David Price

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, immigration enforcement is a Federal responsibility. Local law enforcement is not and should not be the long arm of ICE. And if it is perceived to be the long arm of ICE, it is going to be very difficult to work with the community to do what needs to be done for local law enforcement and community protection. The end result would tear entire communities apart, would greatly hinder the ability of local law enforcement to effectively do their job. Furthermore, this amendment has no place in the T-HUD appropriations bill. The employees of the Department of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development are not law enforcement. They do not routinely need to interact with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. This amendment would insert unnecessary controversy into the bill. It does nothing to improve transportation. It does nothing to provide housing for vulnerable Americans. It doesn't change existing law, nor does it change the way HUD and DOT programs are administered. The underlying bill has enough challenges as written without adding something of this moment and this divisiveness. So I urge defeat of this needless and partisan distraction. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, the facts are pretty clear about this matter. A thousand people die on our highways each year because of speeding trucks. The technology that limits speeding by large trucks is already installed and successfully deployed by many trucking companies across this country. We know that high speeds in large trucks are a deadly combination. A 2012 study by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration found that trucks without a speed limiting device had twice as many speed- related crashes as those who had a speed limiter installed. Those are the facts. Pretty incontrovertible, I believe. So on the basis of this, quite rightly, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration have a rulemaking under way, a careful rulemaking looking at all the evidence, and the proposal is here tonight that we upend that, that we on the floor of this House, with 5 minutes of consideration on each side, that we abrogate unto ourselves the decision to upend this safety rule. This is technology that saves lives. The evidence is very clear. What that exact rule should look like in the end, we don't know, but we do know that to completely set aside the rulemaking process in such a vital area is reckless and irresponsible. This amendment should be rejected. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. Truck crash deaths in this country have increased significantly in recent years. That should be the backdrop of this discussion. 4,067 people were killed in crashes involving large trucks in 2015 alone. That is a 20 percent increase since 2009. And studies show that driver fatigue--that is what this amendment is all about, driver fatigue--is an important part of the problem. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board repeatedly have recommended that all trucks and buses be equipped with ELDs. In 2012, Congress decided to take strong action to address this problem and passed a requirement for the use of ELDs with bipartisan support as a part of the MAP-21 legislation. Supporters of this amendment say that the enforcement community is not ready to begin enforcement by December 18. That is really not the case. And it is also true that inspectors aren't going to pull truckers out of service for noncompliance until April 1 of next year. That is a considerable grace period. It will give the trucking and the enforcement community ample time to adjust to the mandate. The Department of Transportation has estimated that the benefits adopting ELDs to be over $1 billion. So implementing the mandate makes financial sense, and it certainly makes sense in terms of the safety of our people, the safety on our roads. Mr. Chairman, I urge opposition of this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Crawford).

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remainder of my time to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman).

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this needless, divisive, and, indeed, provocative amendment. President Bush, long ago, ordered Federal agencies to comply with E- Verify. That was in 2007. I have seen no indication that the Trump administration intends to rescind this order. This amendment, if it only applies to hiring at Federal agencies, would do nothing, absolutely nothing. So why is it before us? What is the purpose here tonight? Is it possibly a political purpose? What the amendment does do, in fact, is to insert unnecessary controversy into this bill. It does nothing to improve transportation, and it does nothing to provide housing for vulnerable Americans. The underlying bill, one would think, has enough challenges, as written, without this gratuitous amendment. Mr. Chairman, I urge defeat of this distraction, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the Reverend Dr. W.B. Lewis who is retiring after fifty-three years as the Pastor of First Cosmopolitan Baptist Church in Raleigh, North Carolina. I have come to appreciate over many years the gracious hospitality and faithful witness of Rev. Lewis and this congregation. Early in my term of service--but well into his--we worked together to help land a so-called ``section 