Transcripts For CSPAN U.S. House Of Representatives U.S. House Of Representatives 20240713

On their own comprehensive pfas action plan. And we must listen to science rather than regulating new devices and dreams out of existence. Heres the bottom line. We cannot ignore the benefits that some pfas chemicals have given to humankind. I strongly urge the adoption of the balderson amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman yields. The gentleman from ohio is ecognized. I thank my friend for his words. Madam chair, i reserve. The chair the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. The gentleman from new york is recognized. Mr. Tonko i yield back. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The gentleman from ohio is recognized. Thank you, madam chair. I am prepared to close. The chair the gentleman is recognized to close. Thank you. Madam chair, my closing statement would be the administration has demonstrated that one of its Top Priorities is the research and necessary regulation of pfas. Its ongoing commitment to Public Safety is responsible. Congress should allow the e. P. A. To complete its work before casting such a wide net when labeling 5,000plus pfas as hazardous. Mr. Balderson this is an opportunity for congress to be proactive rather than reactive. I invite you to join me in supporting thoughtful action to ensure safety of the American Public and our environment. I urge a yes vote on my amendment. I yield back. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from ohio. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. Thehe opinion of the chair, noes have it. The noes have it. The amendment is not agreed to. Mr. Balderson mr. Tonko madam chair, i ask for a recorded vote. The chair pursuant to clause 6 of rule 1, further proceedings on the amendment offer 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from will be postponed. It is now in order to consider amendment number 7 printed in art b of house report 116366. For what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition . Mr. Delgado madam speaker, i have an amendment at the desk. The chair the clerk will designate the amendment. The clerk amendment number 7 printed in part b of house report 116366 offered by mr. Delgado of new york. The chair pursuant to House Resolution 779, the gentleman from new york, mr. Delgado, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. The chair recognizes the gentleman from new york. Mr. Delgado thank you, madam speaker. Today i am pleased to offer this bipartisan amendment to strengthen this legislation aimed at addressing pfas contamination in our communities. Right now communities in upstate new york continue to struggle with the impacts of pfas contamination in Drinking Water. Residents are living every day with the impacts of pfos contamination. Which we know include thyroid disease, birth defects, auto immune disorders autoimmune disorders and cancer. Last year emily, who now lives with her family, testified before the energy and Commerce Committee about her experiences with contaminated water in her home in petersburg, new york. Emily spoke about her experiences of being unable to drink the water from her faucet, having to sell her home and then test her blood. As well as the blood of her children for pfoa. What emily described is all too common in my district and it it is and it is representative of the experiences of communities across the country. This is why pfos has been a priority of mine and so many in this chamber on both sides of the aisle. The pfos action act is a critically important bill. My bipartisan amendment will strengthen this legislation and address another element of this crisis. Increcked discharge indirect discharge. My amendment, which pulls from the pfas Transparency Act, would make it illegal for an Industrial Facility to introduce pfas into a Sewage Treatment system without first disclowes disclosing information about that substance. Right now, right now companies can tap into a public waste Water Infrastructure and introduce pfas into our Sewage Systems regardless of the local Treatment Plants ability to effectively treat the contamination. Most municipal water Treatment Plants are not equipped to effectively treat for pfas contamination, which makes indirect discharges extremely hazardous, particularly when not disclosed. The pfas Transparency Act establishes a commonsense requirement that Industrial Facilities disclose this information to Treatment Systems beforehand. Meaning more transparency and accountability for our communities. Id like to take this moment to recognize my coleads on this measure, representatives pappas and rouda. We introduced this pfas Transparency Act alongside the bipartisan clean water standards for pfas act of 2020, which would require the e. P. A. To review pfas discharges under the clean water act and issues regulations to address harmful discharges of pfas into our nations waterways. These bills together take important steps to increase our understanding of pfas in waste water and address harmful discharges in our water system, both direct and indirect. I urge this house to stand with our communities facing unthinkable consequences of pfas contamination. Thank you. I urge a yes vote on this amendment and i reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. The gentleman from illinois for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition . Mr. Shimkus thank you. I rise to claim time in opposition of this amendment and i reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. Mr. Delgado how much time do i have remaining . The chair the gentleman has two minutes remaining. Mr. Delgado id like to yield a minute to my good friend, congressman tonko. The chair the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. One minute. Mr. Tonko thank you, madam chair. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Under the clean water act, Many Industries discharge directly to municipal Sewage Treatment plants rather than discharge directly to surface waters. To address this practice, the clean waters act established a Pretreatment Program which allows Sewage Treatment plants to work with industrial discharge connections to ensure that any Industrial Chemicals are properly treated, or that these chemicals do not disrupt the normal functioning of the Sewage Treatment plants. However, a Pretreatment Program is only effective if the Sewage Treatment plant knows what chemicals are being introduced into their Sewage Treatment systems. Yet there is no current clean water act requirement that requires industrial discharges to tell the municipality that it plans to release pfas related chemicals into the sewage system. The amendment offered by the gentleman from new york, mr. Delgado, would address this current loophole. I support this amendment and i appreciate the work, the good work that the gentleman from new york has done not only for the residents of his congressional district, but for the residents of this country. This is an important amendment, i appreciate the hard work hes done, the sensitivity shown, and i yield back. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The gentleman from new york is recognized. Mr. Delgado thank you. I reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. Mr. Shimkus id like to reserve the time. The chair the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. Mr. Delgado im prepared to close. The chair the gentleman from new york. Mr. Delgado im prepared to close. The chair the gentleman is ecognized. Mr. Delgado madam chairwoman, im prepared to close and i want to use this opportunity to strengthen our defenses against these dangerous forever, forever chemicals. And protect our Drinking Water for generations to come. I urge a yes vote on this important bipartisan amendment. I yield back. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The question is the gentleman from illinois. Is recognized. Mr. Shimkus thank you, madam chairman. I yield myself the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman is recognized. Mr. Shimkus this amendment makes it illegal for an Industrial Facility to introduce pfas into a Sewage Treatment system without first disclosing information about that substance. This amendment effectively would create an entirely new and duplicative Regulatory Program under the clean water act. This amendment is an ad hoc attempt at regulating pfas without any consideration of whether or how these requirements would duplicate or mesh with the implementation of the e. P. A. Pfas action plan or similar already existing regulatory requirements under the clean water act. The committee of jurisdiction for this provision is the transportation and infrastructure committee. And they have held no hearings and conducted no stakeholder or Scientific Community engagement or consultation on this issue. As a result, this amendment is nothing more than an automatic reaction to regulate in a vacuum without risk information, without understanding of its consequences. I urge a no vote on this amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new york. