Mary Scanlon

Ms. SCANLON

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of S. 3998, the Federal Judiciary Stabilization Act of 2024, a bill to convert 10 temporary Federal judgeships to permanent seats. Our country is facing a serious judicial shortage and has for some time. The last bill creating Federal district court judgeships was passed into law over 30 years ago. Since that time, the Federal caseload has ballooned, and it has become increasingly difficult to ensure that Americans are able to have their day in court. This need spurred Republicans and Democrats to seek passage of the JUDGES Act earlier this year before the November election. That bill was predicated on an agreement to give 25 judicial appointments to the unknown at that time next President. I was disappointed that Republican leadership held the bill until after the election in order to ensure that their candidate controlled the appointments. It was very disappointing to have politics introduced on what should have been a bipartisan bill. We can't go back in time and pass the JUDGES Act before the election, but we can pass this legislation on a bipartisan basis to prevent the loss of 10 Federal judgeships when the current temporary judgeships expire. Temporary judgeships are designed to help district courts reduce unusually large backlogs. Short-term judgeships look very similar to permanent ones. They are created by Congress, and the judges are appointed by the President to a lifetime judgeship. However, after a temporary judgeship expires, the next person to retire or otherwise leave the bench in that judicial district is simply not replaced. That is exactly what will happen if these 10 temporary judgeships are allowed to lapse. When a judge retires, no new nominees will be sent to Congress. Those judicial districts will lose judgeships on which they have relied for at least two decades, and Americans living in those districts will have trouble accessing justice. We may call these judgeships temporary, but it is clear they are needed on a permanent basis. The 10 at issue today on S. 3998 have been reauthorized again and again. Since they were first authorized over 20 years ago, our Nation has grown, and with it, the demands on our Federal judicial system have grown too. Making these 10 temporary judgeships permanent will ensure that people living and working in those communities have a Federal court system that is more responsive to their needs. The Federal Judiciary Stabilization Act is a product of bipartisan, bicameral work. I thank my colleagues in both Chambers, Senators Mazie Hirono and Ted Cruz along with Representatives Ted Lieu and Lance Gooden for their hard work on this bill. The Senate passed this bill in April, so if the House passes it today, it will go directly to the President's desk. I am proud to support this bill. I urge all of my colleagues to do the same Mr. Speaker, this legislation will strengthen the rule of law and access to justice, and provide stability to our judiciary by ensuring the number of Federal judges doesn't decrease when these temporary judgeships expire. Each of these judicial districts has relied on these temporary judgeships for decades, and it is long past time that we make them permanent. This bill is a small, but meaningful step toward making our courthouse doors accessible to all Americans, regardless of where they live. I hope we can replicate this bipartisan work in the future. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support this bill, and send it to the President's desk, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. SCANLON

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 4610, a bill that would amend chapter III of title 36 of the United States Code, which codifies various national symbols to designate the bald eagle as our national bird. The bald eagle, native to North America, is a longstanding and cherished symbol, as well as one for whom football fans in my district share a special affection. However, it may surprise people to know that the law does not already designate the bald eagle as our national bird. In 1782, the bald eagle was adopted as part of the Coat of Arms for the Great Seal of the United States. It has been incorporated into the Seals of the United States House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate, the President and Vice President of the United States, and various government departments and agencies. It is also deeply embedded into our culture as a symbol of patriotism, reflecting the strength, majesty, and grace of our great Nation. However, by the 1960s, this powerful symbol of American freedom was on its way to extinction due to the combined impact of environmental hazards and habitat laws. In the late 1970s, the bald eagle was designated as endangered in many of the lower 48 States. Today, its population has recovered significantly, thanks to targeted conservation measures spearheaded by the Federal Government and private individuals. These included habitat protection, the banning of certain poisons and pesticides, and captive breeding programs, all of which led to the bald eagle being removed from the endangered species list and to its becoming a symbol of how the Endangered Species Act can save wildlife from extinction. The bald eagle population in the lower 48 States has increased from 417 nesting pairs in 1963 to more than 71,400 nesting pairs and 316,700 individual birds today. In bringing this bill to the floor, we applaud the efforts of Senators Amy Klobuchar, Cynthia Lummis, Markwayne Mullin, and Tina Smith, as well as Brad Finstad and Angie Craig. I urge the House to pass this legislation to designate the bald eagle as the national bird, or as we say in Philadelphia, Go Birds. Mr. Speaker, I support this legislation, I urge all Members to pass it, and send it to the President's desk. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. SCANLON

