Chellie Pingree

Ms. PINGREE

Ms. PINGREE. Madam Speaker, I would like to extend my congratulations to Lyndel ``Joe'' Wishcamper on his outstanding advocacy for and production of affordable housing. I was thrilled to learn that Joe will receive this year's Affordable Housing Vision Award from the National Housing & Rehabilitation Association. I cannot think of a more deserving recipient. In his nearly 50 years as a community developer Joe has owned, developed, or redeveloped over 15,000 affordable housing units throughout the country. These include many units throughout Maine including ones in Portland, Eastport, Camden, Freeport, Bath, Rockland, and Wiscasset. He became an early practitioner of historic rehabilitation when he converted a vacant school building in downtown Portland to senior affordable housing. He later reduced their energy costs as well as reduced global warming by investing in a solar farm. Beyond his work in affordable housing, Joe has also been an asset to the Maine community serving on the boards of countless businesses and nonprofits, including Maine Medical Center, the Nature Conservancy, and the University of Maine System. In recognition of his contributions to the community he has been awarded both the Spurwink Humanitarian of the Year and the Colby College Philanthropy Award. While we are very proud of Joe and his contributions to his home state, this is a national award and many states have benefitted from his work and his philanthropy. His life's work has earned him many honors. This is a particularly significant one that merits special note. Congratulations to Joe Wishcamper for this award. I look forward to his continued efforts to create safe, decent, and affordable housing and to his many philanthropic endeavors.

Ms. PINGREE

Ms. PINGREE. Madam Speaker, I rise to support H.R. 1595, the SAFE Banking Act, which passed this House this afternoon. Maine voters have legalized marijuana. Like every other business, cannabis companies in Maine and other legalization States need financial institutions to help them start and grow. Maine credit unions and banks want to help. They were early advocates of the SAFE Banking Act. They recognize that a safe harbor is necessary so that lenders can assist this emerging industry sector, to the benefit of consumers, lenders, and law enforcement. Just yesterday, a banker from southern Maine contacted me out of regret. The bank had to close a long-time customer's account when they found out he was a delivery driver for a legal marijuana producer. Due to potential Federal liability, the bank lost a customer. The citizen lost his trusted financial institution. Does he have to keep his earnings under a mattress? This makes no sense. The SAFE Banking Act will fix this problem by allowing lenders to legally serve marijuana businesses. It promotes security by ensuring transactions are done through regulated institutions, not with bags of cash.

Ms. PINGREE

Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chair, I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will join me in supporting H.R. 1941, because sacrificing our coastline to further this Nation's dependence on fossil fuels is nothing short of irresponsible.

Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chair, I thank the chairman for his work on this and for yielding me the time. Today I rise in support of the Coastal Marine Economies Protection Act and to defend Maine's coastline for future generations. This summer, I was blessed to, once again, become a grandmother. With the birth of my new grandson, I am now lucky enough to be the grandmother of four. All four of my grandchildren played in and around the ocean this summer, the Gulf of Maine, just as their parents have done and so many other Mainers do every summer. The Gulf of Maine is an irreplaceable natural resource that is a draw for millions of tourists each year, and it is critical to the Maine economy. It should not be exploited for oil and drilling. The climate crisis has already taken a toll on our waters. It has caused ocean acidification and rising sea levels, and the warming of the ocean has put Maine's vibrant fishing industries in peril. Drilling for fossil fuels in the Gulf of Maine when we should be investing in renewable energy, is like trying to put out a fire by dousing it with kerosene. I believe it is our duty as elected leaders to leave this Nation better than we found it. That means ensuring we preserve our oceans for our children and our grandchildren, and we fight this climate crisis with all we have got.

Ms. PINGREE

Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Arts in Education Week. As children return to school from their summer vacations, I am reminded that true education must go beyond language arts and math. It must include daily access to creative subjects like dance, poetry, visual arts, and theater. Ninety-three percent of Americans agree: The arts are a vital part of a well-rounded education, and when schools make the investment, we see ripple effects across students' lives. A student involved in the arts is four times more likely to be recognized for academic achievement; they are three times more likely to win an award for school attendance and are elected to class office more than three times as often as their peers. We must do more to ensure every child can regularly access arts education. In the most recent appropriations bill passed by this Chamber, we included a $6 million increase to support Arts in Education at the Department of Education. I am proud to work with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle to support this program and will push to preserve a strong increase in any final spending bill.

