Jill Tokuda

Ms. TOKUDA

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

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chair, this amendment seems innocent enough. Surely, we do not want our foreign adversaries to acquire agricultural land here in the United States, but ultimately, this is a solution in search of a problem. As of December 2023, the USDA reported that foreignly held agricultural land is approximately 3.5 percent of all privately held agricultural land in the United States. Essentially, five countries, Canada, the Netherlands, Italy, U.K., and Germany, account for 62 percent of this 3.5 percent, with land owned by China coming in at approximately 0.9 percent of the total foreign-owned land, this 3.5 percent, in the United States. The definition is also very general and leaves the President with a lot of discretion to decide which countries or people fit within the definition. We have seen President Trump turn against longstanding allies and partners, calling them adversaries and targeting individuals who stand up to him or refuse to bow down before him. Allowing a President, any President, to target landholdings seems like a very dangerous tool to place in the hands of our current President. Let's be clear: I share the concern about protecting U.S. agricultural land and national security, but this amendment is overly broad and risks serious unintended consequences. We have been down this road before. So-called alien land laws once barred those deemed ineligible for citizenship from owning or leasing land, disproportionately targeting Chinese and Japanese communities because discriminatory Federal laws denied them naturalization. In recent years, States such as Florida and Texas have passed laws restricting ownership of agricultural land by citizens or entities from foreign adversaries, which has resulted in xenophobic and discriminatory practices against Asian Americans, with Realtors literally concerned about selling land to Chinese Americans, insinuating any kind of affiliation to the CCP. If the goal is to address national security, we should be precise. Restrictions should be narrowly tailored to foreign governments and individuals already identified through existing authorities, such as the Treasury Department's specially designated nationals list. We already have the tools to review and block risky transactions, including the CFIUS list that can be used to identify specifically who should not be purchasing our land. We should strengthen and enforce these tools, not create vague, sweeping prohibitions that invite confusion and discrimination, particularly against immigrants and people of color. We can protect our national security without undermining civil rights or opening the door to racial profiling. There is a better way to protect national security, protect our agricultural land, and protect our Asian-American community from the threat of racism. This amendment is not it. Mr. Chair, I strongly urge my colleagues to reject this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Chair, I think it is rich that the previous speaker insinuates that China may buy all our agricultural land when most of the land in Hawaii was stolen by the United States of America when it was illegally annexed by this country. Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. Craig), the ranking member, to speak on this issue.

Ms. TOKUDA

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Chair, earlier today, we sat in the Armed Services Committee and heard a $1.5 trillion defense budget request. That is not including the $1 billion a day going to the Iran war. Just imagine what even a fraction of that could do if we invested it in our farmers and in feeding American families. Right now, every part of American agriculture is under strain, and too many families are going hungry. This is not a moment for a skinny farm bill. It is a moment for a serious, bipartisan one. Yet, once again, specialty crop farm producers, the backbone of agriculture in States like Hawaii, are being shortchanged. They got 7 percent of the USDA Farmer Bridge Assistance funding, even though we have specialty crop growers in every single State, every territory, and 95 percent of all counties with farms. Democrats fought to fix that. We pushed for an additional $10 billion in support so these farmers could survive and compete. We were blocked. At the same time, this administration ripped away $660 million that helped get fresh, local food into our schools--literally, taking food out of the mouths of hungry kids and income out of the hands of farmers who grew it. We fought to cancel those cuts, but we were blocked. Let's be clear about the broader context. Tariffs, taxes on our own farmers, have cost them billions and made food more expensive for everyone. That is not support. That is harm. Yes, this bill does harm for what it does and what it does not do. It opens the door to privatizing SNAP administration, making it harder for families to access basic nutrition. Conservation programs are lifelines when farmers are facing more severe natural disasters. This bill strips over a billion dollars from conservation programs and guts in-kind assistance for RCPP partnerships, the very projects that help farmers invest in their land and build long-term resilience. It shields the most powerful corporations while leaving everyday Americans with fewer protections. It is an outright poison pill that denies Americans their day in court. That is not a compromise. That is a step backward. A farm bill that ignores these realities doesn't just fall short. It deepens the crisis. It tells farmers we are not listening. It tells families they are on their own. We can and must do better. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to reject this bill. Come back to the table. Come back at a decent hour, not in the dark of night where we are trying to push through this bill and this amendment. Do the hard, bipartisan work to deliver a farm bill that actually meets this moment. Vote ``no.''