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to a rule that demonstrates much of what is wrong with the 118th Congress under this Republican majority, primarily a failure to do the people's business in a timely and serious manner. This rule has three bills. First, there is S. 4199, which addresses serious understaffing in our Federal courts, which impedes access to justice for all Americans. This carefully negotiated, bipartisan bill should have passed months ago, but it has been delayed in the House to seek partisan political advantage in the staffing of those new positions. Next, we have the Liberty in Laundry Act, part of the House Republican spin cycle to undermine energy efficiency standards for common household appliances. Like the companion bills that have been offered throughout this term, it would hamper the process of setting energy efficiency standards upon which consumers rely to save money and operate their homes more efficiently. Finally, and most distressingly, this rule puts forward a politicized version of the National Defense Authorization Act. For 60 years, Congress has worked in a bipartisan manner to draft the NDAA, coming together to put our troops, veterans, and national security above political considerations. The FY25 NDAA breaks from this tradition. I am deeply opposed to a provision in this NDAA that will prohibit the children of U.S. servicemembers from receiving medical treatment if they are diagnosed with gender dysphoria. This provision has no business being in an NDAA. At a time when we are struggling to recruit and retain soldiers, ensuring access to medical care for servicemembers and their families is more important than ever, but this bill, as written, will take away medically necessary care. The evidence is clear. Gender-affirming care of various types is life-changing and lifesaving for the children who need it. Our soldiers need to be able to focus on their missions, not worrying whether their children are able to get the medical treatment that they need. In order to illustrate the impact of this political attack, I would like to share the following story from a military spouse whose family would be harmed by this provision of the NDAA. They write: My spouse has proudly served in the U.S. Air Force for 22 years, dedicating their life to protecting our country. Over the years, our family has moved across the Nation and the world, embracing the challenges and opportunities that military life brings. One of the greatest blessings of this life has been the assurance of quality healthcare for our family. It has been a cornerstone of our stability and a key reason why my spouse continues to serve. Knowing we could depend on the military healthcare system gave us the peace of mind to focus on the sacrifices required of us as a military family. However, I am now writing to you with great concern and a heavy heart. Recent legislative efforts to restrict or eliminate access to gender-affirming care threaten not only the well-being of my trans child but also the very values of dignity and respect that our military stands for. This care has been transformative for my child, giving them confidence, joy, and a sense of self that we had only glimpsed before. To have this vital care stripped away feels cruel and unjust. For lawmakers to target military families, families who already sacrifice so much for this Nation, only compounds the pain. My spouse has given 22 years to the service of this country, and now it feels as though the country is turning its back on us. I am thankful to this military family for sharing their story. The ability to obtain medical care for one's child, including gender- affirming care, should be between a parent, a child, and their doctor, and politicians should stay the hell out of it.

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, for all of these reasons, I oppose today's rule.

Ms. SCANLON

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, that is the whole purpose is to have experts making those decisions. I thank the gentleman for organizing this Special Order.

