative DeGette, to honor the life of an extraordinary Coloradan. John Fielder was a prolific nature photographer who lived in Summit County since 2006. Over 50 books have been published showing his photography. John also worked to protect Colorado's ranches, public lands, and wildlife. Over his 40 year career, John was recognized on several occasions for his work. He received the 1993 Sierra Club Ansel Adams Award, the 2011 the Aldo Leopold Foundation's first Achievement Award ever given to an individual, and an Honorary Degree in Sustainability Studies from Colorado Mountain College. We thank John for his work elevating the natural beauty of Colorado and for fighting to protect our pristine lands.

Mr. NEGUSE

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, this House is well served by the many public servants who make up the ranks of congressional staff, and I want to acknowledge the passing of one such public servant, Stan Sloss. Stanley, or ``Stan'' as he was known to all those who worked with and knew him, grew up in Glenwood Springs, Colorado, and spent his career serving a number of Members of the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate who represented Colorado and Alaska. He was a legislative director to former Representative David Skaggs and former Senator Mark Udall, who both, at the time Stan worked for them, represented the Second Congressional District of Colorado--a district that I am proud to represent. Stan dedicated his life to public service having spent 37 years in various roles in Congress. When he retired, at age 70, then Senator Mark Udall, provided a tribute to Stan in a floor speech, in which he captured the essence of what made Stan so respected and admired. Those who had the benefit of working with Stan during his time in Congress can attest to the sentiments reflected in that tribute. As Sen. Mark Udall and Rep. David Skaggs noted in their remarks, Stan was adept at drafting legislation and constructing public policies that were examples of legal rigor and textual precision to achieve the desired objectives of those seeking quality solutions to challenging issues. His work has stood the test of time and is a model for all of us as we work together to address the needs of our constituents and the goals of our nation. But it was his integrity, his willingness to work with all sides, his respect of others' opinions, and his personal approach of patience and good humor that he brought to all of his endeavors that will be most remembered by those who worked with him and valued his expertise and friendship. Stan is survived by his sister Ellie Hanlon, as well as other family members and everyone fortunate enough to have known and worked with him. Stan set the standard for professionalism, decorum, patience, and perfected the skill of staffing congressional Members and mentoring those who wished to learn what it takes to succeed in Congress and crafting enduring and effective public policy.

Mr. NEGUSE

Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I thank the ranking member for his service and for yielding me time. I certainly concur with the sentiments that he has expressed. We hear from our colleagues on the other side of the aisle that this resolution is somehow designed to modernize the Endangered Species Act. Of course, the American people know better. They understand that this resolution is designed to undermine the Endangered Species Act, and we heard that over and over again during the Rules Committee proceeding that the ranking member referenced. Putting that aside for a moment, I suspect many Americans who are watching today, Madam Speaker, are wondering what in the world is the House of Representatives debating today? They are not the only ones. Earlier this afternoon, the majority leader from the Republican side announced that this House would be adjourning this evening. Now, as you know, Madam Speaker, in 65 days, the Federal Government will not be able to function absent this Congress passing a budget and averting a government shutdown. The congressional recess that Republican leadership has announced that apparently is set to commence in less than 2 hours is 45 days long. Madam Speaker, you can do the math. That leaves this Congress with precious little time to do the people's business: To pass a budget to fund the government. Instead of doing that, we are debating, what? The northern long-eared bat. That is how Republicans in Washington have determined to spend the waning hours of this congressional session. It is consistent with the way that they have conducted their majority in this House for the better part of the last 7 months. No bills to lower costs, no bills to grow the middle class, no bills to build safer communities. Bills on gas stoves, hearings on gas stoves, three hearings on gas stoves, bills on the lesser prairie- chicken and the northern long-eared bat. The priorities that House Republicans have pursued in this Chamber are grossly out of step with the priorities of the American people. The American people expect us to do the people's work, and we are not doing that today. I believe that in 65 days, when House Republicans shut down the government--which they seem determined to do, given that they have passed one appropriation bill before they have decided to send everybody home--the American people will be right to question the priorities of congressional Republicans; why they dither instead of working in good faith with their colleagues to fund the government, to do the basic work of governing. It is an important question, and one I hope every American asks of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle.