202'' Housing and Urban Development grant to construct rental housing for the elderly under First Cosmopolitan's sponsorship. Those apartments stand as a symbol of Rev. Lewis's leadership and the church's understanding of its ministry. Under Rev. Lewis's leadership, First Cosmopolitan has grown into a powerful pillar of the Raleigh community. Dr. Lewis himself has become an institution of sorts within North Carolina. For four years, he served as the President of the General Baptist State Convention. He was appointed by North Carolina Governor James Hunt to serve on the board for Smart Start. His service has also included the Raleigh Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance, the Raleigh Interracial Ministerial Association, the Raleigh YMCA Board of Directors, the State Board of Chaplaincy, the Rich Park Board of Directors, the Board of Trustees at Shaw University, Prince Hall Lodge, the Masonic Order of Raleigh, Wake and Johnston Missionary Baptist Association, Wake Baptists Association Ministers, and the Deacons Union. Reverend Lewis has rightfully been recognized on numerous occasions for his roles as a pastor, builder, teacher, mentor, spiritual and community leader, and friend to many. In 2013, he was inducted into the Wake Baptist Association ``Hall of Fame''. In 2017, he was presented with the ``Loving Cup'', the highest award that can be presented to an individual minister or pastor who has served with distinction, from the General Baptist State Convention of North Carolina. During his tenure he was also instrumental in the planning and execution of two projects critical to the South East Raleigh Community: the Willie B. Lewis Family Center, and Rich Park, a 100 unit apartment complex that serves the elderly and handicapped. Reverend Lewis also co-authored ``A Splendid Enterprise,'' a history of the General Baptist State Convention of North Carolina. Having an artistic eye, he was also instrumental in the design of the beautiful Martin Luther King Jr. Park in Raleigh. In celebration of his great accomplishments, Rev. Lewis will be the recipient of the order of the Long Leaf Pine, which is the highest honor bestowed upon a citizen by the Governor of the State of North Carolina. I am pleased to join the State of North Carolina and the Raleigh community in celebrating this remarkable man, whom I and many others regard as a mentor and friend. We thank Rev. Lewis for a legacy of lives touched and a community made more welcoming and just, and we wish him the very best in retirement.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this so-called security minibus. The Republican majority has rushed through the fiscal year 2018 appropriations process, passing 12 bills without benefit of a budget resolution. Now they have failed to secure the votes on the floor for that Republican-only omnibus package, so they have decided to move forward with what is before us today--four appropriations bills stitched together that would bust the Budget Control Act defense cap and, if enacted, result in a $72 billion sequester against all defense accounts. The entire fiscal year '18 appropriations process has been a Republican exercise in sham accounting and wishful thinking: ignore current law, jack up defense spending, and impose huge, unnecessary, and detrimental cuts on domestic appropriations. When future students learn about congressional appropriations, this episode should be exhibit A of what not to do. The four bills before us today are also full of objectionable and unreasonable policy riders, including the ridiculous inclusion in the rule of $1.6 billion to be spent on 74 miles of border wall. Nobody would know it from the President's hysterical rhetoric, but there are already 700 miles of fence along the border--vehicular fencing and pedestrian fencing. I know about it because most of that fence was built when I was chairman of the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee. When Congress appropriated funds to build that fence, we required segment-by-segment analyses and environmental impact studies. This bill doesn't include that. It doesn't include any language regarding congressional oversight. There are no requirements for Homeland Security to submit a cost-benefit analysis or to work with Congress through any modifications. Mr. Speaker, funding an unnecessary wall, especially without congressional oversight, is not a defensible use of taxpayer dollars. We would simply become complicit in what we all know was campaign demagoguery. Speaking of which, wasn't the Mexican Government going to pay for this wall? Weren't they going to pick up the tab? This $1.6 billion should be spent on much more important priorities, within and beyond homeland security, that would actually improve the lives of our citizens. It is time for Republicans to stop playing games with taxpayer money and start negotiating with Democrats. We know this is going to have to happen eventually. We need a bipartisan budget and appropriations package that actually has a chance of becoming law and that addresses the need of a great country for serious investment. Oppose the border wall. Oppose this sham appropriations minibus.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, as the United States continues to monitor the JCPOA and Iran's behavior, it is important that Congress continue to refrain from actions that would violate the deal, threaten the deal, or impose careless sanctions that--under the guise of being tough on Iran--would make the United States less safe. This legislation meets that test, and I urge its adoption.