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much for yielding. Mr. Speaker, we are here to discuss Project 2025, the extremist playbook to impose a radical, rightwing agenda upon Americans. It is called Project 2025 because it is designed to be implemented by Trump and his allies if he returns to the White House next year. The authors of Project 2025 have even begun recruiting people to apply for jobs to help implement this scheme because, as they detail in Project 2025, they plan to fire career civil servants and replace them with partisans who swear loyalty to Trump rather than to our country or our Constitution, a move, by the way, that the former President tried to implement by executive order before he left office. When the authors of Project 2025 decided to publish their radical agenda, they must not have realized that their ideas are so extreme that Americans would reject them as being, frankly, un-American. That is why the former President and many of those allies are now trying to distance themselves from Project 2025, but they can't because their fingerprints are all over Project 2025. Nowhere is that clearer than in Project 2025's plan to ban abortion and restrict women's reproductive freedom. The truth is the extremists who plotted with Trump to overturn Roe v. Wade were never going to stop there. Chapter 14 of Project 2025 outlines their plans. It was written by a member of the Trump administration, and you can read it yourself on pages 449 through 502. Project 2025 would impose a nationwide ban on medication abortion by revoking FDA approval of that drug. It would resurrect a 19th century law, the Comstock Act, to ban the mailing of abortion care materials and criminalize their use. Project 2025 would rip away access to basic contraception. It would end emergency room reproductive healthcare for women whose health and lives are at risk. Project 2025 would end IVF as it is currently practiced. It would require the government to monitor women's pregnancies and miscarriages. Project 2025 is beyond extreme. It is dangerous. Democrats will continue to stand firm and united against this radical agenda and to stand up for Americans' reproductive freedom because we trust women to make decisions about their own bodies, not politicians.

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I don't think so. I mean, it doesn't matter what aspect of our Federal Government you are concerned about. If you are concerned about clean air and clean water, the idea that they are just going to take out all the scientists and have political hacks deciding how many parts per million of poison can be in our water and air, that is just frightening.

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, absolutely.