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

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, though I understand wholeheartedly my colleague's position on this topic, I must oppose this amendment. The United States benefits from broad animal disease monitoring networks that extend worldwide. Through these scientific connections, our scientists here at home can prepare for and mitigate new and emerging pathogens that would affect livestock here in America. Global health and safety also depend on shared data, and just because we remove ourselves from collaborative efforts doesn't mean the research stops. We simply remove ourselves from receiving any of the benefits that shared research could yield. This amendment would also prohibit education activities on animal research in those countries, and I would ask my colleagues: Do we really want to limit education that could prevent the next outbreak of a zoonotic disease, even if the education is in a country of concern? I, for one, am not eager to see another pandemic threaten the United States and understand the devastating risks if we are isolated and alone against these threats. Mr. Chairman, I humbly oppose this amendment and strongly encourage my colleagues to vote ``no.'' Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Chairman, I continue to urge all Members to oppose this amendment. Again, while I understand the perspectives and the points of view of the majority, again, eliminating ourselves from the opportunity to engage in shared research to the benefit of the health and wellness and the lives of all American people, we cannot support this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, even though I am not opposed to it.

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Chair, I support promoting healthier diets and lifestyles for all Americans, but I have serious concerns with any policy that would make life more difficult for Americans who are already struggling to make ends meet. For many, like my constituents, who live in food deserts, we shouldn't make a program that is supposed to provide relief too confusing and too frustrating for anyone to want to participate in or be able to participate in. It is not that SNAP recipients buy different foods than other Americans. USDA research has shown that SNAP participants purchase foods at rates similar to nonparticipants. Despite this, USDA has now approved 22 different State waivers, each of which have different restrictions on what can be purchased with SNAP through restriction pilot programs. One restricts soda and candy. One restricts soda and energy drinks. One restricts soda, energy drinks, candy, and prepared desserts. Another one restricts candy, candy-coated items, gum, licorice, mints, fruit leathers, sweetened baking chocolate, fruit or nuts with any sugar or honey added, granola bars--unless they include flour--and some types of popcorn if it has sugar in it like kettle corn, are excluded. That is just way too confusing for too many people. Better ways to address diet-related chronic disease include investing in fruit and vegetable incentives like GusNIP and nutrition education programs. Unfortunately, as we know, funding for SNAP-Ed, which benefited many States, including mine, provides grants to State and local organizations in all States and territories to teach people how to stretch their SNAP dollars, cook healthy meals, and lead active lifestyles, was eliminated in the big, ugly bill. The cherry on top is that these restriction pilots depend on the now- nonexistent SNAP-Ed program to evaluate their effectiveness. The study proposed in this amendment can provide valuable data about the lack of effectiveness of the waivers, though it is certainly not going to be making up for the loss of SNAP-Ed. I cannot emphasize enough that we must seek to restore the funding to this essential program. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Chairman, I have no objection to this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise to oppose this amendment which would extend automatic grazing renewals to the national grasslands, eliminating environmental review, public participation, and Tribal consultation in the management of our public lands. Our national grasslands are extraordinarily precious ecosystems. Sixty-two percent of similar landscapes have already been lost globally. As stewards of these public lands, we, therefore, must ensure that they undergo fulsome analysis to prioritize their restoration and long- term conservation. This amendment would allow grazing permits to be renewed indefinitely when agencies fail to complete the NEPA on time. In a time when the Forest Service has lost more than 15 percent of its staff due to forced retirements and DOGE-ing, this is the wrong approach. Though I support responsible grazing of our public lands, this amendment would incentivize the Trump administration to keep cutting staff and degrade these landscapes, which are our national heritage. I must oppose this amendment. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Chairman, I urge all Members to oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment, which would send us backwards when it comes to animal disease tracing and herd management. Electronic ear tags for cattle and bison reduce human error and empower veterinarians and animal health experts from APHIS to traffic potential outbreaks. The American Veterinary Medical Association has prioritized the implementation of unique identification of animals and premises, which is essential for tracing origin and destination of all livestock, and in particular, food-producing animals in order to protect the Nation's livestock industry and public health. That is why the electronic ear tag proposal was supported by the National Milk Producers Federation, the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, and the American Veterinary Medicine Association. The USDA has provided free tags to producers to combat any economic burden while enabling the fastest possible response to animal disease. At a time when highly pathogenic avian influenza has been proven to affect additional species and the New World screwworm is again threatening American cattle herds, we should not take tools out of the USDA's toolbox to prevent the spread of disease. I strongly urge my colleagues to oppose this measure, Mr. Chair, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. TOKUDA