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise to stress two critical aspects of this legislation. First, it would impose tough sanctions on Russia for its serious international violations, the seizure of Crimea, its violent incursion into Ukraine, its cyber interference in the 2016 U.S. election. Perhaps most importantly, in the present context, it would prevent President Trump from removing or softening existing sanctions without congressional approval. Second, the bill addresses Iran's unacceptable behavior in the non- nuclear realm, such as ballistic missile development, human rights violations, financing of terrorism, without violating the nuclear deal with Iran. The JCPOA celebrated its second anniversary 2 weeks ago. It has given the international community 24/7 access to Iran's nuclear sites, provided an enforcement mechanism to ensure that Iran's nuclear-related activity is solely peaceful, and elongated Iran's breakout time to over a year. It has made the world a safer place.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the life and legacy of Paul Hardin III, former Chancellor of the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, who died on July 1 after a courageous battle with ALS. My wife Lisa and I treasure the friendship of Paul and his wife Barbara and were privileged to join his family in a moving memorial service at University United Methodist Church last Saturday. Paul was a man of great intelligence and insight, moral seriousness and integrity, and irrepressible enthusiasm and dedication--qualities abundantly evident throughout his career in higher education. As was said more than once in the memorial service, Paul pledged allegiance to ``two shades of blue.'' The deeper hue belonged to Duke University, where he earned his undergraduate and law degrees and edited the Duke Law Journal. Paul then served in the Army's Counter Intelligence Corps and practiced law in Birmingham before returning to Durham to spend ten years on the faculty of Duke Law School. He was appointed to his first college presidency, at Wofford College, at age 37, and went on to serve as president of Southern Methodist and Drew Universities. In 1988 he became the seventh chancellor of UNC-CH, where he served until his retirement in 1995. As a young man, Paul made a credible run for Mayor of Durham, and throughout his life he was attentive and involved in national, state, and local politics. In recent years, Paul, along with Barbara, brought his trademark high energy to the leadership of Democrats in their retirement community, Carolina Meadows. They also shared, as children of ministers, deep roots in the Methodist Church. Paul, his son Russell reported at the memorial service, seriously considered entering the ministry as a young man. But his father, who was a Methodist bishop, assured him that he could render faithful service and powerful witness in his chosen fields of education and the law. Paul's father was right, as the thousands whose lives Paul touched can attest. I am honored to join this chorus of tribute, and include in the Record a piece by Paul's friend and mine, Village Communications President Jim Heavner, from the Raleigh News and Observer of July 5. Paul Hardin--A Good Man Who Made UNC Better When Paul Hardin slipped away last week, North Carolina lost a brilliant and fine man, a UNC chancellor whose leadership was endearing, its lessons enduring. ``This may be audacious, but here's an idea,'' I heard him say so often as a way to prepare us to hear how he might see the future differently. The good fortune of my work and home town gave me much time with Paul and a friendship that grew. He and I were pulled together in work when my company owned the school's sports network. It was the good fortune of us all to learn from him. Among the leaders I have known, none was more dogged in defense of the values he sought to protect. He was clear-eyed and courageous in facing down those who threatened those values. It was likely the example of his Methodist minister father (also a bishop) that inculcated his habit to find noble qualities among many where the rest of us could not. An extroverted and joyful soul, he loved much about politics and once ran for the town council in Durham. It is little-known that he served in the CIA, or that his excellent golf game honed on the Duke team (his alma mater) qualified him for the British Open at a time when he was in Scotland. A great storyteller, Paul loved to recall those days and so many more. He was a brilliant student who finished first in his class at Duke, where he also obtained his law degree. He would have to call on all of that as a university leader. It's a job with high prestige buffeted daily by high winds of disparate owners and bosses and the thunder of their loudest voices. Paul would frequently recall the story attributed to Lincoln about the politician who was tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail: ``Except for the honor of the public experience, I would have preferred to walk.'' Most every university is beset with the challenge of balancing the conflicting goals of big-time sports and the university's academic mission. As president of Southern Methodist University, Paul Hardin heard of a minor malfeasance by the football coach that led him to learn