Ms. SCANLON

Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, today's rule is a tale of two Congresses. On the one hand, we have the National Defense Authorization Act, the NDAA, which is a bipartisan bill, the result of good faith negotiations between Republicans and Democrats on the House Armed Services Committee to support our servicemembers and provide for our national defense. This NDAA accommodates the diverse interests of Members of the House in ways that, while inevitably not satisfying everyone on every point, represent compromises that ensure the bill can become law. Attached to this rule are two nakedly partisan and groundless contempt resolutions based on manufactured allegations, conspiracy theories, and bad faith arguments designed solely to smear President Biden in the lead-up to the 2024 election. In the first example, we see Congress at its best. In the second, we see Congress at its worst. First, the NDAA: The fiscal year 2025 NDAA is a solid bipartisan package designed to support our servicemembers and provide for our national defense. I applaud the work of my colleagues on the Armed Services Committee for their evenhanded, bipartisan work to produce a bill that addresses priorities and concerns from all across the country. Like all negotiated bills, there are policies I agree with and disagree with, but that is how negotiation and compromise work. Of particular note is that this year's NDAA would implement long- overdue reforms to improve military recruitment and retention, a growing concern as our armed services have struggled to meet recruiting targets over the past decade. The reforms in this bill are the result of an in-depth, bipartisan study led by Representatives Don Bacon and Chrissy Houlahan into the factors impacting recruitment and retention. It should be no surprise that the main concerns facing our servicemembers are the same as those of many American families: wanting to earn enough to support a family and to afford good housing, childcare, and medical care. This NDAA increases pay and benefits for junior servicemembers. It fixes dilapidated military housing. It increases military housing benefits. It fully funds childcare assistance programs so that all eligible military families can receive the benefits. It strengthens programs to support military spouses. It is a disgrace that we have servicemembers living in poverty, servicemembers and member families who go hungry, and servicemembers who aren't able to take care of their children and families. I am glad that the Armed Services Committee came together on these reforms. They will go a long way in fighting poverty and hunger and will encourage more people to enlist in military service. This NDAA also makes significant investments in our national defense. The bill funds a range of programs to support our domestic defense industrial base. These programs will help maintain and create jobs throughout the country and ensure that we can meet the demand for munitions and weapons systems to support our own military needs and those of our allies. Finally, this NDAA makes needed cuts to wasteful defense programs to keep the top-line spending in the bill at a flat 1 percent increase over last year's amount. All in all, while there are plenty of policies that I disagree with, the overall bill is solid and should garner the support of a large majority of House Members. However, despite the best efforts of our Armed Services colleagues, it looks like House Republican leadership has decided to politicize the NDAA, just as they did last year. Last night in the Rules Committee, Republicans made in order dozens of rightwing MAGA amendments that will poison the NDAA's bipartisan support. These amendments, many of which are likely to be adopted by the House's extremist Republican majority, would restrict access to abortion care for female servicemembers and block efforts to promote diversity and address discrimination in our armed services. In doing so, House leadership is, once again, politicizing one of the few remaining areas of bipartisan agreement in the House, while ignoring the real needs of those who serve our country. Last year, when House Republicans pulled this exact same stunt, it killed bipartisan support for the NDAA for the first time in decades. This week Republicans have decided to repeat that mistake. Additionally, last night in the Rules Committee, Republicans rejected multiple bipartisan amendments to the bill. Republicans rejected an amendment from a Member of their own party to add 4,000 special immigrant visas to resettle our Afghan allies who supported our troops throughout that conflict and who we promised to protect. Republicans rejected another Republican amendment to adopt the Major Richard Star Act, which would fix a longstanding prohibition that prevents medically retired veterans from receiving their full earned benefits. That is a provision that has the support of over 300 Members of this House. Republicans rejected a bipartisan amendment to provide cancer screenings for civilian DOD firefighters, who have been disproportionately exposed to cancer-causing PFAS forever chemicals. These screenings would help detect cancers early and save lives. Lastly, Republicans rejected an amendment that would ensure that female servicemembers, who place their lives on the line for their country, would have the freedom to access reproductive healthcare when they need it. Republicans rejected these sensible amendments, prioritizing over two dozen partisan culture war amendments, including amendments to relocate a Confederate monument back to Arlington National Cemetery and to defund DOD efforts to remove white nationalists from our military. In rejecting other amendments, our Afghan allies, our veterans, our firefighters, and women servicemembers have to take a back seat to the MAGA extremists' culture wars. That is shameful. It is bad leadership, and it is clear that House Republicans have the wrong priorities for our servicemembers, our veterans, our national security, and our country. Madam Speaker, whereas the NDAA, absent the toxic amendments, represents the possibilities of a functional legislative process and bipartisan negotiation, the rest of this rule represents the worst parts of this Chamber. Since the first day of the 118th Congress, Republicans have spent the past year and a half spreading lies and conspiracy theories about President Biden and denying or making excuses for the misdeeds of their presumptive Presidential candidate, Mr. Trump. A year and a half of investigations, depositions, written testimony, hundreds of thousands of pages of documents, and they haven't turned up any credible evidence of wrongdoing by President Biden or his administration. In fact, they have conclusively proven what the world knows: that President Biden has not committed impeachable acts. While House Republicans have been confronted repeatedly with this reality, they have doubled down, wasting the time and money of three separate congressional committees on a wild goose chase that has turned up exactly zero evidence of wrongdoing. I will make sure we understand just how backward the House Republicans' priorities are. At a time when the Nation has been dealing with high costs, devastating national disasters, and wars in Europe and the Middle East, Republicans have wasted tens of millions of taxpayer dollars, thousands of hours of staff time, and weeks of valuable committee and floor time to pursue completely fabricated allegations against this President, and all of their wasted time and money has turned up nothing. Rather than concede defeat, Republicans have manufactured this baseless contempt resolution against the Attorney General. Everything our Republican colleagues are saying about these contempt resolutions is smoke and mirrors, designed to distract attention from the criminal conviction of former President Trump by a jury of his peers and a desperate attempt by Republicans to save face after their failed investigations, their failed legislative agenda, and their failure to represent the American people. There is no wrongdoing, no crime, no impeachable offense. The President and the Attorney General have done nothing wrong. Madam Speaker, I honestly don't know who is tuning into C-SPAN at 9 a.m. on a workday to watch a rules debate, but I guarantee that most Americans could care less about the nonsense we are hearing from the other side of the aisle about this contempt resolution. Americans care about real issues. They care about the prices at the grocery store, access to quality healthcare and childcare, and whether their kids will be safe on the way to and from school. It is clear that the Republican majority has not done anything to address those issues. Many Republican Members have acknowledged as much right here on this floor. House Republicans have wasted a year and a half fighting with each other and falsely smearing President Biden in order to provide cover for the twice-impeached felon who leads their party. They can't even pass their priority bills, and thank God they can't, because their agenda would be disastrous for our civil liberties, our economy, and our national security. Day after day, all we get from House Republicans is messaging, talking points, and a whole lot of hot air. Despite everything, Democrats remain ready to work for the American people. We have stepped into the breach multiple times in the past 18 months to negotiate and cut deals with Republicans to save our economy from default, fund the government, protect our allies, and provide humanitarian aid where it is needed most. We stand ready to advance real solutions for the American people. That offer is always on the table for Republicans who want to take it up. As these contempt resolutions make clear, House Republicans have shown us time and again that they would rather fight partisan culture wars and stir up chaos and fear than work for the American people. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, we are all very grateful to the House Armed Services Committee for the bipartisan product that they have put forward here, but as we said before, it is the inclusion of multiple poison pill amendments all put forward by extremists from the House Republican majority and the failure to include both bipartisan and Democratic amendments that are really empowering both this rule and this bill. Madam Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 12, a bill that would ensure every American has full access to essential reproductive healthcare, including abortion care. Following the abhorrent Dobbs decision, which ended the protections for reproductive rights provided by Roe v. Wade, many States have enacted laws to either ban some or all abortions, which Republicans have declared numerous times is their goal. Reproductive healthcare is vital, and denying these rights to millions of women around the country and our servicemembers and their spouses is shameful and dangerous. That is why House Democrats are fighting to protect women, protect doctors, and protect patients who simply want to access and provide needed care. H.R. 12, the Women's Health Protection Act will prevent States from trampling on women's constitutional rights and keep fundamental healthcare services available across the country. Madam 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.

Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Mrs. Fletcher) to discuss this proposal.

Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Goldman).

Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I do agree with some of the gentleman's comments about the need to increase pay and benefits for our junior servicemembers and service families, but I have to strongly disagree with his attempts to turn this into an attack on the President. We have seen multiple reports from experts talking about the challenges that our servicemembers face, and the challenges we see to recruitment are because our economy is so strong that people have other better-paid and better-resourced opportunities under the current economy than they have for years. That has been suppressing recruitment and retention, so I think his economic analysis is a little off. I did think when he was getting up here, he might be here to speak about some of his amendments that were not being made in order. Last night, the majority of the Rules Committee, the Republican majority, voted unanimously to disallow amendments that would protect our Federal firefighters from cancer-causing PFAS chemicals. These were bipartisan amendments, and the gentleman from Wisconsin was a cosponsor of them, so I assumed that when he was here today, he was here to speak against the rule. I think perhaps that is the best choice until we have a more bipartisan approach to the amendments that should be made in order. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. As you may have guessed, I strongly oppose this rule. The rule likely guarantees that there will not be bipartisan support for the NDAA, and like last year, this means that the House will get steamrolled by the Senate. As we have discussed this morning, the two contempt resolutions included in this rule are not a serious legislative effort but a manufactured dispute between House Republicans and the Attorney General, which threatens to undermine rather than promote the rule of law. We would be a lot better off with a clean rule for the NDAA, stripped of all the partisan nonsense, so we can focus on our core constitutional duty to provide for the common defense. Conducting oversight over our Armed Forces and funding our national security are two of Congress' most important responsibilities, but the kind of politicization we see from the House Republicans is disrespectful to the American people, unbecoming to this Chamber, and signals to our servicemembers that we don't have their backs when they need it the most. As the NDAA goes to the floor this week, I call on my colleagues to reject the poison pill amendments that have been presented and maintain the bill's bipartisan support. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose the previous question and the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Ms. SCANLON