Mr. NEGUSE

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman, my friend from Pennsylvania, for the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, as the gentleman said, today's rule provides for consideration of three bills. The first of those bills is H.R. 4366, the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2024. Mr. Speaker, this is typically a bipartisan bill, one of the most bipartisan bills that we consider in the United States Congress. That is not the case this year. Why? Because House Republicans decided to inject into this bill extreme policy riders that threaten the freedoms of each and every American. They have kicked off appropriations season by doubling down on funding bills that endanger essential services. Just to speak frankly, neither this bill nor any of the others that they will bring to the floor on the appropriations side have any chance of becoming law. My colleagues across the aisle know that. Today, they come to the floor to proudly tout a bill that would slash $1.3 billion--not my number; their number--from military construction programs that support quality-of-life services for members of the Armed Forces and their families. Democrats fight against cuts to vital programs that help the American people. Unfortunately, House Republicans are doing the opposite. We saw this cycle many times, Mr. Speaker. Throughout the last 7 months, it has been hard to understand what my colleagues across the aisle truly want. At the beginning of this Congress, the other side of the aisle voted for a House rules package that promised an open rules process for amendments. Yet, here we are, debating another rule structured by Speaker McCarthy and Republican leadership. Now, House Republicans threaten to shut down the government in order to fulfill an unpopular agenda full of far-right policy riders that undermine equal opportunity, restrict access to abortion, and more. We are going to hear a lot from my colleague, my friend on the other side of the aisle, about what he claims this bill will do. It is important for the American people to understand three simple things. It cuts military construction by $1.3 billion. Think about the impact that will have, Mr. Speaker, on servicemembers across the country. It funds no infrastructure backlog for the Department of Defense. Mr. Speaker, we have a $100 billion infrastructure backlog in the Department of Defense for installations across the world, across the country, and in our districts. The President asked for $2 billion to start to address that backlog. House Republicans said no. How much did they give? Zero. Finally, the bill does nothing to address toxic PFAS contamination-- not a thing. Last year, House Democrats, under President Biden's leadership, appropriated $200 million toward PFAS remediation to address the toxic chemicals that are literally killing people across the country. This bill appropriates how much? None. Those are the facts. If that weren't enough, as the gentleman said, we are considering two other bills today. The American people watching this might think that perhaps House Republicans would decide to bring a bill to the floor to lower costs, address inflation, try to reduce the cost of healthcare, grow the middle class, build safer communities, or address school safety. No. House Republicans have declined to put any of those bills on the floor. Instead, what are we left with? Hearings and bills on gas stoves and, today, bills on the lesser prairie-chicken and the northern long-eared bat. That is what we are here to debate, Mr. Speaker. I think the American people would be deeply disappointed at the choice of priorities that House Republicans are pursuing. Let's get back to the core issues at hand. Let's negotiate in good faith. Let's do the people's business. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Scholten) to discuss our very important proposal.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, let me just say that only in Washington can politicians demand recognition after being shamed into doing the right thing. That is what we just heard. We all know that the default on America act that House Republicans pursued was primed to cut veterans benefits. House Democrats, President Biden, and Senate Democrats led the charge to convince our colleagues to come back from the brink, and now they have the audacity to demand that we thank them for it. By the way, Mr. Speaker, this comes from the same party that overwhelmingly voted against the Honoring our PACT Act, the most comprehensive healthcare legislation for veterans in my lifetime, the proudest vote I have taken since I was sworn into the United States Congress. Mr. Speaker, 174 of them voted against it, including the gentleman from Pennsylvania. Now they have the audacity to claim that they are fighting for veterans? Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn), the distinguished assistant Democratic leader.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I understand it is a little empty on the other side of the aisle. There are perhaps not many Members who want to come to the floor to defend the propriety of this bill that cuts military construction funding, and I don't blame them. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Reschenthaler), whom I respect, has the unenviable task of trying to make the case for a bill that cuts military construction funding, does nothing to address the infrastructure backlog, and cuts PFAS toxic exposure remediation, to say nothing of the many other ills within the legislation. We heard a lot earlier about the supposed work that House Republicans are doing on the appropriations front. Of course, this is the first appropriations bill that has come to the floor. However, we still can't get House Republicans to commit to protecting Social Security and Medicare, as House Democrats have championed. Of course, we know why. It is because they have been unabashed about their efforts to cut both vital programs. Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment that we have offered before to the rule to provide for consideration of a resolution which unambiguously states that it is the House's duty to keep our solemn promise to American workers and seniors to protect and preserve Social Security and Medicare and reject any cuts to these critical programs. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment into the Record along with any extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Michigan.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Texas.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman talked about facts. Again, these are not my numbers. These are their numbers. This year in this bill, House Republicans appropriate $17.5 billion for military construction. That is $1.5 billion less than the current level. In other words, it is a decrease. It is a cut of $1.5 billion to military construction, which is used for housing for our servicemembers. Under current levels, there is $200 million dedicated to PFAS remediation. In this bill, there is none. President Biden requested $2 billion to address the infrastructure backlog in our military. Under this bill, there is none. These are not my numbers. These are their numbers. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article from The Hill today titled: ``Senate GOP fears House actions could lead to shutdown: It's going to be a problem.''