of cash payments to players. Paul was not a Pollyanna. He had a good political radar but never let it overpower his gyroscope. Knowing that he was in Dallas, where many see football as the reason to have a university, he nonetheless reported it to the NCAA and told his trustees that he was going to clean it up, knowing that he would face criticism. His board members fired him. The school ultimately was given the NCAA's only four-year ``death penalty.'' Paul later said that it ``perked up'' his career. It was that experience, his exhibition of putting his values first, he said, that got him the job heading UNC in Chapel Hill 13 years later. Unflinching in his support of the Knight Commission on College Athletics' position that a school was more important than any coach, he never swerved in his commitment to administrative control of athletics and transparency in its dealings. He was a great fan of basketball and UNC's iconic Dean Smith. Yet, when the head coach's Nike contract came up for renewal on Paul's watch, the chancellor insisted that it be made public. (Ironically, while he was demanding the coach's contractual transparency, he also was being criticized in cartoons in The News & Observer for allowing Dean to make so much money while he was away playing golf. In some things, you just can't win.) He also faced issues of protest and social unrest. He was caught in the jaws of irreconciably-conflicting forces when supporters of the Black Cultural Center wanted it expanded into its own, freestanding building, something others opposed. The chancellor was initially opposed, as an advocate for more integration. He saw it as a contributor to separatism. The faceoff between conservatives and growing campus protests became overwhelming. Hardin agreed to build the center, which was done in the subsequent administration. Yet, he had paid a price for it in criticism from all sides. Paul was a pioneer in fundraising, creating the university's first major fund campaign that was first announced as one for $200 million to celebrate the UNC Bicentennial. That was then raised to $300 million and ultimately reported $412 million in gifts. Paul showed them the way. The school now channels that Hardin audacity, embarking now on its second multi-billion- dollar campaign. He loved being the ``Bicentennial Chancellor,'' with its many commemorations, including an anniversary speech in Kenan Stadium by President Bill Clinton. Paul Hardin loved life, one well-lived until the ravages of ALS took him away. He was still able to find good in all things and laughter with good friends until the end. Paul could lament the awful examples and roiling consequences of today's political leadership, even as he might find something good in each of those who are, at least, he might say, willing to lead. The more we ponder that world view, that life, the closer we come to our own better angels. Our community and our state lost a good man. A good, good man.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join my colleague, Mr. Butterfield, in honoring the life of a towering figure in North Carolina politics, Senator Ralph Hunt, Sr., of Durham. I first got to know Senator Hunt early in my political career when I was chairman of the North Carolina Democratic Party. Ralph was already a business and community leader in Durham, having served in the U.S. Army, taught in Durham city schools, started a career in business, and served as one of the first African-American members of the city council, where he served from 1975 to 1985, including 3 years as mayor pro tempore. Ralph was a genial, energetic, and beloved leader. He was also a tireless advocate for the needs of the people of Durham--all of the people. It is no coincidence that the city has undergone a renaissance over the course of Ralph's long career. He served as executive director of the Durham Business and Professional Chain for over a decade. He provided leadership to the Mutual Savings and Loan Association, which provided vital access to capital for many Durham residents; and to the Downtown Durham Revitalization Foundation board, which helped pave the way for the thriving downtown we see today. Ralph, of course, is best known, as my colleague has noted, for his service in the North Carolina Senate from 1985 to 1993, and again from 2004 to 2005. He held various leadership positions in our caucus, and he mentored a new generation of progressive elected officials. The North Carolina Senate still bears the mark of his leadership. In the intervening years, between those years of service in the Senate, he served with distinction on the North Carolina Utilities Commission. More recently--and I respect the fact that Ralph took this on late in his life--he assumed the challenge of chairing the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People at a critical juncture for that organization. In fact, Ralph always stepped up to the plate and always took on challenges when he was needed. He was an exemplary citizen. He was also a devoted husband, a loving father and grandfather, and a community leader who will long be remembered in Durham and throughout our State. As we mourn his passing, we give thanks for his life of strong citizenship and service.