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chair and my colleagues who have co-led and provided leadership on this important bill: Representative Steube, Representative Thompson, and Representative Panetta. I rise today, like so many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, to honor our friend Doug LaMalfa. He understood that the disaster after the disaster happens when families cannot recover and return to their hometowns because the funding and resources they receive just don't stretch far enough or, worse, are taxed and taken away from people who need absolutely every single dollar to be able to rebuild. On Saturday, I stood above Lahaina, and for a moment--the briefest of moments--in the darkness, the town almost looked normal. Immediately, you realize that something is missing: no warm glow from homes and businesses, no kids riding bikes, and no neighbors gathering in garages. The people of Lahaina were not counting on that day. They did not seek or ask to lose their homes, their businesses, their livelihoods, their history, or their loved ones. They should be able to count on this: that every dollar and every resource meant to help them rebuild, recover, and return home stays with them in their pockets, not in government coffers. As I stand here today wearing Doug's pin above my heart, I know he is up there smiling right now. Doug believed recovery should not come with a tax bill, and the Doug LaMalfa Federal Disaster Tax Relief Certainty Act makes sure of that. As we all know too well, the burden of those touched by fire, flood, hurricane, tornado, or disaster is already too much to bear. It is already far too heavy. We should not be making it heavier. Mr. Speaker, for my constituents, and disaster and wildfire survivors everywhere, let's stand with them in this moment and every moment to come. Let's show them some aloha. Let's make sure that we all vote ``yes'' on this bill.