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. He amendment is agreed to. It is now in order to consider amendment number 8 printed in 366. B of house report 116 for what purpose does the gentlewoman from maine seek recognition . Ms. Pingree madam chair, i have an amendment at the desk. The chair the clerk will designate the amendment. The clerk amendment number 8 printed in part b of house report 116366 offered by ms. Pingree of maine. The chair pursuant to House Resolution 779, the gentlewoman from maine, ms. Pingree, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. The chair recognizes the gentlewoman from maine. Ms. Pingree thank you, madam chair. First, i want to thank chairman pallone and congresswoman dingell for their leadership on pfas issues. And thank you to congresswoman spanberger who is also a sponsor of this amendment with me. I rise today in support of my amendment to h. R. 535, the pfas action act of 2019. This bipartisan bill would take muchneeded and longoverdue action on these forever harmful chemicals. These pervasive and dangerous chemicals pose serious risks to both human health and to our environment. And the delay in taking action on them has been inexcusable. They are known hormone disrupters and studies link exposure to them to kidney and testicular cancer, to thyroid disease and other Health Problems. Pfas chemicals are concentrated in human and animal blood and tissue and can remain there for years. Its estimated that 99 of americans have pfas in their blood. In my home state of maine, pfas was first discovered from the ground water at former military installations from Fire Fighting foam, but pfas has also been found in our public water supplies, in soil, in animal products, and household products like cookware and carpets. A 2015 review by the Environmental Working Group showed the majority of pfas in homes comes from its presence in carpets and textiles. The u. S. Centers for Disease Control named carpet as the number one source of pfas exposure for infants and toddlers who, as you can imagine, spend a lot of time playing, lying and crawling on carpets. My amendment would expand the Environmental Protection agencys safer choice label to additional household products, including carpets, rugs, clothing or furniture certified to not contain pfas. This change would prompt manufacturers to develop safer alternatives and help consumers find and buy healthier products for their homes. I urge my colleagues to join me in taking action for the health of our communities and the environment and vote yes on my amendment. I reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. The gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. For what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition . Mr. Shimkus thank you. I claim time in opposition and i reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. The gentlewoman from maine is recognized. Ms. Pingree id like to yield a minute of my time to mr. Tonko of new york. The chair the gentlewoman yields one minute of her time to the gentleman from new york, mr. Tonko. Mr. Tonko thank you, madam chair. I thank the gentlewoman from maine for yielding. I support the pingreespanberger amendment, which would expand the voluntary label for pfas products to include carpets, rugs and furniture. The pfasfree label created under this bill was developed by representative soto to help consumers who are trying to protect themselves from pfas risks. I thank mr. Soto for his work on that provision. Expanding that label to cover carpeting, rugs, clothing and furniture makes great sense. Recent data suggests that those Consumer Products can be a significant source of pfas exposure and that pfasfree products are available on the market, currently consumers have no clear way to know which russian have pfas and which do not rugs have pfas and which do not. Manufacturers taking steps to produce these items without pfas have no way of distinguishing their products in the marketplace. This amendment will give them that tool. I congratulate both representatives pingree and spanberger for their sensitivity to consumers by placing this amendment before us. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment and the overall bill. With that, i yield back. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The gentlewoman from maine is recognized. Ms. Pingree i thank mr. Tonko and i reserve. The chair the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. Mr. Shimkus id like to reserve. The chair the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. The gentlewoman from maine is recognized. Ms. Pingree i am prepared to close and i think i have the right to close. So i reserve. The chair the gentleman from illinois has the right to close. Ms. Pingree oh, he has the right to close . Ok. Then im prepared to close. Just in closing, consumers have the right to know what harmful chemicals are in their homes and they should have the ability to choose products that keep their families and their environments safe. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on my amendment. And yield back my time. The chair the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. The gentleman from illinois is recognized. Mr. Shimkus thank you, madam chairman. I yield such time as i may consume. The chair the gentleman is recognized. Mr. Shimkus thank you, madam chair. This amendment expands e. P. A. Safer Choice Program to include carpets, rugs, clothing, furniture that do not contain pfas. The safer Choice Program was not meant to cover products like this and will be extremely expensive and time consuming to do so. Revisions to the program of this type are not consistent with the intent of the program and would require significant changes to the program to effectively implement it. To establish this standard, e. P. A. Would have to hold listening sessions and develop and propose and finalize changes to the safer choice standard public involvement, choice, choice standard, public involvement would have to be substantial. A labeling indicating the absence of pfas does not necessarily mean a safer product. Which undermines the purpose of the e. P. A. Program. In addition, when b. P. A. Was used in baby bottles, companies and retailers who made bottles with other substances had no problem labeling their products as b. P. A. Free. In some ways this is a taxpayer funded campaign for companies not scrg to advertise for themselves. A better way would be to have a collaborative between the e. P. A. , Consumer Product safety commission, and the food and Drug Administration to make recommendations on how to convey any risks from these products. This is not the right way the right way to address this issue. I urge a no vote on theament. I yield back my time. The chair the question on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from maine. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. He amendment is agreed to. It is now in order to consider amendment number 9 printed in 356. B of house report 116 for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition . Mr. Kildee i have an amendment at the desk. The chair the clerk will designate the amendment. The clerk amendment number 9 printed in part b of house report 116366 offered by mr. Kildee of michigan. The chair pursuant to House Resolution 779, the gentleman from michigan, mr. Kildee, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. The chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan. Mr. Kildee thank you, madam chair. I yield myself such time as i may consume. E community i represent is oscota, a small town in the northern part of my district once home to the wordsmith air force base and even though that base closed more than two decades ago, the community is dealing with pfas contamination from the base leaching into their Drinking Water and the nearby lakes. For years i have been fighting to help them clean up pfas contamination. January of last year, one year ago, i, along with congressman brian fitzpatrick, founded the bipartisan congressional pfas task force to bring republicans and democrats together to address this growing and Urgent Public Health threat. We now have 50 members from the 14 members we started with. As more members of Congress Learn about con damnation contamination in their districts, theyre joining this movement. So now were beginning to know the problem. We know that we have to do more urgently to act, clean up and address pfas and the environment. Thats why im a strong supporter of the bipartisan pfas action act, a bill pushed through the energy and Commerce Committee with the support of many members but most particularly my michigan colleague, congresswoman Debbie Dingell. According to the environmental working grup over 100 Million People are exposed to pfas in their Drinking Water. This isnt acceptable. Every american deserves clean Drinking Water. The pfas action act will help protect families from pfas in their Drinking Water, in their lakes and rivers and streams, by requiring pfas to be listed under the safe Drinking Water act, the clean water act and Clean Air Act. It will also require polluters and corporations to clean up their pfas contamination through cercla. Its important that Congress Acts because the Trump Administration has not. While the e. P. A. And the Defense Department both have had authority to protect the public from pfas, they have so far failed in their responsibilities to address this Public Health crisis. The e. P. A. Has run a Public Relations campaign to convince us that they care about pfas but failed to act, to regulate these dangerous chemicals, even missing their own promised deadlines to act. Just this week, the white house signaled it would likely veto this legislation. In threatening to veto this bill, President Trump and his administration