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the career of Duke University President Richard Brodhead, who is stepping down after 13 years of service. Dick Brodhead succeeded Nan Keohane in 2004 as the 9th president of Duke University, attracted by what another president, former Governor Terry Sanford, defined as the university's ``outrageous ambition.'' President Brodhead has led the university on a new trajectory of growth and international renown. In one of his first major actions as president, he led an effort to greatly expand the endowment for financial aid, which has allowed academically talented students to pursue a Duke degree regardless of their financial circumstances. President Brodhead's time at Duke has been transformative, from the renewal of campus gems such as Duke Chapel, Baldwin Auditorium, West Union, and athletic facilities to the construction of a series of stunning new research facilities. Dick Brodhead also embraced and amplified one of Duke's enduring themes: knowledge in the service of society. He launched DukeEngage, a civic engagement program that provides undergraduates the opportunity to apply their knowledge to challenges in communities in the U.S. and around the globe. Under his leadership, Duke established the Duke Global Health Institute, which translates research to address health inequities around the world. Further expanding Duke's global reach were the creation of Duke Kunshan University in China and the construction of the Duke-NUS Medical School in Singapore. Closer to home, he enriched Duke's relationship with the City of Durham by investing in K-12 education, community health clinics, and neighborhood revitalization and helping spark the renaissance of downtown Durham. President Brodhead had the opportunity to help Duke celebrate ten NCAA national championships won by men's basketball and lacrosse and women's golf and tennis teams, while a host of Duke student-athletes were victorious as individual national champions and Olympic medalists. At the same time, Duke ensured that athletics upheld the academic mission of the university. An expert in 19th-century American literature, President Brodhead came to Duke after a distinguished teaching and administrative career at Yale University. He has authored or edited more than a dozen books on America's great writers, including analysis of the works of Hawthorne, Faulkner, and Welty. President Brodhead has also assumed a national leadership role in higher education. Elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2004, he was named the Co-Chair of the Academy's Commission on the Humanities and Social Sciences, created at the request of a bipartisan group of House and Senate members, including myself, to bolster teaching and research in the humanities and social sciences. The Commission's 2013 report, The Heart of the Matter: The Humanities and Social Sciences for a Vibrant, Competitive, and Secure Nation, stands out for the persuasiveness of its argument and its practical import. Dick Brodhead was a hands-on co-chairman and has played an active role in the report's dissemination. Cindy Brodhead has been of indispensable support to Dick throughout his tenure. Cindy has a background in corporate and regulatory law and has made significant contributions to the arts and humanities across our state. She has served on the boards of the Carolina Ballet and Preservation North Carolina and has rendered outstanding service as chair of the North Carolina Humanities Council. My wife Lisa joins me in thanking Dick and Cindy Brodhead for their friendship and for all they have given to Duke, Durham, and North Carolina. We are fortunate indeed that they have devoted their great energy and talent to our community, and we wish them well as they open the next chapter in their lives.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding and for taking up this Special Order to focus on the role of the Endowments for the Arts and the Humanities in American life and the need for us in this body to have some historical perspective and appreciation of that, and to rise to the occasion of the challenge presented by the Trump preliminary budget to make certain that these efforts are appreciated, and, more importantly, that they are funded, that they are supported in this body and in our budget for fiscal 2018. I am glad that the gentleman took some time to give us a history lesson. He comes by this advocacy honestly because he is the Representative from Rhode Island. The inspiration behind the Endowments, back in the 1960s, was Senator Claiborne Pell of Rhode Island, a towering figure in the Senate. I suppose I am one of the few Members around here who has been around long enough to remember Claiborne Pell. I never served with him, but I was a young staff member in the U.S. Senate when Claiborne Pell was going strong. I first got a job as a summer intern and then returned summer after summer. I ended up writing a dissertation out of the Senate office of Senator Bob Bartlett of Alaska who was a friend and collaborator of Claiborne Pell's. Pell had many things going. I remember his chairman, Senator Lister Hill of Alabama. When I interviewed him at one point, he remarked on Claiborne and how just Claiborne had everything going. You had to really work to keep up with him. But these Endowments were favorite projects of Claiborne Pell and of that uniquely fertile period in the history of this Congress when these efforts were pioneered and established, and, of course, they have enriched our national life ever since. As the gentleman from Rhode Island mentioned, I have been honored to co-chair the Congressional Humanities Caucus. I