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. SCANLON

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, this year, we celebrate the 50th anniversary of the first National EMS week and honor the first responders delivering urgent lifesaving care to people across our country. I rise to recognize a constituent who embodies the courageous and dedicated spirit of our emergency medical services professionals. Last month, Delco's own John Goddard, an EMS professional with Riddle Emergency Services at Main Line Health, was awarded the Pennsylvania Paramedic of the Year Award. John has served our community for nearly three decades, including as a flight paramedic and as a trainer and mentor for the next generation of EMS professionals. Since starting as a volunteer in 1996, John has shown up for our community day in and day out, delivering compassionate critical care to alleviate suffering and make our communities safer. It was heartwarming to attend the ceremony at which John received his award and to see the love and respect in which his colleagues and his family hold him. I thank John Goddard for his devotion to serving our community and inspiring the next generation of EMS professionals. We are lucky to have him. In Recognition of Tyshawn Sorey

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a constituent who just earned the prestigious 2024 Pulitzer Prize for music. Composer and multi-instrumentalist Tyshawn Sorey was awarded the 2024 prize for his composition, ``Adagio (for Wadada Leo Smith),'' which premiered in March 2023 at Atlanta Symphony Hall. Sorey is known for his extraordinary ability to blend composition and improvisation in his work and for his effortless mastery of highly complex scores. The Pulitzer board describes Sorey's work as ``an introspective saxophone concerto with a wide range of textures presented in a slow tempo, a beautiful homage that's quietly intense, treasuring intimacy rather than spectacle.'' This Pulitzer is just the latest addition to Sorey's list of accomplishments. It comes 1 year after he was named a Pulitzer finalist for his acclaimed composition, ``Monochromatic Light (Afterlife).'' He was a 2017 MacArthur Fellow, and, after the 2018 Opera Philadelphia premiere of his ``Cycles of My Being,'' a set of songs exploring the African-American male experience, he was named the opera company's composer in residence from 2019 through 2023. He currently serves as the Presidential assistant professor in the departments of music and Africana studies at the University of Pennsylvania, where he maintains a vigorous touring schedule in addition to his academic duties. In the future, Sorey plans to continue pushing boundaries, extending cultural norms, and reformulating public perceptions of modern Black creative practice through the breadth and depth of his works. I congratulate Mr. Sorey on this prestigious and well-deserved recognition.

Ms. SCANLON

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, over 60 million Americans live with a disability, including many of our seniors and veterans. When they travel, these passengers deserve a safe and dignified flying experience, but I have heard all too often from constituents living with disabilities that their air travel experience can be anything but safe and dignified. Inaccessible restrooms and aircraft, damage to wheelchairs, or an absence of assistive devices can make air travel unpleasant or even impossible. I was proud to vote for the bipartisan FAA Reauthorization Act, which expands the rights of passengers with disabilities and makes important strides for consumer protection and accessibility, including protections for powered wheelchairs, safer handling of assistive devices, new aircraft with accessibility standards, deadlines for DOT to investigate and respond to disability-related complaints, improved accessibility for airline mobile apps, and important updates to emergency medical kits on commercial planes. Many of these measures are key provisions from the Air Carrier Access Amendments Act, which I have proudly fought to advance since coming to Congress and will continue working to include.