clearly are siding with polluters instead of protecting the health of the American People. This act represents a continued push by this Bipartisan Group of legislators for muchneeded legislation to clean up pfas and safeguard us from these chemicals. Some of the provisions in this bill were taken out of the recently passed ndaa by senate republicans. Who sided again with President Trump and the administration on behalf of the corporate polluters and blocked these provisions from becoming law. So while we were able to include many good pfas provisions in the ndaa including phasing out of Fire Fighting foam and requiring polluters to report when they release pfas inta the environment, allowing for a nationwide study of pfas contamination, many of these critical provisions were ultimately blocked by senate republicans. So the house will continue to act and protect Public Health and urge action for my district and other places around the country. I also obviously want to urge passage of my amendment which would promote transparency in streamline and streamline e. P. A. Resources to help people potentially exposed to pfas and other contaminants to better understand what their test results mean. In the u. S. , well water is essentially unregulate sod for the 43 Million People in our country with well water, when they get testing results back, its hard for them to understand how it could impact their familys water supply. Under this amendment, the e. P. A. Website would be simplified and streamlined making it easier for millions of American Families to understand the threat they face. I want to thank my colleagues, congressman kind from wisconsin, congressman gallagher, for supporting me with this amendment. I encourage its adoption. I reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman reserves. For what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition . Mr. Shimkus i claim time in opposition and reserve my time. The chair the gentleman from new york i mean michigan is recognized. Mr. Kildee i urge my colleagues to adopt. This just to be clear the amendment, obviously i support the underlying legislation. The amendment simply requires that we provide an opportunity for people who are potentially going to be affected by pfas particularly in Drinking Water but from other sources to easily be able to understand that the threat they face, so i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this. This is ultimately this amendment is about making sure people are armed with the information they need to protect their families. With that, i yield back the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman yields. The gentleman from illinois. Mr. Shimkus thank you, madam chairman. I appreciate my friend and colleague from michigan. He has been very active on this issue for many years now and i respect his intent his intensity and his effort. A couple of things because a lot of the debate was initially just on the overall bill. If the senate, who caused us not to enact all these provisions in the ndaa, thats why theyre on record as not going to move this bill. So we did have a chance for the safe Drinking Water act to be included in the final piece of legislation, that was blocked by someone. And now here we are. So and the president has done a veto, youre correct about that it doesnt diminish, you raise the benefits of what we did do. I looked at them earlier. E. P. A. To mandate that Drinking Water systems monitored for unregulated pfas, provides grants to community, requires new reporting of pfas under the toxic relief inventory program, requires manufacturers and processors to Submit Health and safety information. This is all law today. Restrictions on new uses of long chain pfas, guidance for appropriate destruction of these compounds, requires federal government to work expeditious lay hi with states to enter into binding cooperative agreements, particularly important for your state which was a success, and of course i have many more. Id like to highlight the appropriations bill this which 2. 8 billion for clean water and Drinking Water state Revolving Fund. With that 20 million going for this issue. So you do adequately highlight the success that weve made at the end of last year on these two programs and we dont want to demin herb the success. I know its not as far as a lot of people want to go but there was some success. , its a ur amendment federalism debate. Water, wells, in states, are regulate and controlled and tested by the state. Not the e. P. A. Thunder amendment, the federal government would have to collect and manage information about individuals and their property. This amendment both broad and vague at the same time would be an enormous expansion of the federal government into an area thats been governed by states. So these wells in your state are not being tested, theyre not being tested by your state. I know your state is very aggressive. I will yield. Mr. Kildee you raise an excellent point but the issue is this. We could mandate if youd choose to that states provide information on a website thats easily discernible, the problem is that while wells and other sources may be tested, i dont know if youve had the opportunity to read the published tests from those examinations, the idea of the amendment is not just to see that the information is somehow available somewhere but available in a fashion that is easily discernible by people who are not scientists. Mr. Shimkus youre saying your state is not capable of doing it itself . Your States Health department cant do the research, understand, and then youre also talking about private wells on private property. Under g the feds in to the system of federal government we are raising some concerns with that. If i have time well go on. In addition to the state departments of health that certifies the laboratories. Your department of health certifies the laboratories that test the water, not e. P. A. It would place a lot of burdens states. For things the could more easily handle. It would also take a year to establish this program, which is all the bill provides. I believe it places serious unfunded mandays on states. I have questions about the information being collected and disseminated thunder amendment can be done in a way that meets the proper Risk Communication strategy called for in the brown amendment. That is thats what we have problems with this amendment. I would yield to my friend. Mr. Kildee i appreciate the gentlemans concern. I think we may have a disagreement as to whether or not theres a legitimate federal role in making sure this information is readily available. I understand the point about state bus i believe this is a national interest. In part because it is the federal government very often which is the biggest culprit here. The community, for example, that i represent, where so many individuals had their private wells affected, they were affected by the federal governments poisoning of the ground water. I mr. Shimkus i wish i could debate longer but my time has expired. The chair all time has expired. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from michigan. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair the aye have it. This the the amendment is agreed to. It is now in order to consider amendment number 10 printed in art b of house report 116366. For what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition . Madam chair, i have an amendment at the desk. I rise as the designee of representative lawrence. The chair the clerk will designate the amendment. The clerk amendment number 10 printed in part b of house report 116366, offered by mr. Tonko of noverbing. The chair pursuant to House Resolution 779, the gentleman from new york, mr. Tonko, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. The chair recognizes the gentleman from new york. Mr. Tonko thank you, madam chair. I yield myself as much time as i may consume. I thank congressmen lawrence for her work on this amendment. The amendment, madam chair, is simple. It would ensure that the public is notified when any additional chemicals in the pfas family are designated as hazardous substances. More specifically this amendment requires the e. P. A. To publish its determinations on the remaining pfas chemicals on its publicly accessible website within 60 days. Public reporting helps communicate how government is working for the people. For agencies like the e. P. A. Full transparency is necessary to inform our communities about threats to Public Health and the environment. Our constituents have the right to know exactly what contaminants are in the air we breathe and the water we drink. As she noted in her statement in support of her amendment, in her home state of michigan, she knows the importance of clean air and clean water from firsthand experience. We know threats to our environment and Public Health do not discriminate and the representative concludes that she knows that too often it is the most important unrepresented and disadvantaged communities that are left behind. So i urge support for the amendment from the gentlewoman from michigan and reserve. The chair the gentleman the chair the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. For what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition . Mr. Shimkus i rise in opposition to the amendment. The chair the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. Mr. Shimkus while i will not oppose this amendment, this section in particular is objectionable. But putting Agency Decisions on their website sounds like a reasonable proposal. Im concerned about the timing of 60 days. That would be something that the agency can do without a problem, it would have preferred the agency was invited to testify on sweeping and antiscience bill and its implications. I do not intend to oppose this amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The gentleman from new york. Mr. Tonko i thank the gentleman for his support of this amendment and i encourage my colleagues to support the amendment and the overall bill. And im prepared to close. I yield back. The chair the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new york. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. He amendment is agreed to. It is now in order to consider amendment number 11 print in part b of house report 116366. For what purpose does the gentlewoman from new york seek recognition . Mr. Rice miss rice mr. Chair, i have an amendment at the desk. The clerk amendment number 11 printed in part b of house report 116366 offered by miss rice of new york. The chair pursuant to House Resolution 779, the gentlewoman from new york, miss rice, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. The chair recognizes the gentlewoman from new york. Miss rice mr. Chair, my amendment would expand the pfas Infrastructure Grant Program by 25 and designate the increased funds for reimbursing water districts that have already started to address the pfas water crisis. Like many communities across the nation, long island, my district, in new york played a major role in the industrialization of america. Industrialization brought unparalleled economic growth, Innovative New technologies and transformed society as we know it. But with these great societal gains, also came unintended consequences. Like pfas Drinking Water contamination. Pfas are toxic chemicals found in paint, cleaning products, packaging and countless other products. And too often they find their way into our Drinking Water systems. According to a may, 2019, study by the new York Public Interest Research group, long island has the most contaminated Drinking Water in new york state and nasa Nassau County has the highest number of Water Systems with detected emerging contaminants, including pfoas and pfos. For years water districts across the country have had to invest millions of their own dollars on technologies to secure impacted wells and keep their residents safe. These costs have crushed our local communities and thats why ive offered this amendment today. Communities that could not wait for federal action and who quickly redirected resources to address this Immediate Health threat should not be punished. The federal government failed to address this threat for decades. The least we can do now is help reimburse the costs incurred by local water districts that acted when congress failed to do so. Without this federal reimbursement, costs could be unfairly transferred to residents in the form of higher Water Utility bills. We cannot let this happen. Residents should not be left with the bill when they had no responsibility for the crisis. Id like to thank my colleagues from long island, representatives peter king and tom suzie, for coleading this amendment with me, and our other bipartisan cosponsors, representatives fitzpatrick, grijalva, cisneros and stevens, as well. This is a commonsense, bipartisan priority and i urge all of my colleagues to support my amendment to help these communities. Thank you, mr. Chair, and i reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. For what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition . Mr. Shimkus thank you, mr. Chairman. I rise in opposition to the amendment and i reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. The gentlewoman from new york is recognized. Miss rice mr. Chair, im prepared to close. The chair the gentlewoman is recognized. Miss rice mr. Chair, i want to thank chairman pallone for supporting the amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. The chair the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. The gentleman from illinois is recognized. Mr. Shimkus thank you, mr. Chairman. I will use the time that i have available. This amendment provides reimbursement funding for treatment technologies that were purchased up to five years ago. The program for which this amendment is offered is supposed to aid communities that have demonstrated problems and are economically disadvantaged and cannot afford the new technology because of the expense. Thats why we have the program. This amendment, though, suggests that community Water Systems that had the means and no expectation of federal funding to pay for them get money for past work. It does not seem a fair use and diversion of taxpayer resources, considering the expense of the technology that can currently meet the criteria of the technology and the unknown nature of the communities that might need it. According to the e. P. A. , there are few it any reverse osmosis Treatment Options that are economically viable on a mass scale that would remove all etectable amounts of pfas. I understand the intent of the legislation, but our grant and loan programs are designed for communities that cant afford the expense. What my colleague is asking is that those communities who could and did make the investment, that then they be reimbursed. Thus depriving communities that cant afford to do it an opportunity to obtain it. Thats why we object to the amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from new york. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. He amendment is agreed to. It is now in order to consider amendment number 12 printed in 366. B of house report 116 for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition . Mr. Chair, i have an amendment at the desk. The clerk amendment number 12 printed in part b of house report 116 366 offered by mr. Brown of maryland. The chair pursuant to House Resolution 77, the gentleman from maryland, mr. Brown, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. The chair recognizes the gentleman from maryland. Mr. Brown thank you, mr. Chair. I yield myself as much time as i may consume. I want to first thank chairman pallone, chairman tonko and congresswoman dingell for this comprehensive package. We know pfasrelated substances remain in our bodies and environment for years, if not decades. Coupled with widespread consumer use and pollution, pfas toxins could result in longlasting Public Health problems. This legislation confronts pfas contamination, spurs cleanup efforts and sets a Drinking Water limit. It is critical for Government Agencies to inform the public of the risks posed by pfasrelated substances. My amendment would require the e. P. A. To develop a national Risk Communications strategy to share the best available science about pfas and its hazards. Notify the public about risks and mitigation measures. And consult with states with effective statewide Risk Communication strategies of their own. In my home state of maryland, pfas has been identified in the water at eight d. O. D. Installations, tainting neighboring communities, local wells and seeping into the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Im proud that maryland is committed to pfas transparency and research and has taken this issue seriously. Mr. Chair, there are some communities that have especially vulnerable to pfas exposure. Among them, firefighters at military installations. To stop the spread of fire at training sites, Fire Departments use a type of Fire Fighting foam that contains pfasrelated substances. Over the course of their careers, these firefighters put themselves in harms way, unaware of the toxicity of these chemicals and the Health Issues they can cause down the road. We owe these service men and women an unrecoverable debt. And it is our duty to communicate to them the hazards that they were exposed to while risking their lives protecting the public. Whether its former firefighters, military families living on bases, or the American People at large, the exchange of information between communities, risk assessors and scientists is critical. As we continue to learn more about the full range of Health Problems linked to pfas, we must also communicate that risk to the public. Sharing this risk, the knowledge of the risk is an important step to give the public the resources they need to defend against pfas contamination and the Adverse Health impacts it can cause. I encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this amendment and the underlying bill and i reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. For what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition . Mr. Shimkus i rise in opposition to the amendment, although i will not oppose the amendment. And i reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. The gentleman from maryland is recognized. Mr. Brown i yield to my good friend, the representative from michigan, congresswoman Debbie Dingell, as much time as she may consume. The chair the gentlewoman from michigan is recognized for as much time as she may consume. Mrs. Dingell thank you, madam speaker. I thank the gentleman from maryland for yielding. I rise in support of the gentlemans amendment. By requiring the e. P. A. To develop a national Risk Communications strategy surrounding pfas, the federal government will be better able to educate americans and inform the public about the danger of pfas chemicals. Experts believe that 99 of americans have some level of pfas in their blood. And most of them dont even know it. I thank the gentleman for his strong leadership in addressing the pfas crisis headon, and thank him for offering this amendment. Incorporating this amendment will make the pfas action act stronger and communicate the urgency to more people. Im proud to support this amendment and i urge all of mying colleagues to support it as well my colleagues to support it as well. Thank you, and i yield back the balance of my time. Mr. Brown i yield back the balance of my time, madam chair. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The gentleman from illinois is recognized. Mr. Shimkus thank you, madam chairman. So, we support the amendment because i think its important to have a national Risk Communications strategy. It kind of we get troubled and we get confused in this debate when were going to eclare 7,866 chemicals toxic without doing the basic science. So, hopefully as we move this forward, i believe that were going to find some of the 7,866 that are safe. So when we do a risk advisory, were going to be able to say, these are bad, these are ok. What the bill does is just say theyre all bad. And we dont have any science to prove that. I think were close on pfoa and were close to that on pfos. And we could have moved in a bipartisan manner to address those. We didnt do that. But we would like, as the e. P. A. Considers this, and informing the public, that they look at hazard identification, Exposure Assessment and risk characterization. Risk is a combination of time and exposure over a period of time. Weve talked to toxicologists, thats what they do. That was the glue that held the tosca bill together, was the focus on using science. Again, our as youve heard tonight and youll hear tomorrow, our problem is that we are rushing legislation before were allowing the science to truly evaluate this. And were classifying currently all 7,866 as hazardous, which i dont believe that is. We have never in the history of this republic, under the superfund act, legislatively banned a chemical. Weve always allowed the scientific process. So i think your amendments helpful in that it helps us be able to clarify when we do the scientific analysis whats safe, whats not. Informing the public is good. Transparency is great. We must support the amendment. We appreciate you bringing it forward. And i yield back the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from maryland. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. He amendment is agreed to. It is now in order to consider amendment number 13 printed in art b of house report 116366. Frurm dud for what purpose does the gentleman from New Hampshire seek recognition . I have an amendment at the desk. The chair the clerk will report the amendment. The clerk amendment number 13 printed in part bmbing of house report 116366, offered by mr. Pappas of New Hampshire. The chair the gentleman from New Hampshire, mr. Pappas and a member opposed each will control five minutes. Mr. Pappas i yield myself such time as i may consume. For decades, americans have been exposed to toxic pfas chemicals and there are not sufficient protections in place to safeguard our communities, Drinking Water and environment. Americans are getting sick from these forever chemicals known to cause cancer, immune disorders and thy thai rhode island problems. I represent so many tireless advocates in New Hampshire who have identified this and raised our collective consciousness about pfas. Ive heard from too many who have been exposed to pfas on a base. Ive heard from residents who have had their private wells contaminated by a manufacturing plant. Ive heard about those who live in landfills where pfas was dumped, an area with the nations highest cancer rate. We are only having this conversation today buzz of advocates like them from across the country. Wed be negligent if we failed to do so. Im offering an important bipartisan amendment to this legislation thats based on a bill that i filed, the clean water standards for pfas act. If you want to protect the public from pfas we must stop pollution which continues today. We must prevent industry and other polluters from dumping pfas into rivers streams and other bodies of water and further contaminating the environment. This calls on ee. P. A. To set and force proactive limits and requires e. P. A. To issue pretreatment standards for pollute, this amendment creates a Grant Program to provide assistance to Treatment Facilities ensuring that municipalities have the resources to meet these environments requirements to keep our communities safe. My constituents deserve clean water. Theres nothing more important than the health and safety of our communities. We must Work Together to stop pfas from getting into the environment and poisoning our Drinking Water. Thank you, madam chair, i reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman reserves. For what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition . Mr. Shimkus i rise in opposition and reserve my time. The chair the gentleman reserves. The gentleman from New Hampshire. Mr. Pappas i urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this amendment and i want to thank all those who have stepped forward to address this issue including the bipartisan pfas task force as well as the coleads of this particular amendment, representatives uda, delgado, fitzpatrick, kuster, cisneros and kildee. I appreciate the discussion today. Its about time we go beyond action plans and implement some policies that are going to affect peoples lives in a positive manner back home. I urge adoption of this amendment and the underlying bill. I yield back the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman yields. The gentleman from illinois is recognized. I yield such time as i may consume. I understand this reflects an effort to perfect this proposal from when we considered it under the National Defense authorization act but dont know what it changes or what it means since theres been no hearing or markup record for me to consult to better understand this proposal or its impacts. There are 7,866 of these chemicals listed on the pfas master list and uninformed policy could carry massive liabilities. As i read it, this amendment continues an antiscience mindset that seeks to regulate first without adequate knowledge or understanding of polyfluorinate compound and says well figure it out later. It covers substances that may not be necessarily chemicals the industry is using and simultaneously recommends creating new standards for every substance. This means e. P. Ample will be forced to divert resources to chase those pfas that are no long for the use and may not be necessary. The amendment requires e. P. A. To regulate pfas compounds through the clean water act without validated analytical methods for detention in waste water. Without established science or human or environmental impacts to determine appropriate and legally scientifically defensible standards and without an understanding of how best to treat and remove pollutants from wastewater, even if there was a validated method for detection. The deadline in this amendment will likely make e. P. A. s work e. P. A. Work implemented vulnerable to legal challenge, laying any benefit the proponents want from it and helping the trial bar. I yield back. The chair the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Hampshire. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair the ayes have it. The amendment is agreed to. Mr. Shimkus i request a recorded vote. The chair pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Hampshire will be postponed. It is now in order to consider amendment number 14 printed in part b of house report 116366. For what purpose does the gentlewoman rise . Ms. Plaskett i have an amendment on the floor. The chair the chloric will report the amendment. The clerk amendment number 14 printed in part b of house report 116366, offered by ms. Plaskett of the Virgin Islands. The chair the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands and a member opposed each will control five minutes. The chair recognize the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands. Ms. Plaskett i rise in support of this amendment. This amendment is simply a correction. It would make the United States territories eligible for additional safe Drinking Water act funding authorized to address emerging contaminants like pfas. Today we are discussing pfas, toxic chemicals that have posed adverse Public Health risk and have persisted because they do not break down. Their carbonfluoride bond is the strongest bond in nature so pfas contamination is continuing to be found across the country in the water, air, soil. Its been extraordinarily widespread. E. P. A. Has acknowledged that millions of people in this country receive Drinking Water with pfas over the Health Advisory limit. And the United States territories have been no exception to this. It has been a serious issue for communities that have been impacted and more and more communities will be known to be impacted. A lot of those who have detected it are taking action, which are extensive to remove it from Drinking Water. Thats why this bill as reported out of the energy and Commerce Committee and under the recent ndaa provides new Grant Funding to assist Water Utilities struggling with this