Ms. TOKUDA

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1011. Last month, back-to-back Kona Low storms brought catastrophic flooding to our islands. In the span of just a few days, our State was inundated with more than 2 trillion gallons of water. Some areas received over 36 inches of rain in a 24-hour period, far exceeding what scientists expected in a once-in-a-thousand-year storm event. More than 200 people needed emergency rescue--some being picked up with excavators and farm equipment to be able to get away from the floods. Hundreds of homes were damaged or destroyed. Over 100,000 people throughout our islands lost power for an extended period of time. Some of our ``seniors''; ``kupuna'' were trapped in their homes without food or electricity for days at a time. While people and businesses across our State face a tough road toward recovery, our farmers have had an especially difficult challenge. Over the last 3 weeks, I have walked through farms and fields in my district and witnessed the devastation firsthand. From Waialua and the North Shore through Koolauloa, Wailuku, and upcountry Maui, across Molokai, and in Kona, I saw flooded fields, washed-out topsoil, collapsed roads, culverts completely blown apart by flooding, ruined farm equipment, crops dying in the fields, and animals stuck in mud. I saw entire seasons of crops wiped out, and real questions as to when their next harvest will be still remain unanswered. Early estimates put the damage across Hawaii's farms at nearly $70 million and counting. One in three farmers across our State was negatively impacted by the storms. Our farmers and ranchers are resilient, tough, and proud. They will come out on the other side, but it is going to take real, sustained support to get them there. That is why this bill is so important. This isn't the first time, sadly, that our farmers experienced such tragedy. Farmers in my specific district deal with some of the most relentless climate pressures and diverse natural disasters anywhere in this country--wildfires, hurricanes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, landslides, and floods caused by increasingly powerful Kona low storms. Each disaster we face chips away at our ability to grow our own food in an island State where we import 80 to 90 percent of the food that we consume. In a place as remote and geographically isolated as Hawaii, food security is fragile. As we know, food security is also our national and State security, as well. Every farm that we lose, every farmer who decides that he is just going to give up after this last disaster, makes it more difficult for us to feed ourselves. USDA disaster assistance programs like the ones we are talking about today, ECP and the forest restoration program, play a critical role in helping our farmers not just recover but to rebuild stronger and more resilient. I am grateful to the FSA, the NRCS, and the Rural Development offices in Hawaii that are already working to enroll storm- impacted farmers and get help out the door. Let me be clear: USDA programs also work only if they have the funding and staff to deliver them. The President's budget proposes slashing USDA by nearly 20 percent and eliminating more than a quarter of Farm Service Agency staff. I need those people in our farms and fields helping them to make it through one more disaster, one more storm. This is the wrong decision if we are looking to pass bills like this and, at the same time, slash funding and the staff that we need to get that funding out the door. When farmers are facing millions of dollars in losses, they cannot risk delays caused by hollowed-out agencies. We need USDA to be fully resourced and ready to respond. I also want to be honest about the long-term challenges we face, not just in Hawaii but across the country. Climate change is real, and intense storms, more destructive wildfires than we have ever seen in our lifetimes, prolonged droughts, and extreme weather events of every single kind will continue to increase in frequency and intensity. Farmers and ranchers are on the front lines of that reality, and our Federal programs must be designed to help them meet and overcome these challenges. The Emergency Conservation Program Improvement Act of 2025 would take important steps to ensure disaster assistance programs are responsive to the needs of our producers by providing more flexible, upfront cost- sharing payments. This will help farmers and foresters to begin rebuilding immediately after a disaster rather than waiting on reimbursements they simply cannot afford upfront. Most farmers in Hawaii are small, mom-and-pop, family operations. When a disaster hits, they don't always have the cash on hand to pay tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars in recovery costs while they wait months for reimbursements from the Federal Government. That is not how their finances work. Frankly, it is not reasonable to ask them to make that kind of investment upfront for people who have lost everything. By expanding advanced cost-share payments and extending upfront assistance for select programs, this bill would make sure our farmers can access the help that they need quickly enough to actually make a meaningful difference--not after the season is lost and the crops gone, not after they have had to walk away from most of their livelihoods, seen it washed away in a disaster, but right when they need it most. I thank my colleague Representative Letlow for introducing this urgently needed, bipartisan legislation. I look forward to working together to strengthen USDA disaster assistance programs so that we can meet the needs of our farmers today and help them prepare for the challenges they will encounter tomorrow. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this very important bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. I thank my colleagues for their support, specifically my colleague from Louisiana, on behalf of the farmers, ranchers, and forestry caretakers in my State. This bill is important, and I am so glad that she brought it forward. Before we vote, I want my colleagues to see what I saw. I stood in a field where 20,000 saplings ready to be planted drowned before they ever had a chance to grow. I saw thousands of coffee trees lost, including heritage trees planted by the original owners generations ago, gone in a single storm. I saw banana fields buried in water and silt. I saw fruit contaminated and roots rotting in the ground. I saw livestock lost, mature animals and their young, newly born, swept away, with only empty pens left. Even where crops are still standing, farmers don't know if they are safe. They are unsure of what flood waters carried into their soil and are unsure if their land will produce food again next season or the season after that. This is not just damage. This is devastation. These are livelihoods hanging in the balance. Farmers told me how they tried to fight back, saving seedlings by hand, rushing to harvest whatever they could before it was gone, and building up pens in the middle of the storm just to keep their animals from drowning. These aren't just fields as we all know here. These are fields that feed families. For some, these are fields that are also their homes, and now they are asking a simple question: Can we recover? Make no mistake, Hawaii needs help now, but farmers in every State and district are one disaster away from asking those same questions because disasters don't discriminate. While the bill we are considering today will not make disaster- impacted producers whole overnight, it would help the Federal Government deliver support faster and give farmers and ranchers the resources they need to continue growing the food, fuel, and fiber that keeps this country running. Our farmers are not asking for a handout. They are asking for a fair shot. That is what this bill delivers, not delayed help, not paperwork and waiting, but real support when it actually matters most. That is because disasters aren't slowing down, and neither should we. Our farmers are doing everything that they can to hold on, making sure that we have food on our table and fuel in our tanks, clothes to wear at the end of the day, and real cotton grown here in America. The question is whether we will meet them with the urgency they deserve. By passing this bill, we can say yes. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. TOKUDA