have also been a member for a long time of the Congressional Arts Caucus. It is at least in part in that capacity I speak out today in defense of these Endowments, but also as a U.S. citizen, as a former academic who appreciates the role both of these Endowments play in supporting academic life and research into our history, our culture, our national background. And not just research at the very top levels of our great universities, although they do some of that, but also the kind of local historical understanding that is developed through local arts councils and through local groups who research history and put on pageants and who educate young people and who do so much to enrich our national life from the bottom up. One of the strengths, I think, of both the Arts and the Humanities Endowments, maybe their greatest strength, is their grassroots character--how they work to make history and the arts real and tangible and meaningful to young people coming along and to our local communities. That is one reason their political support is so strong and so broad in terms of the political spectrum. We all know there have been times in the past where opportunistic politicians took out after the arts and the humanities thinking that maybe they could get a point or two by pretending to be antielitist or something like that. Efforts fall flat because Members of this body and most Americans know that the Endowments for the Arts and the Humanities operate at anything other than an elitist fashion. They have managed to, at one and the same time, support the great achievements of our top research institutions but also to fund all sorts of activity at the local level, to the grassroots level, that has enriched our understanding of who we are and where we came from. There was a Commission on the Humanities organized by the American Academy of Arts & Sciences a few years ago. It was co-chaired by the distinguished president of Duke University, Dick Brodhead, and a prominent businessman, John Rowe. The heart of the matter is the report that they produced. I would recommend to colleagues that report. It is not a report designed to gather dust on a shelf. It is a report designed to be an action document to help us understand that the humanities in this country are an important part of our educational excellence. They are an important part of our competitiveness internationally. The humanities are important to national security and to the business world in terms of languages and cultural understanding and the kind of historical perspective that people need to operate in the modern world. We all have our stories about how the humanities have enriched our lives and given us understanding. I experience that every day, not in a direct application necessarily but some kind of appreciation of where we have come from historically. What is the validity of some of these idealogical arguments that we hear? What is the history of our institution and of our role at critical moments? There is so much, whatever your walk of life, whether you are a Member of Congress or a businessperson or whatever. You are not going to get an instant history when you need it, when you need to have that understanding and that perspective. You gain this only by virtue of your educational background and what is available to you in terms of resources to deepen your understanding, and then you draw on that later, and it is extremely important to have that to draw on. We need to situate ourselves, in this body especially, situate ourselves historically and understand the challenges we face. A broad liberal arts education is simply irreplaceable as a way of doing that. There are no more effective champions of broad liberal arts education and all of its facets than the Endowments for the Arts and the Humanities. They have a robust system of partnerships with State agencies, local leaders, and the philanthropic sector. I particularly appreciate, in my district, the Carolina Ballet; the North Carolina Symphony, which gave a wonderful performance at the Kennedy Center as part of a series to celebrate State orchestras last week; and the National Humanities Center in my district also, a home for first-rate research in the humanities where scholars come year in and year out. There is an economic impact that is sometimes not fully appreciated. A recent analysis by the Bureau of Economic Analysis found that our Nation's arts and cultural capacity produces over $700 billion in economic output and supports millions of jobs. Coming down to specific programs, in fiscal year 2016 alone, the Endowment for the Humanities museums grants leveraged $33 million into an additional $104 million. That is a pretty good return, quite a return, for the American taxpayer. In fact, every dollar that the State Humanities Council gives out in grants, since fiscal year 2015, leveraged at least $5 at the local and State level. There are all kinds of reasons for us to appreciate the arts and the humanities--the ways they enrich our lives, the kind of ways they equip this country and this country's young people to be insightful, to be creative, to think outside the box, to develop their skills to the fullest extent for their own good and also for the good of our country. In the face of all this, how can it be that the preliminarily budget of the Trump administration proposes eliminating these time-tested and productive programs? I don't believe that will stand. I don't believe