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, that article is quoting a Republican Senator from the gentleman's region, his neighbor, Senator Shelley Moore Capito. When House Republicans shut down the government in 66 days, which they seem committed to doing, the American people will be right to ask the question, they will be justified to ask the question of why House Republicans decided to focus their time on the northern long-eared bat and the lesser prairie-chicken. It is a fair question for the American people to ask. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Again it feels like Ground Hog Day. Again, I have great respect for my friend from Pennsylvania, but I don't understand what numbers he is looking at. Does he deny that in statute we appropriated last year $19 billion for military construction? He is an appropriator. I am happy to engage in a colloquy with him to the extent that he wishes to clarify that. Last year, military construction was funded at $19 billion. This year, it is funded at $17.5 billion. Not complicated, and, of course, the gentleman knows that because half of his caucus is bragging about the fact that they have cut military construction and a variety of other programs, juxtaposed against the levels that were set by Congressional Democrats. This is not disputed anywhere but apparently during this particular debate. They are cutting military construction. They are not funding military infrastructure backlog needs that the President has requested of this Congress; and they have zeroed out any dedicated funding for PFAS remediation. Those are the facts. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. McGarvey).

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time remains on both sides.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Again, I thank my friend and colleague from Pennsylvania for the respectful debate. I understand that we don't see eye to eye on the bills that this House will unfortunately be considering this week but, nonetheless, I appreciate his courtesy. Mr. Speaker, today marks 200 days since House Republicans gaveled us into this 118th Session of the United States Congress; 200 days that they have been in control; 200 days that they have had the gavels here in Washington, D.C. The American people would be justified in asking how have House Republicans spent those 200 days. Any bills to address inflation, to lower costs for working families, any bills to grow the middle class, to build safer communities? The answer is none. Instead, they have pursued extreme policy after extreme policy, and this MILCON appropriation bill is no exception. Gas stoves, the northern long-eared bat, the lesser prairie-chicken, and whatever other issue House Republicans conjure up when we are back in session, that is how they have chosen to spend their time and taxpayer dollars. When House Democrats were in control, working with President Biden and our colleagues in the upper Chamber, we focused on issues that mattered to the American people: A bipartisan infrastructure law that, unfortunately, most of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle in this Chamber voted against that is rebuilding bridges and roads and highways across this country from Pennsylvania to Colorado, ensuring folks have clean water to drink and clean air to breathe; The PACT Act, the most comprehensive veterans' healthcare legislation enacted in my lifetime, that 174 Republicans in this Chamber voted against; The Inflation Reduction Act, capping insulin costs at $35 for seniors participating in Medicare across the country. That is how we spent our time. As I said