Ms. TOKUDA. Madam Speaker, last week, two back-to-back storms brought the most catastrophic flooding Hawaii has seen in over 20 years: landslides, washed-out roads, emergency evacuations, and destruction in every single county. What we saw during these Kona lows was a hard truth: Nature will find a way, and water will go where she wants. We grew up preparing for hurricane season. That was a threat that we knew. Now, disasters don't wait their turn. Hawaii experiences wildfires and floods year-round. What we are experiencing today is more than our infrastructure was ever built to handle. I saw it firsthand. Roads ripped apart as water surged through storm drains too small to contain it. Four feet of rock and silt slammed against guardrails, pushed down from the mountains. Fields flattened where water jumped its bank, bypassed overgrown ditches, and raced toward the ocean. In its path were homes, cars, farms, hospitals, schools, churches, entire communities, our ``family''; ``ohana.'' Madam Speaker, even in our darkest hour, I also saw Hawaii at its very best: neighbors showing up for our neighbors, no one waiting to be asked; volunteers feeding families; and first responders and healthcare workers going above and beyond. That is aloha. That is who we are. Now, we must match that same spirit with action. We need a whole-of- government approach in response right now: disaster, SNAP, and hot food waivers for families who can't access their kitchens; debris removal so that people can begin to rebuild; the Army Corps of Engineers clearing and dredging our waterways; EPA testing soil and water to keep our communities safe from whatever ran off the farms or the mountainsides behind them; and National Health Corps support for wound care, mental health, and recovery that doesn't end when the water recedes. To every ``family,'' ``ohana,'' to every friend, and member of our community back home in Hawaii clearing out the mud, mourning what was lost, searching for some stable ground again, you are not alone. We see you. We will always be standing with you. We will not stop fighting to bring every possible resource to help our communities recover, rebuild, and come back even stronger.

Ms. TOKUDA

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Speaker, I was unable to be present for the vote series today, as I was dealing with the immediate aftermath of the Kona Low Storms, the most severe floods in more than 20 years, which caused extensive damage, displacement, and evacuations across the State of Hawai'i. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 97.