Ms. SCANLON

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

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. SCANLON

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about ghost guns. They have been called the Ikea of firearms. You can order them online, and in less than an hour, have a firearm as deadly as any sold by a gun dealer. These fully functioning, untraceable firearms can be bought without a background check, and they are wreaking havoc on our communities. That is why they have become the weapon of choice for people who would otherwise be banned from purchasing a gun, including known violent offenders, gun traffickers, and increasingly, teenagers, whose digital literacy enables them to purchase ghost gun kits freely online. Prior to 2019, Philadelphia police discovered five or fewer handmade firearms per year during criminal investigations; but by 2022, 575 ghost guns turned up in investigations, and that number has only grown. Last summer, the mass shooter who killed five people in the Kingsessing neighborhood had two ghost guns in his possession when he was arrested. Recently, Delaware County was rocked when a 15-year-old killed another 15-year-old using a ghost gun. These guns are reaching into every community, including the heartland, and not just our big cities. According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the number of ghost guns seized by law enforcement has skyrocketed in the last decade from less than 3,000 in 2017 to nearly 26,000 in 2022 alone. They have become a lucrative business for gun traffickers. In the last couple years, district attorneys in three suburban and rural counties near Philadelphia have busted gun traffickers assembling and selling ghost guns for profit. In one instance, the trafficker had set up shop across the street from the county courthouse. This has to stop. We hear all the time from lawmakers who oppose gun safety laws that we should focus on violent crime. Well, that is exactly what H.R. 4992, the Ghost Guns and Untraceable Firearms Act of 2023, would do. There is no reason why anyone would want an untraceable gun that can be purchased without a background check, except to use it in a crime. Chairman Jordan likes to say that bad guys aren't stupid, they are just bad. But this bill has been waiting for consideration since it was referred to the House Judiciary Committee nearly a year ago. In the absence of Federal action, cities like Philadelphia, Baltimore, and L.A. have been forced to undertake creative legal strategies like suing ghost gun manufacturers to block them from selling these guns without background checks. However, that is far from enough to stem the tide. The White House also stepped up to issue a regulation that would require ghost guns to be traceable and subject to background checks, but that regulation has been challenged in the Supreme Court. Get this: The argument is that the White House cannot regulate guns because it is Congress' job to regulate guns. It is time for Congress to stop arming people who should not have access to guns. Members of Congress need to make a choice. Will they stand with Americans who want to live free from gun violence, or will they stay in the pocket of ghost gun manufacturers? Americans--our children--deserve to know where their Representatives stand. Honoring the Legacy of Marian Anderson

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about the legacy of Marian Anderson. The world knows the story of Marian Anderson, the legendary singer who, after being barred from performing at the DAR's Constitution Hall here in D.C. because of her race, instead sang at an open-air concert at the Lincoln Memorial before more than 75,000 people and a radio audience in the millions. What is not so well known is that she was a proud daughter of Philadelphia. Born in 1897, she lived there most of her life, almost 100 years, and she is buried in the Eden Cemetery just outside of Philadelphia in Delaware County. Marian Anderson's home in south Philadelphia, which she purchased in 1924 and where she entertained famous Black musicians including Louis Armstrong, Bessie Smith, Billie Holiday, Duke Ellington and the like, is a museum celebrating her legacy as an outstanding artist, a champion of modern civil rights, and a true Philadelphian. Between 1925 and 1965, Marian Anderson performed opera, spirituals, and American classics in major venues across the United States and Europe. She sang at the White House in 1939, and in 1955 she became the first Black soloist to perform at the Metropolitan Opera. She served as a delegate to the U.N. Human Rights Committee and a goodwill ambassador for the United States Department of State. But the acclaimed contralto's talent was never fully recognized in her native country because of the color of her skin, until now. On June 8, 2024, 85 years after she sang on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, the Philadelphia Orchestra is renaming its principal performing venue in the heart of Philadelphia as Marian Anderson Hall. This will be the first major concert venue in the world to honor Marian Anderson, and it is fitting that this honor will be bestowed in her hometown by the renowned Philadelphia Orchestra, which has its own history of cultural diplomacy as a proud global ambassador for our Nation.