earlier, we know that in 66 days, House Republicans will shut down the government. They are telegraphing that. Many of their Members have said publicly that they want to shut down the government; that, in their view, a shutdown of the government is the desired outcome; 66 days. Mr. Speaker, in 72 hours, Republicans will gavel this Chamber out of session. They will adjourn this Chamber for a 45-day recess. Mr. Speaker, 66 days until the government runs out of funding, 45-day recess, 72 hours until that recess, and we are here debating the lesser prairie-chicken and the northern long-eared bat. It is deeply disappointing, and it does not comport with how the American public expects us to operate here in Washington, D.C. We can do better, and I would challenge my Republican colleagues to come back from the brink that I described earlier, work with us in good faith. Help us deliver for the American people. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this rule, and to vote ``no'' on the underlying bills. If you support cutting military construction, if you support not addressing military infrastructure backlog, if you support zeroing out PFAS remediation then, by all means, vote for the MILCON bill. But if you oppose those draconian cuts, as I do, then I hope you will vote ``no.'' Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. NEGUSE

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. NEGUSE

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the legacy and retirement of Darla Sidles, the first female Superintendent of Rocky Mountain National Park. For the last seven years, Darla has been in charge of managing and supervising all operations within Rocky Mountain National Park--the Nation's fourth busiest national park--an area I am lucky to represent in the United States Congress. Rocky Mountain National Park surpassed 4 million visitors for the first time the year before she took over, and it has exceeded 4 million almost every year since, Darla has helped Rocky Mountain National Park navigate unprecedented challenges like record levels of visitors, the global pandemic forcing a closure of the park in 2020, and then another closure of the park that same year as a result of Colorado's two largest wildfires ripping through Rocky Mountain and burning about 10 percent of the park. Through it all she remained dedicated to improving and protecting our treasured public lands. Darla has served at the National Park Service for 34 successful years. She has been a trusted and valued partner to my office and to the Town of Estes Park. We are sad to see Darla go, but wish her a happy retirement.

Mr. NEGUSE

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 235 (H.R. 1669).

Mr. NEGUSE

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I rise with 80 of my Democratic colleagues to demand that Republicans do their job, do the right thing, and pay America's bills. My colleagues on this side of the aisle are here to do the people's business. Where are Republicans? They have rushed out of town as America speeds toward economic catastrophe. Why? It is because they know they have forced a dangerous and false choice on the American people to either impose draconian and cruel cuts that will hurt American families, America's veterans, and American seniors or a devastating and catastrophic default. Mr. Speaker, this is an unacceptable choice. It is time for House Republicans to get serious. House Democrats are here united, just as we were at the beginning of this year and just as we will be throughout this legislative Congress to do the people's business. It is time for Republicans to do the same.