Ms. TOKUDA

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Speaker, on a hilltop in Santa Fe, New Mexico, there is an interpretive plaque on a boulder. It stands where the government locked up thousands of Japanese as so-called enemy aliens. My great-grandfather, my GG, was one of them. He was locked behind barbed wire while his son, my grandfather, joined the Military Intelligence Service in service to a country that saw him as the enemy. That small stone marker is all that remains to tell their story. Today, the Trump administration is removing national park signage that tells the truth about slavery, the genocide of indigenous Americans, and the incarceration of Japanese Americans during World War II. In Nazi Germany, it started with burning books. In the USSR, they erased people from photographs. In North Korea, they deleted political leaders from online archives. Today, in the United States, quite ironically, the Trump administration calls it removing negative information about past or living Americans. What happens when they decide the story of my GG is too negative to remember? What happens when they want to whitewash history and remove the service and sacrifice of our communities of color? In March 2025, the U.S. Army removed its web page honoring the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, the all-nisei unit that became one of the most decorated in American military history. That is not a simple edit. It is not an accident. It is not an oversight. It was an intentional action by this administration to push a revisionist history of American history, scrubbing away one plaque, one web page, one sign, one sentence at a time. Mr. Speaker, five incarceration sites are now part of the National Park System. They are Manzanar in California, Minidoka in Idaho, Tule Lake in California, Amache in Colorado, and Honouliuli in Hawaii. Across the country, a dozen federally recognized landmarks and museums preserve this history, our history, from Heart Mountain to Topaz to Santa Fe. Are they next? Will the truth be rewritten or, worse, completely erased? History is not just decor for a museum exhibit or a national park. It is a warning label for the same injustices we are now seeing repeated today. We see it in the targeting of immigrants. We see it in the dismantling of civil rights protections. We see it in efforts to attack birthright citizenship. We see it when they invoke legal powers that once falsely justified locking up over 120,000 Japanese Americans. Looking back, what would have changed if someone had just stepped in, if the books had been saved, the pictures restored, the stories preserved, and the truth protected? That is the choice before us now. We are the truthtellers. We are the truthkeepers. It is on us to truly be the keepers of this history and to make sure that the truth is known and cannot be forgotten. We have the chance to make this the moment when someone did step in, when someone did say not again. The question isn't whether history will repeat itself. The question is: Will we let it?

Ms. TOKUDA

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 7148 because for rural communities like mine in Hawaii, this bill isn't abstract policy. It is about whether people can get care and whether caregivers can keep going. I have met grandparents caring for grandchildren, parents caring for children with disabilities, and adult children caring for aging loved ones, often with no backup and no break. That is why the 5-year reauthorization of the Lifespan Respite Care Program in this bill, which I was proud to co-lead with Representative Langworthy, matters so deeply. Respite care isn't a luxury. It is the difference between a caregiver burning out and a family staying together. This bill also reauthorizes the Teaching Health Center GME program, the National Health Services Corps, extends telehealth, and increases funding for critical rural health programs. Taken together, these investments will grow the workforce, expand access to care, and improve health outcomes. Providers and patients need certainty now. Rural health systems are fragile, and delays have real consequences. Passing this bill will change lives and save lives, and we cannot afford to wait.

Ms. TOKUDA

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Speaker, today marks the anniversary of Citizens United. This decision did not rewrite campaign finance law; it sold our democracy to the highest bidder. Before Citizens United, elections were about persuading voters. After it, they became about courting billionaires. As of 2025, there are 2,502 super-PACs. For the 2024 election, they have taken in over $5 billion, much of it dark money, much of it undisclosed, and much of it designed to drown out the voices of everyday Americans. Let's be clear: This isn't free speech. This is legalized corruption. Super-PACs were supposedly independent. In reality, they have become shadow campaigns, circumventing coordination laws, allowing unlimited, often anonymous, contributions, and turning elections into auctions. What does that buy? For a bargain price of $300 million, Elon Musk bought a gilded seat inside the Federal Government and walked away with billions in contracts from the very agencies he later DOGE'd. It is a parasitic, pay-to-play system disguised as innovation. Meanwhile, teachers, nurses, construction workers, and police officers pay higher effective tax rates than private equity executives. Families struggle with housing costs, healthcare, and childcare while Congress stalls, paralyzed by fear of angering the super-PACs that bankroll campaigns. That fear is the point. Dark money doesn't just influence policy. It changes behavior. It makes Members of Congress think twice before doing the right thing because they know one vote could trigger a massive smear campaign. The losers aren't Democrats or Republicans. The losers in all of this are the American people, across parties and across States, whose voices are being drowned out. Fifteen years later, the verdict is in: Citizens United has sold out our democracy and all Americans across the country. It is past time to end the era when billionaires buy access, buy silence, and buy power. Congress must act to close the coordination loopholes, rein in the super-PACs, and restore the simple idea that in America, people, not money, govern.