Ms. PINGREE

Ms. PINGREE. Madam Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to congratulate the Salt Bay Chamberfest on their 25th Anniversary Season. Founded in 1994 by cellist Wilhelmina Smith, the festival has grown to international recognition. Giving voice to contemporary composers, the Chamberfest commissions and premieres new works as well as standard chamber music. Their mission to ``produce chamber music of the top artistic quality'' draws world-class talent to the unique setting of Darrows Barn at Round Top Farm. I am proud of Salt Bay Chamberfest's commitment to Maine's Midcoast community through their education programs--from open rehearsals to the public and the Family Concert aimed at introducing classical music to future generations, to Pre-Concert Talks and OffTopic! lectures and demonstrations by individual musicians. Chamberfest strives to make music accessible to all ages and ``broadens the horizons of its audience and the community.'' The arts are essential and play a vital role in our state's quality of life. As our creative economy grows and receives national attention, I am pleased to recognize Salt Bay Chamberfest as an exceptional example of how the arts can enliven and inspire a community. Bravo.

Ms. PINGREE

Ms. PINGREE. Madam Speaker, I rise in recognition of July as American Grown Flowers Month. As co-chair of the House Cut Flowers Caucus, I know the buy local movement has encouraged customers to buy not only their food, but also their flowers, from local farmers. People want to support the small family farm down the road, whether it is lettuce or lilies. The cut flower industry creates jobs, benefits our local economies, and naturally encourages us to embrace our planet's natural beauty. For farmers, cut flowers allow us to preserve open spaces, participate in sustainable agriculture, and, many times, support women- owned businesses. In my home State of Maine, where I represent many small farms, more than 250 farms sell cut flowers, from the Snell Family Farm in Buxton to Lazy Acres Farm in Farmingdale. This is an industry worth upwards of $1 million to our economy and has seen such rapid growth in recent years that we have many flower CSAs for local customers. The new interest in locally sourced flowers has allowed farmers to diversify their crops and boost their income. In Maine, nationally recognized as ``Vacationland,'' cut flowers are essential to our tourism industry. Flowers decorate wedding venues, hotels, and restaurants across our State. And when you are celebrating something as special as a wedding or a long-awaited vacation, shouldn't everything, down to the flowers on the table, have some meaning?

Ms. PINGREE

Ms. PINGREE. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Ms. PINGREE. Madam Speaker, pursuant to clause 1, rule I, I demand a vote on agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the Journal.

Ms. PINGREE

Ms. PINGREE. Madam Speaker, I am delighted to congratulate Opera Maine on its 25th anniversary season. Since its inception, opera has mirrored and challenged culture, politics, and power. And now, in our fast-paced world, opera invites us to slow down. It is bold and extravagant, and it evokes emotion unlike other art forms. Both passionate and beautiful, opera is an antidote to our busy lives, showcasing voices both powerful and exquisite, honed by years of training. I am grateful to Opera Maine for bringing acclaimed, nationally and internationally known vocal artists to the state. They have developed a reputation for creativity, sophistication, and artistic excellence, and they have played a key role in educating the next generation of aspiring theater performers. As Maine's creative culture continues to grow and receive well- deserved recognition, I want to thank Opera Maine for 25 years of enhancing the quality of life in our beloved state. I commend them--the little opera company that could--for their outstanding leadership and success, and for many years of entertainment and inspiration. Bravo.

Ms. PINGREE

Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chair, I strongly oppose this amendment. I appreciate the thoughts of the gentleman, but this is the wrong place to go about it. This amendment just indiscriminately cuts programs in this bill without any thought to the relative merit of the programs contained in the bill. For instance, this cut would result in fewer patients seen at the Indian Health Service, fewer safety inspectors ensuring accidents do not occur, deferred maintenance on our Nation's water and sanitation infrastructure. More generally, investments in our environmental infrastructure and our public lands will be halted and the associated jobs will be lost. This amendment would not encourage the agencies to do more with less. Simply put, it would force the agencies and our constituents to do less with less. Yes, it is true the Interior budget does not meet the same numbers that the President sent over to us, but the President cut the Environmental Protection Agency by a third, he cut the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities. I can make a very long list that the President cut that this Congress would never stand for. So this does not stand. We cannot go back to the President's original budget. We must stand together to oppose this amendment, which if it was passed, would harm the American people. Mr. Chair, I oppose this amendment and encourage my colleagues to join me in opposing it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. PINGREE

Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chair, I am sorry to disagree, but I hope that my colleagues won't be fooled by the comments coming from the proponents of this amendment. This is not about energy security or energy imports and exports. It is not about jobs. Instead, this is about whether the Interior Department is going to be held to the same procedural standard we expect every other department and agency to adhere to. Mr. Chair, if my colleagues think the Department of the Interior should follow the law and complete the process, then I urge them to oppose the gentleman's amendment. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment, which would strike section 117 from the bill. I have been a strong opponent of the current administration's offshore drilling proposals. I am proud to have the chance to manage this time in opposition to this amendment, which would be so devastating to States like my home State of Maine. I want to start by correcting a mischaracterization that I think has been made. The description of the gentleman's amendment states that it is removing language from the Interior bill ``which prohibits funds'' for the administration's 5-year offshore drilling plan. That is actually not correct. The language in the bill does not prohibit the administration from working on its plan. What the language in section 117 does is to tell the Interior Department that if it moves forward with oil and gas activities in 2020, it must do so only with respect to lease sales that have been through the entire approval and review process spelled out in the law. Our language recognizes the fact that the 2017 offshore drilling plan under the previous Presidential administration is the only plan that has completed all the steps required by the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act. Because of that, we agree that the Interior Department is free to continue to implement the previous 2017 narrow plan. In the meantime, it is true that the current administration is working on a new oil and gas drilling plan that would cover the 2019 to 2024 timeframe. This new plan, if implemented, would open up the entire East and West Coasts to drilling. To date, the current administration has put out one iteration of its plan, with two more to go. Despite not having completed the process, the administration has acknowledged it is already conducting pre-lease work in the mid-Atlantic, south Atlantic, and southern California planning areas. The budget for the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management states that it is preparing ``four new environmental impact statements for the lease sales that are planned in early 2020 or early 2021,'' which is where the problem comes in. The new 5-year plan, which is nothing more than a work in progress, is under siege, both from the courts and a complete lack of political support. In late March, a Federal court reinstated the moratorium in the north Atlantic planning area. That decision has essentially frozen work on the new plan. In fact, the Secretary told me, under questioning in an Interior Subcommittee hearing last month, that he did not know the outcome of the proposed plan. He said a new plan wasn't ``imminent.'' He was also quick to point out that no previous 5-year plan has ever included drilling in a State that was opposed to such activity. If that is his bottom line, then he might as well throw in the towel right now as there is not a single State along the Atlantic or Pacific Coasts that is in favor of drilling. My home State of Maine has a $5.6 billion tourism industry, 71 percent of which comes directly from the Maine coast. Thirty thousand Mainers make their living in marine industries. Our world-famous lobster fishery alone brings in $500 million annually. Our Governor, our Senators, our congressional delegation, and many of our cities and towns oppose the OCS drilling proposal. As nearly one-third of the United States population lives in the coastal areas impacted by this proposal, and there is broad bipartisan opposition to this issue, moving forward makes no sense, either fiscally or practically. The language in our Interior bill simply supports that position. It says to follow the law, complete all procedural steps, including responding to the concerns of the American public, the concerns of their Governors, and the concerns of their Members of Congress, before moving forward on individual drilling projects. To the Department, it says to save its money until it completes the process and finds out if it can drill for oil off the coast of South Carolina or off the coast of Florida or off the coast of California. Following a well-thought-out process, especially one contained in law, shouldn't be controversial, and I don't think it is. As such, I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment offered by the gentleman from Louisiana; protect our coastlines from Maine to Florida, from Washington State to California; and support the process contained in the OCS Lands Act. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chair, I do appreciate my colleague from Oklahoma clarifying that it is a big State for renewables and Texas is as well, and I encourage them to continue farther down that path because that is certainly an important challenge that we have to overcome is having more renewables in our country. I would again say that climate change is the greatest environmental threat that mankind has ever faced. We need to deploy every available tool at our disposal and address this crisis, including the best available science and economics, which I believe is also represented in the social cost of carbon analysis. I strongly oppose the Mullin amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, although I do not oppose the amendment.

Ms. PINGREE. Madam Chair, I am sorry to say that I have to oppose the amendment from the gentleman from Oklahoma and appreciate his thoughts, but he is completely wrong. The amendment is a harmful rider that would prohibit the EPA from considering the social cost of carbon as part of rulemakings. The ``social cost of carbon'' may sound a little confusing to people, but, frankly, it is an estimate of the economic damages associated with the small increase in carbon dioxide emissions in a given year. It represents, currently, our best scientific information available for incorporating the impacts from carbon pollution into regulatory analysis. Weakening or eliminating the use of the social cost of carbon as a tool for Federal agencies would ignore the sobering cost of health, environmental and economic impacts of extreme weather, rising temperatures, intensifying smog, and other impacts. We just cannot afford to abandon science at this critical moment in time. Our country needs to face the challenges ahead of us with climate change and have the best scientific tools available, and this is one. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Schrader).

Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of this amendment, and I thank my colleague from the Appropriations Committee for doing this. This is an important amendment that would prohibit any changes to the Job Corps centers or their closure. I appreciate that Secretary Perdue has announced his change of heart, but I want to make sure that the administration doesn't change the plan again. I think everyone else has said it very articulately. These are really important operations. They teach our young people a tremendous number of things. They provide full-time and temporary jobs. In New England-- as on the West Coast, I am sure--we need a lot of these people to help us with some of the challenges that are going on today. The Department of Labor had previously announced a proposal to close nine of the facilities. That would have impacted 356 full-time and 107 temporary and contract employees. More than 3,000 students were at risk of losing the opportunity to develop the skills and work experience they need to get jobs, and that would include the 966 students at centers that have been proposed for closure. Our Nation would lose out as well. We have already heard some of the ways that would happen on the West Coast, as it certainly would on the East Coast as well. These are countless hours for young people in conservation work, forest restoration work, and wildland firefighting. To quote a USDA web page, I will say that ``there has never been a time when Civilian Conservation Centers were more necessary or a more worthwhile investment in our Nation's future.'' Mr. Chair, I concur with the gentleman, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for yielding me time, and I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Huffman) for raising concerns that I think many of us have. But in this case, I am supporting this amendment. Mr. Chair, I have long fought to protect the health of our oceans and the sea life that inhabit them. That is why I have opposed the Trump administration's plan to drill in the gulf of Maine since day one. And I am proud that this Chamber recently passed our ocean acidification bill. Along with my colleague from Maine's Second District, we represent 90 percent of all the lobster landings in the United States. Lobster is an iconic symbol of our State, especially this time of year when Mainers and visitors from across the country enjoy our coastline and our food. I am proud of our very well-managed and highly restrictive lobster fishery of responsible operators. We need to work together on a new peer-reviewed tool to address this problem. Our State also is the home of a vibrant conservation movement that supports marine conservation and protecting the right whale. We have been successful over the past several years in creating tools with NOAA, our lobster industry, and conservationists. Indeed, the State of Maine has been actively involved in right whale conservation and worked with NOAA in the past to ensure that our State is doing all we can to keep whales safe in our very active fisheries. Unfortunately, in April, NOAA's Large Whale Take Reduction Team announced a plan to reduce right whale deaths that forced lobstermen to reduce their vertical lines by 50 percent. This risk-reduction tool, as my colleague mentioned, has not gone through a peer-review process despite significant concerns from the stakeholders that should be addressed. It does not account for many of the issues specific to the gulf of Maine. Mr. Chair, for that reason, I urge my colleagues to stand for a fair process, and I support this amendment.

Ms. PINGREE. Madam Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment.

Ms. PINGREE

Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in recognition of World Refugee Day and in support of the community of refugees who have resettled in my district. One of these refugees is Kifah Abdulla, who lived in Baghdad until war broke out at home. He spent over 8 years as a prisoner of war. He was isolated because of his activism against the dictatorship. He was a refugee for 11 years in Amman, Jordan, and 5 years in the Netherlands, before coming to Portland, Maine in 2011. He is now an Arabic teacher, a published poet, a performer, and an activist. There is a reason America has signed international treaties and passed laws giving shelter to those fleeing persecution. Many refugees, like Mr. Abdulla, were jailed or tortured because they protested, organized, or challenged their government. These values are at the core of our Nation. Every year, refugees travel 1.2 billion miles in search of safety. And right now, we are in the midst of the greatest refugee crisis since World War II. Sadly, when people fleeing the violence need us most, the administration has dramatically reduced refugee admissions. In a Nation where nearly all of us have come ``from away,'' as we say in Maine, I urge us all to make our communities warm, safe, and welcoming to refugees across the globe.

Ms. PINGREE

Ms. PINGREE. Madam Speaker, I thank the chair of the Rules Committee for yielding me the time, and I thank his fellow committee members for the hard work that they do and their staff putting in so many long hours around this appropriations process. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the rule for H.R. 3055. I would like to focus my remarks on the fiscal year 2020 Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies appropriations bill. This bill includes robust funding for the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the U.S. Food and Drug Administrations, two Federal agencies that touch the life of every single American. I am proud to serve on the subcommittee that oversees this bill, and I am grateful to Chairman Bishop and Ranking Member Fortenberry for working together to come up with a bipartisan bill that supports the diversity of American agriculture. As an example of the growing diversity of growing techniques that are used by American farmers, in Maine, organic food sales increased 39 percent between 2012 and 2017. Producing food free of toxic chemicals is better for the health of consumers, for the farmers, and for our environment. This bill supports growing markets, including organic and locally grown food, by increasing the funding for the National Organic Program to $18 million and providing $23.4 million for the Local Agriculture Market Program. The bill also boosts USDA efforts to reduce food waste by including $1 million for a new composting and food reduction pilot program, as well as $400,000 to establish the first Food Loss and Waste Reduction Liaison at the USDA. This is important because 30 to 40 percent of the food in this country is wasted. If food waste were a country, it would be number three in admitting global greenhouse gases. Additionally, the bill acknowledges that farmers are an integral part of playing a positive role in climate change solutions. There is report language urging the USDA to look at carbon markets for agriculture, supporting the USDA's Regional Climate Hubs, and encouraging the USDA to look at other opportunities to support farmers dealing with the effects of climate change.