Ms. SCANLON

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Reschenthaler) for yielding the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, today's rule provides for the consideration of a partisan package of pro-polluter energy and environmental bills. Half of these bills have already been considered by the House last year, and the other half are toothless resolutions simply declaring a sense of Congress, albeit a partisan sense of Congress. A package like this is what we have come to expect from this Republican majority in the House. In the 118th Congress, Republicans can rarely find agreement with each other, let alone negotiate bipartisan legislation capable of being passed by both Houses and signed into law by the President. Therefore, what we get week in and week out are old bills chopped up and repackaged to give Republicans something to talk about for the week while we all wait for the next budget crisis deadline. Republicans have run the House for the past 15 months and have used that precious time not to lead but to pick fights and air grievances. As my Republican colleague on the Rules Committee, the gentleman from Texas, keeps reminding us, House Republicans have nothing to show for their majority. They haven't done anything to address the most important issues confronting America. Let's look at the record of this feckless Republican majority thus far. House Republicans spent a month fighting with each other to pick a Speaker, only to kick out Kevin McCarthy a few months later and spend another month selecting the current Speaker. House Republicans brought the country to the brink of fiscal calamity to extort a budget deal that they then failed to honor. House Republicans walked out of a bipartisan deal to overhaul the immigration system after claiming it was their number one priority. House Republicans are blocking bipartisan legislation to provide military aid to Ukraine and our allies. Also, House Republicans are blocking a funding package for increased border security. Although we hope to finish the 2024 budget this week, it is already 6 months late. All of which is to say, this majority has done nothing. My Republican colleagues have squandered their majority. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have squandered the country's time and taxpayer dollars and have nothing to show for it. Mr. Speaker, the legislation in this rule, if enacted, would be disastrous for our environment and would set back much of the progress we have made to tackle the climate crisis. Legislation in this rule would make it easier for companies to pollute our water. These bills roll back important Clean Water Act provisions that prevent companies from dumping waste and harmful chemicals into our public waterways. This rule would also make it easier for oil and gas companies to avoid responsibility for cleaning up drilling sites after finishing production. The rule would block efforts by the Biden administration to make Big Oil companies pay their fair share to remediate the environmental damage they have caused. The rule would cut billions of dollars in funding to help communities like mine mitigate the harmful effects of air pollution. Time and again, we see that the Republican energy agenda means putting polluters and their profits over regular people. Bills like this make my colleagues wonder just who exactly House Republicans represent. The vast majority of Americans support making energy and mining companies financially responsible for site cleanup. The vast majority of Americans want clean air and clean water. They want to protect their health, and they want their kids to have a healthy future. Yet, these partisan Republican policies would mean more pollution in our communities so that Exxon and Chevron can boost their stock prices. That doesn't seem like a fair trade for the American people. We need to solve the climate crisis, not enable it. We need to put people over profits and polluters. Congressional Democrats and President Biden are united behind that goal. In stark contrast to our Republican colleagues, Democrats have passed landmark legislation to combat the climate crisis, grow domestic energy production, and bring our energy infrastructure into the 21st century. Democrats passed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act. Combined, these bills used tax credits, lending programs, and public-private partnerships to invest billions of dollars in electric vehicles, renewables, energy production, and improvements to the electric grid. This investment is growing our economy, creating good-paying jobs in green manufacturing, and helping to lay the foundation for the mass adoption of renewable energy sources. Already, the Inflation Reduction Act has created over 170,000 jobs, and it is projected to create more than 1.5 million jobs over the next 10 years. The Inflation Reduction Act puts America on pace to cut our carbon emissions by 50 percent by 2030 so that we can meet our obligations under the Paris Agreement. The Inflation Reduction Act also caps abandoned oil wells, cleans up Superfund sites, and provides funding to communities to mitigate the effects of industrial pollution. In the long run, the Inflation Reduction Act and the infrastructure bill will save American families up to $38 billion on electricity bills, reduce industrial and manufacturing emissions, double the share of American electricity generated by renewables, and accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles. That is what a real energy agenda looks like. It is not grandstanding, and it is not handouts to oil and gas companies. The Democrats' energy initiatives and agenda have been wildly successful. Right now, the United States is the number one energy producer in the world. We produce more energy from both renewables and fossil fuels than any other country. This is directly translated into lower energy prices for Americans, more jobs, and higher economic growth, and it has allowed us to provide natural gas to our allies in Europe who have been squeezed by a belligerent Russia. Under President Biden's leadership, the United States is more energy independent today than at any time in our history. This is an amazing achievement and one that should be celebrated by this Chamber. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, we keep being presented by a false choice here--a choice between being environmentally responsible and having economic opportunity, and that is just not true. We can do both. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record a letter from nearly 50 organizations in opposition to H.R. 7023.