Ms. TOKUDA

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Speaker, only 50 years ago, we made a promise as a nation. When Congress passed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, we affirmed a simple and profound truth: Every child, no matter their disability or ability, has the right to a free and appropriate public education; not as charity, not as an afterthought, but as a civil right. Let's be honest. That promise has never been self-executing. Making IDEA real has required vigorous Federal oversight, strong civil rights enforcement, litigation when necessary, strong parents who demand only the best for their child, and a willingness to demand more--not less-- resources and accountability. That is why the Trump administration's dismantling of the Department of Education, the decimation of special education enforcement, and the hollowing out of the Office for Civil Rights is so dangerous. This is not reform. This is retreat. It will set public education back more than 50 years. In Hawaii, we know what happens when FAPE is treated as optional. The Felix Consent Decree raised the alarm more than 30 years ago that we were failing our children. We are the tenth largest school district in the Nation. One in ten of our students have an IEP. Many live on our neighbor islands in rural and remote communities, where even access to services or reliable internet is a challenge. Federal enforcement is not abstract to us. It is the difference between support and neglect. The reality is, IDEA has also been an unfunded mandate. You have heard it here today from my colleagues. The Federal Government once promised to cover 40 percent of the cost. It has never met that promise, never rising above 10 or 12 percent at best. Now, instead of finally doing what we owe our children, our families, our communities, this administration wants to walk away altogether. I am a proud product of our public schools. I am a proud parent of public school students, and I believe deeply that an injury to one is an injury and insult to all. The dismantling, defunding, destaffing, restructuring of the Department of Education is death by a thousand cuts. If we allow this to continue, if we walk back all the gains we have made as a result of IDEA, it will leave all our children behind. We must not, cannot let this happen, and I assure you, all of us here today on this floor will stand in the way of the destruction of the Department of Education and the demise of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

Ms. TOKUDA

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Speaker, I chuckled when Ken mentioned pet peeves and names. We need to add quinoa and potatoes to that list. He definitely didn't like those. For the record, my nickname was Barracuda, so figure that one out. God works in mysterious ways. In the face of disaster, I found a friend in Doug. Doug and I didn't agree on a lot of things, but we always showed up for each other. We cosponsored bills, worked on disaster funding and rural health, and traded a lot of jabs and took funny pictures of each other in our Agriculture Committee hearings. I gave him Spam musubis, and he brought me my favorite lemon almonds from Oroville. I will never forget November 8, 2023. Doug stood here on this floor, and he marked 5 years since the Camp fire. I was marking 3 months since the Lahaina fire in Maui. He came up to me and gave me a hug after, and he said: We are going to get through this together. I believed him. I still do. He gave me hope. Doug and I are two very different people. It would have been the most unlikely of friendships, except that he was one of the kindest, most gentle, and genuine people I have ever met. I don't know about you, Mr. Speaker, but the House floor feels a little less warm and a bit empty without Doug, but maybe I just miss my friend. To his wife, Jill, and the LaMalfa ``family''; ``family,'' our prayers, our aloha, and our love are with you. May you rest in aloha, my friend, until we meet again.

Ms. TOKUDA

Ms. TOKUDA. Mr. Speaker, imagine being a farmer choosing between insurance and seed, a small business owner weighing a doctor's visit against payroll, families hoping nothing goes wrong because they are one ER visit away from being homeless. This is the reality for rural America today. The big, ugly bill took a sledgehammer to rural healthcare, and letting the ACA enhanced premium tax credits expire will accelerate the damage and hasten the harm. In rural America, places like Hawaii, insurance coverage is the business model that keeps hospitals, clinics, and emergency rooms open. When premiums rise, coverage drops, revenue disappears, and hospital doors close. Without those credits, rural Americans will see their monthly healthcare costs rise by 107 percent. A single premium hike will make the difference between whether a family eats, pays their rent, or sees a doctor. Mr. Speaker, 2.8 million rural Americans will lose coverage. For them, this is not politics. This is life or death. Healthcare should never depend on your ZIP Code. This clean extension of the ACA tax credits will save lives.