Mr. NEGUSE

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, it is a great privilege to be able to be here today to salute my friend, a fine man, a good man, and someone who has served our country so admirably over the course of these last 12 years in David Cicilline. There is a quote from President John Adams that I want to share, our second President who once said: ``But I fear that in every assembly, members will obtain an influence, by noise not sense; by meanness, not greatness; by ignorance, not learning; by contracted hearts, not large souls.'' There are many places in our country in which his fears ring true today, but one of the places where it does not is in Rhode Island where, for the better part of the last decade, the people of Rhode Island could rest easy knowing they had elected a leader who would serve them admirably. A leader whose common sense was on full display as a Member of the House leadership team. I can remember very early in my tenure in Congress 5 years ago learning from and being mentored by David Cicilline as he chaired the House Democratic Policy and Communications Committee, always willing to help a new Member navigate the experience of serving in Congress. His greatness was on full display during the course of the investigation that he led as chairman of the Antitrust Subcommittee. As his vice chair during that subcommittee investigation, I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, firsthand just how hard he worked day in, day out. The entrenched interests and the concentrated power that he fought against day after day to ensure that that investigation would be done and that ultimately the American public would benefit from it. Of course, his learning was on full display during the course of both Presidential impeachments over the course of the last 4 years, but, in particular, during the second impeachment when Mr. Cicilline and I stood together on the floor of the United States Senate when his fidelity to the Constitution and his role in defending our democracy was on full display to millions of Americans. He has been an effective Representative for the people of Rhode Island. He has been a tireless leader here in the United States Congress. He has done his country and his State a great service. He has been a dear friend, a dear, dear friend to so many of us in Congress. In the last 5 years I have been here on the floor for quite a few departing speeches from Members, people I considered friends. I have yet to come to one in which the Chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, the Chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, the Chairman of the Equality Caucus, the Speaker of the House, the former chairman of our caucus have all gathered, except for today. It is a reflection of just how special David Cicilline is, the reach and breadth of the support and friendships that he developed within the House Democratic Caucus, which I believe will last long after he has left this hallowed Chamber. Mr. Speaker, I say thanks to Mr. Cicilline, the gentleman from Rhode Island, for his service to our country. We will miss him, and we look forward to seeing him again.

Mr. NEGUSE

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I didn't prepare a speech today. I brought the bill to the floor because I have great empathy for my colleague on the other side of the aisle who has the unenviable task of somehow trying to defend this 200-page bill, the polluters over people act. These 200 pages put polluters first at every turn. Mr. Speaker, if you don't believe me, I encourage you to read the bill. Buried in this 200-page bill, on page 40, is a provision that gives the Secretary of Energy and the Administrator of the EPA the power to grant a waiver to any refinery in this country from the key requirements of bedrock environmental laws that have governed this space for the better part of the last 50 years, since the days of President Richard Nixon. Look at subparagraph (c) that enables any party who acts under a waiver granted under this bill to violate any environmental law and have blanket immunity. The Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, NEPA, you name it, they will waive it. That is not a bill that puts people first. It is a bill that puts polluters first. It is why I am proud to vote ``no'' and why I encourage every Member of this distinguished body to vote ``no'' on this bill.

Mr. NEGUSE

Mr. NEGUSE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman, my colleague from Pennsylvania, for yielding. Mr. Speaker, like many of my colleagues here in this Chamber, I am blessed to be a parent. My wife and I are proud parents of a 4-year-old daughter, and we are deeply invested in her education and ensuring that she has the ability to be able to live her dreams. Mr. Speaker, you can imagine my surprise and my disappointment when I learned that the Republicans, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, would be spending our time today on this bill, the politics over parents act. It is a surprise because for so many years my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have bemoaned the role of the Federal Government in public education. They have lectured us about local control time and time again, and yet here they stand with a bill to impose a variety of unfunded mandates on school districts across the country and eroding local control, as my colleague from Ohio (Mr. Landsman) articulated. I am disappointed because these unfunded mandates are so disconnected from the real concerns and fears that parents in my district back home in Colorado are experiencing every day. Just yesterday the Denver metro area in Colorado was frozen with fear at the news of another incident of gun violence in one of our schools. At East High School, two teachers were wounded, one of them critically. This came on the heels just 2 weeks ago of the tragic death of a 16- year-old student at East High School as a result of gun violence. Our prayers, our thoughts, and our hearts go out to him, his family, his friends, and all the students and the parents who have been impacted in just the last 14 days as yet another incident of gun violence tears our community apart. That is what parents in Colorado are concerned about. They are concerned about their students--their children--coming home from school alive. They are concerned about the ability of children to be able to get a quality education and not go hungry, to not be poisoned by lead pipes in some of the dilapidated buildings in rural and urban communities across our country, and about the cost of childcare. Mr. Speaker, that is what they are concerned about.