Members of either party in this body will let it stand. The funding already is very modest for these institutions. I am not talking about meeting the Trump administration halfway. I am talking about restoring full funding for the Endowments for the Arts and the Humanities and standing up proudly for these institutions and understanding and furthering understanding of the role they play in our national life. Where did this proposal come from? I know where it came from--an outside rightwing think tank. That is the only credential that I know that this proposal from the preliminary budget has. I hope and believe that this was an overly hasty inclusion in that preliminary budget based on nothing more than this think tank's proposal. I know it is up for reconsideration, I hope by the administration itself, but certainly by this body, as we put together our budget for 2018 and also our appropriations bills for the year. We have got to stand up for our institutions' prerogatives in this case, but exercise those prerogatives on behalf of our own constituents, our own communities, and two of the finest and most efficient and most effective uses of Federal funds that are in the whole budget, the National Endowments for the Arts and the Humanities. Let's hold fast in our investment. It is one of the most efficient we make in terms of leveraging private, nonprofit, and corporate dollars. It is one of the very most effective in enriching our national life. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend again for taking up this Special Order. I am happy to work with him on this, and we will count on a cooperative effort going forward.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill's men's basketball team for winning the 2017 NCAA Division I National Championship, in the face of a spirited challenge from Gonzaga University. As a proud alumnus of UNC-Chapel Hill, the Nation's first public university, I was delighted to cheer on the entire team--players, coaches, and staff--during their outstanding performance yesterday in the Nation's most competitive and most popular collegiate athletic tournament. The Tar Heels have now played in a record 20 NCAA Final Four games, the most of all time, and last night marked their sixth NCAA National Championship and seventh overall National Championship. The years 1957, 1982, 1993, 2005, and 2009 are seared in the minds of North Carolina basketball fans, and I know I speak for our entire State when I say how delighted we are to add 2017 to that list! The teamwork, camaraderie, and determination of this year's team were evident throughout the entire season as they struggled to overcome their heartbreaking defeat in the last seconds of the 2016 National Championship game. While their tournament finishes may have been a little closer than we wished, the team managed six wins against a formidable slate of opponents. These 15 young men played hard, played smart, and played together. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the names of the players, coaches, and staff. UNC Men's Basketball Roster Nate Britt, Upper Marlboro, Md.; Theo Pinson, Greensboro, N.C.; Joel Berry, II, Apopka, Fla.; Kennedy Meeks, Charlotte, N.C.; Isaiah Hicks, Oxford, N.C.; Tony Bradley, Bartow, Fla.; Shea Rush, Fairway, Kan.; Kanler Coker, Gainesville, Ga.; Brandon Robinson, Douglasville, Ga.; Seventh Woods, Columbia, S.C.; Aaron Rohlman, Gastonia, N.C.; Stilman White, Wilmington, N.C.; Luke Maye, Huntersville, N.C.; Justin Jackson, Tomball, Texas; Roy Williams, Head Coach; Steve Robinson, Assistant Coach; Hubert Davis, Assistant Coach; C.B. McGrath, Assistant Coach; Brad Frederick, Director of Basketball Operations; Sean May, Director of Player Personnel; Jonas Sahratian, Strength & Conditioning Coordinator; Eric Hoots, Director of Player Development.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, we could not be prouder of our team's victory last night. To paraphrase the greatest basketball player of all time and a fellow UNC alumnus, Michael Jordan, who was perhaps channeling Yogi Berra, ``The ceiling truly is the roof.'' Hark the sound, and Go Heels!

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to this misguided and shortsighted pay-more-for-less bill, also known as TrumpCare. In all my time in Congress, I have never seen such blatant disregard for the interests of the American people. Twenty-four million hardworking Americans will lose their coverage. TrumpCare will raise premiums, while reducing critical premium subsidies that millions depend on. Meanwhile, deductibles and out-of- pocket expenses will go up. Particularly hurt will be the Americans aged 50 to 64 who will have to pay five times more than others for health coverage, no matter how healthy they may be themselves. TrumpCare then goes on to ransack the Medicaid funds that older Americans rely on for long-term care, and it shortens the life of the Medicare trust fund by 3 years. North Carolina consumers in the insurance marketplace, many of them insured for the first time, would face the second highest healthcare cost increases in the entire country, an average of over $7,500. Again: mainly older, poorer North Carolinians. For example, a 64-year-old resident making $22,000 a year would see a premium spike of over $14,000. That is over half of his income. After years of trying to destroy the ACA, is this the best that Speaker Ryan and President Trump can come up with? Defeat this bill.