issue. Contamination in Drinking Water and others. However, as currently written, this Grant Funding has only been made available to states through the safe Drinking Water act Revolving Fund program which does include the district of columbia and puerto rico as states. But not other u. S. Territories. Which are jebly provided with a separate reservation of Overall Program funding an wrulely. My amendment simply corrects this new program to permit the e. P. A. To provide such grans to these american territories, including my home of the u. S. Virgin islands, to assist their Water Utilities with pfas treatment if it is found. These territories have some of the most severe needs for federal assistance in the era of clean area of clean air and Drinking Water and these needs have historically tended to be woefully underfunded. They often received les on a per capital basis than a number of similarly situated states. If congress is to assist American Communities with the removal of toxic pfas from Drinking Water, its only fair to include all american territories as eligible to receive this assistance. I urge approval of my amendment as simply a matter of fairness. I would also take this opportunity to gently remind my colleagues to please consider americans in territories in developing legislation intebbeded to assist all americans. Thank you and i reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentlewoman reserves. For what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition . Mr. Shimkus i rise in opposition to the amendment and reserve my time. The chair the gentleman reserves. The gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands is recognized. Ms. Plaskett in closing i would like to acknowledge to the chair the support of the energy and Commerce Committee, particularly my good friend mr. Tonko of new york, as well as congresswoman Debbie Dingell for introducing this legislation and all the staff thats worked on this. I urge adoption of this amendment as part of fairness to all americans who face this issue. I yield the balance of my time. The chair the gentlewoman yields. The gentleman is recognized. Mr. Shimkus thank you, madam chair. I yield myself such time as i may consume. We all support the territories to have the funding to address their Drinking Water needs. The biggest concern is the territories really operate from a different system because they dont have the loan program because they dont have really the money to pay back the loan program, so there is a system by which Grant Funding is awarded to the territories to make up this need. Is is so the concern that theyre the amendment disenfranchise the states from taking from the grant that and affecting, you know taking from the state drink, Revolving Fund program when the territories historically historiccally because they dont use it get more grant money. Thats why we oppose it. We think its going to impact the states ability to apply for funds. We think that the territories have a different method of Grant Funding to meet their needs. With that, i would request a no vote and yield back my time. The chair time has been yielded back. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from the injury ion ver gin islands. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair the ayes have it. He amendment is agreed to. It is now in order to consider amendment number 15 printed in part b of house report 115366. For what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition . I have an amendment at the desk. The chair the clerk will report the amendment. The clerk amendment number 15 pribted in part b of house port 116366, offered by mr. Brindisi of new york. The chair the gentleman from new york, mr. Brindisi and a member opposed each will control five minutes. The chair recognizes the gentleman from new york. Mr. Brindisi i yield myself such time as i may consume. The chair the gentleman is recognized. Mr. Brindisi i want to thank my colleague across the aisle from new york, mr. Reed, and mr. Gallagher from wisconsin, for their support of this amendment. Support for clean air and protecting Public Health are not democratic or republican values. They are american values. And i am glad 20 work with my colleagues on this commonsense amendment. My amendment is straightforward. First it requires immediate action on the most dangerous types of pfas including pfoa which has been found at elevated levels in Drinking Water of many communities including one in upstate new york. E. P. A. Would be required to swiftly list these as hazardous air pollutants under the Clean Air Act. While ewe take action on the chemicals of greatest concern, we give e. P. A. Time for a thoughtful, sciencebased process that act knowledges the differences across pfas chemicals. Our amendment will give the e. P. A. Five years to establish riskbased standards that protect human health and the environment for many other types of pfas chemicals. This will bring the Clean Air Act provisions into line with the cercla provisions in this bill. We need to be thoughtful in the process, protecting Public Health will make sure that our decisions are informed by the best science available. This amendment is a commonsense compromise that strikes that balance. I again thank congresswoman dingell and chairman pallone as well as chairman tonko for their work on this important legislation and their willingness to work with me on our amendment. Thank you to congresswoman stevens for her work raising the issue of air contamination when it comes to pfas chemicals. I urge adoption of my amendment. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman reserves. For what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition . Mr. Shimkus i rise in opposition to the amendment and reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman reserves. The gentleman from new york. Mr. Brindisi i again urge adoption of my amendment and yield back. The chair the gentleman yields back. The gentleman from illinois. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I yield such time as i may consume. I think this is a good attempt. To try to bring some sense to this bill. I appreciate the my olleagues attempt. Mr. Shimkus what the amendment oes is really create unachievable expectations. And one of the ones there is a lot of problems with the amendment, but one is that you are asking for a final rule within 100 days, especially if it is not proposed, which is going to set up a deadline suits. You have a deadline and cant meet it and the agency why do we pay utilities to haul away nuclear waste. They say we are going to take their waste and now we have to pay these utilities. So i would so thats one ssue i have a concern. 7,866 compounds, Clean Air Act aspects, and youre going to have, as i use numerous times during the nd arch arch, as i did on the rule debate, these 7 ,8 6 aspects of pfas, we are coming to the floor, not using science or diligence but science to say, fan it. Our argument has always been, that is due to science. Science takes a long time and the political emotion of this debate just cant wait. We have addressed a lot of these concerns through the National Defense authorization act and by the omnibus bill. F you look at the f16 and new automobile and new battery technology, medical devices, hey are going to have some perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl compounds. D this is a ban on all the compounds. Or its going to scare the producers of this they dont want to get caught in a list trap. We talked about firefighter fiferinge foam tonight and it is a great debate because we think there is some bipartisan nature that we can get to on that chemical. If you are in a nuclear subunder the arctic ice cap, do you want the second best fire Firefighting Foam . Do you . And the second best means, it takes more time, and takes more water, and i dont think you do, but this is where we stand. E amendment creates an unrealistic burden and e. P. A. Cannot fulfill the requirement ments for inclusion in the clean air policy in five years. We only 29 methods of determining the compounds right now, just 29. And there are 7,866. And the amendment says do it in five years. I wish it could be done. I have been a long time. Government moves slow. When we throw all these funds into the superfund sites, people will be hollering. And now we are going to expand that, i mean pull up the map of the country and all those red states, that is going to be where the superfund sites are going to be and take down those companies that are providing either state and medical devices equipment or career for airplane or technologies. Again, i want to applaud my colleague, this is something we could have done and we were talking about this in a compromised provision and we couldnt get there because of other issues. The majority is going to pass. Unfortunately, the senate isnt going to take up this bill and the president has a veto message on the bill. It will be teed up for the next congress and i yield back. The chair the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new york. Those opposed, no. Those in favor say aye. In the opinion of the chair, the mendment is agreed to. It is now in order tore consider amendment number 16 printed in ouse report 116366. Mr. Kim i have an amendment at the desk. The chair are you rising in the december ig the clerk amendment number 16 printed in part b of house report 116 66 offered by mr. Brindisi of new york. The chair pursuant to House Resolution 779, the gentleman from new york, mr. Brindisi and a member opposed each will control five minutes. Mr. Brindisi i yield myself such time as i may consume. Mr. Brindisi i want to thank my colleague congressman kim and i rise to offer it tonight. This amendment straightforward and ensures that the list of technologies in removing pfas are removed prior to final publication. This will allow healthy debate by experts, universities and the public to understand the most effective means of cleanup. By allowing the public to see this we can put our best ideas and methods and making our Drinking Water safe. I urge adoption of this commonsense amendment. I reserve. The chair for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition . Mr. Shimkus i do not plan to object to it and i reserve my time. The chair without objection. The gentleman from new york. Mr. Brindisi i urge adoption of this amendment and i yield back. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The gentleman from illinois. Mr. Shimkus i yield such time as i may consume. There is no objection to having e. P. A. To having technologies in Drinking Water. Im concerned how form mr. Allen process the amendment seeks to impose. I was going to ask asking of mr. Kim or mr. Pallone and they are not here and thats fine. But the amendment only calls for clinical Public Comment and opportunity for Public Comment s a time consuming process including the appear. If its the focus and not hold up grant making, i think this amendment needs to be rethought a bit without trippings from executing the e. P. A. I know there are larger problems with bill but i want to highlight this is an acceptable amendment and i yield back. The chair the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new york. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, the amendment is agreed to. It is now in order to consider amendment number 17 printed in part b of house report 116366. For what purpose does the gentleman from maine seek recognition . Mr. Golden i have an amendment at the desk. The clerk amendment number 17 printed in part b of house eport 116 66 offered by mr. Golden of maine. The chair punt to House Resolution 779, the the gentleman from maine and a member op owed each will control five minutes. Mr. Golden i offer an amendment and first i want to thank hairman pallone and chairwoman dingell. We know that contamination is an issue that has devastated communities. Maine tober, 2019, the department of Environmental Protection has more than 30,000 records of across the state of maine. And the air force base and Bangor International airport, the navy and the training site contaminated. Ground water identify the presence of these chemicals pose a risk to Public Health and safety. They are exposed to pfas. And given that my state relies on not only career firefighters but volunteer firefighters the threat and health risks. Im pleased to see that the bill being debated includes a provision that would require the administrator for the you Fire Administration to minimize the use of fire fiferinge foam by firefighters and other first responders. I think its important for the public to know how effective this provision will be in the longterm health and im offering an amendment to require the administrator in consultation with the frire administrator to brief the administration for congressional administrator may determine to duce and other first responders. Commonsense amendment that it falls through on its commitment. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. The chair the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. For what purpose does the gentleman from illinois. I reserve my time. The gentleman from maine. I yield back. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. Mr. Shimkus i yield such time as i may consume. And i understand that the gentleman from maines problem with the airports. We have exempted airports from superfund liability and there wont be a liability for you are your sites to be cleaned up. Based upon this amendment, the baveng amendment is unnecessary and no this amendment does not have an end to annual reporting and Firefighting Foam. And under the military specs, so maybe in moving forward there could be a deadline. The amendment asks for recommendations for congress to reduce exposures. This assumes that foam is hazardous and only exposure to address the problem. I would ask there would be discussion. The foam effectiveness is discussed and underlying bill places burdens on the public. With that, i ask my colleagues to vote no and i yield back. The chair the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from maine. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. He amendment is agreed to. It is now in order to consider amendment number 18 printed in part b of house report 116 66. For what purpose does the gentlewoman from iowa seek recognition . I ask that the the clerk amendment number 18 printed in part b of house port 116 66 offered by mrs. Axne of iowa. The chair the gentlewoman from iowa and a member opposed each will control five minutes. Ms. Axne i yield myself such time as i may consume. I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be modified in the form i have placed at the desk. The chair the clerk will modify the modification the the clerk page 37 beginning online 1 to read as follows, e, authorization of appropriations, one in general. Ms. Axne ask to dispense with the reading. The chair is there will objection to the modification . Without objection. The modification is agreed to. The gentlewoman from iowa is recognized. Ms. Axne i yield myself as much time as i may consume. Pfas are manmade chemicals that can pose Serious Health risks and are of great concern to my constituents. In large quabtities, pfas are dangerous and deadly to human health and those forever chemicals are going to take a lot of work and innovation to clean up. These chemicals have been linked to cancer, effects on the immune system, and impaired child development. While pfas chemicals have not been found in the water supply in my district, there is a known contamination site. Our community has stepped up and is working together through a pfas working group to address this contamination and conduct further testing. But its past time that the federal government steps in, stops the production of these dangerous chemicals, requires cleanup and provides resources to ensure that our communities arent left to fight this alone. Our public Water Utilities provide a Critical Service to our communities by ensuring families have safe and clean Drinking Water. However, without proper support, many Water Utilities wont be able to afford the necessary upgrades or would be forced to put the costs back on the backs of their communities. Im glad in this legislation that this legislation provides a Grant Program in order to effectively remove pfas. The pfas Infrastructure Grant Program will ensure utilities have the resources they need to protect our Water Systems without burdening the communities they serve with unaffordable expense. However, as the bill as written is written now, the pfas Infrastructure Grant Program would only be authorized for two years. Our communities need more flexibility and time when deciding the best way to upgrade their Water Infrastructure and to combat pfas. So my amendment would extend the pfas Infrastructure Grant Program for an additional three years, allowing Water Utilities time to properly address their needs, test their water and request funding as necessary. Additionally, my amendment would increase the funding available by 300 million over that threeyear period. By more than doubling the current authorized amount, my amendment would ensure there are enough Funds Available so utilities can afford these necessary upgrades without negatively impacting the critical work that they do. My state of iowa also has many rural Drinking Water systems that dont have the scale to afford massive infrastructure costs. We see time and time again that smaller Water Systems are unable to remove hazardous and dangerous materials simply because of cost barriers. And im pleased that the underlying bill prioritizes small Drinking Water systems and my amendment ensures the program has enough funding so no community can left behind. This legislation is an important step to ensure iowa families have access to safe Drinking Water, without these harmful pfas chemicals. My amendment strengthens the pfas Infrastructure Grant Program and i urge a yes vote. Thank you, mr. Chairman, i reserve the balance of my time. The chair for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition . Mr. Shimkus thank you, mr. Chairman. I rise in opposition to the amendment and i reserve the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. The gentlewoman from iowa. Mrs. Axne thank you for your support of the amendment. Im glad theres bipartisan support to ensure that our communities have the Drinking Water and resources they need to protect that. So thank you. I yield back. The chair the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. The gentleman from illinois. Mr. Shimkus i thank my colleague. I rose in opposition just so she understands that i will be speaking in opposition to the amendment. I appreciate the kind words. I wish she would have been here when the rice amendment was on the floor, which has been passed and added to the bill, which would allow the rich communities hat are already paid for their modifications at great expense to be able to dip back into these funds at the expense of Rural Communities. That was an amendment we passed earlier. This one, under this legislation, e. P. A. Is supposed to issue a National Primary Drinking Water standard for pfos ut and pfoa and at a minimum. Once this is done, communities that are disadvantaged, im from rural illinois, 33 counties, want assistance for ones assistance assistance for those are available. This creates a double dipping opportunity for communities when the main focus of the safe Drinking Waters act state very rosk Revolving Fund is to help those. More practically because of budget allocations that the house appropriators are supposed to operate under, increased capitalization grants will suffer. Money to the tune of 75 million will be diverted to this specific pfas Grant Program at the expense of the state Revolving Fund. Communities, especially Rural Communities not only with pfas but other compliance and Health Problems as well, could and very well will likely be a closer. Thats why i rise in opposition to the amendment. I encourage my colleagues to vote no and yield back the balance of my time. The chair the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The question is on the amendment as modified offered by the gentlewoman from iowa. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. The amendment as modified is agreed to. For what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition . Mr. Tonko i move that we now rise. The chair the question is on the motion that the committee rise. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. The ayes have it. The motion is adopted. Accordingly, the committee rises. The speaker pro tempore mr. Chairman. The chair madam speaker. The committee of the whole house on the state of the union, having had under consideration h. R. 535, trecks me to report that it directs me to report that it has come to no resolution thereon. The speaker pro tempore the chair of the committee of the whole house on the state of the Union Reports that the committee has had under consideration h. R. 535 and has come to no esolution thereon. The chair will now entertain requests for oneminute speeches. For what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition . Mr. Speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. The speaker pro tempore without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. Mr. Speaker, if there was any doubt that last months Impeachment Vote was purely political, there shouldnt be now. Mr. Spano throughout the partisan impeachment inquiry, we were told it was critical to move quickly because the threat of waiting was too great. The schiff report even said, quote, we cannot wait. In the interest of speed negotiation hope of fairness was discarded, rules were broken, democrats couldnt wait on a minority hearing, breaking house rules that afforded us that right. Democrats couldnt wait on the courts to obtain additional testimony, but Speaker Pelosi continues to hold the articles from the senate in an attempt to dictate the terms of the trial to leader mcconnell. The constitution grants the senate the sole power to try all impeachments, not the speaker. Democrats voted to impeach the president for abuse of power and claim hes a threat to the constitution. But look at what youre doing. Youre trying to take the senates constitutional power for your own political gain. Follow the constitution you spoke so much about. Transmit the articles to the senate so they can undertake their constitutional responsibility. I yield back. The speaker pro tempore members are reminded to direct their remarks to the chair. For what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition . To address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. The speaker pro tempore without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. Thank you, mr. Speaker. Tonight i rise to celebrate a dear man in northern california. Mr. Lamalfa George Stevens celebrated his 100th birthday on december 28. I had the pleasure of being able to stop by and spend time with george and his family at the event at a Community Center to celebrate with him and recognize also his service to our country, which is pretty amazing. George is a pearl harbor survivor. He was there in the army at the base there during the pearl harbor attack. Later, if that wasnt enough, he ended up being deployed into europe where he was at the normandy invasion later on in 1944. And if that wasnt enough, a few months later in the winter, he fought at the battle of the bulge. None of us would have the freedom we have if it wasnt for people like george and all of his comrades that were there in that war, preserving freedom for us and so many others. With that sacrifice. Hes a true patriot, a Great American and hes a guy who sill drives and does his home repairs around his place there. So were really proud of george. Happy birthday. Im glad i got to spend time with you and your family there. Look forward to seeing you again. God bless you. The speaker pro tempore the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. The clerk leaves of absence requested for mrs. Kirkpatrick of arizona for today and mr. Simpson of idaho for this week. The speaker pro tempore without objection, the requests are granted. Under the speakers announced policy of january 3, 2019, the gentleman from texas, mr. Gohmert, is recognized for 34 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. Mr. Gohmert thank you, mr. Speaker. Statement with the being made about mrs. Kirkpatrick, i will be missing tomorrows vote. If i was here i would vote no. Theres too much good being done with the pfas and i would vote no. But i will be attending the funeral of a former member of congress, great patriot, a friend, just a wonderful person, michael fitzpatrick. And it was an honor to serve with him in this body. Obviously weve had a lot of discussion about iran, soleimani, his death, the death of so many that he caused. His role in being head of the r. G. C. So i thought it would be helpful if we learned a little more, for those that havent, it helps, i find, profoundly if people know what theyre talking about. And it seems theres been a whole lot of talk and not a lot of knowledge about whats gone on with iran. Many of us remember, i mean, i sure remember, because i was in the army at fort benning at the time, when our embassy in tehran was attacked. Initially it was said by the iranian leaders that the students attacked the embassy and after days of president carter doing nothing but begging for them to let our people go, they realized that we were not going to do anything. And so they began to say, we have the hostages. I always thought at the time, paying close attention to the news back in those days, that by saying, you know, the students did this, that the iranian leaders were giving themselves a backdoor if wed had a president that had put his foot down and said, eith you are get them released or were going either you get them released or were going to come get them released or theyre harmed, iran will pay heavily, theres probably where they would say, hey, we got them from the students, here they are. But that was the first clue after vietnam that we still were a paper tiger. Thats the way we were portrayed around the world. Thats what we in the army heard back in those days. You know, gee, all you got to do drag out confrontation like vietnam and theyll turn tail and run. And that appeared to be consistent with us doing nothing about our embassy, which under International Law is american soil, its american property, its American Housing and it was attacked and we didnt do anything about it. For a lengthy time. Which sent the message to the new leader in iran, the werellah khomeini, that we paper tigers. We were toothless. Here was no power, no courage. And it encouraged them. If fact, there was one effort at a rescue. But unfortunately the militarys hands were tied by people at the top. I was told by a friend in the army back at the time that the white house was the one that had them cut back the number of helicopters that would go into the desert, across around 500 miles or so of desert with turbine engines in the helicopters, and they knew, as my friend general boykin has confirmed, they had to get six to the landing area, otherwise it was an abort and when it was the mission was aborted and alth copter pilot may have gotten vertigo and werent through a c10 and rescue our hostages and america caps were killed. He if that there been helicopters allowed to go in able to ld have been make it and i was told by the white house. They didnt want it to look like an invasion. I mean i asked him about this before and he is more concerned about ploketting our military members and he wants to commit what it knees to get it done and far cry. And in fact, i do recall resident carter, he turned his back on the shah and he wasnt a reat humanitarian but iran and were not at war with us a at that time, but when president carter turned his back on the back and dided his not give at quad thought when the shah is gone whats when the toil ayaan president carter welcomed back in charge of iran and welcomed him back to iran and proclaimed he was a man of peace, could not have been an ig north welcome to the man that would start to being the reatest. Thank you very much to the carter administration, you allowed people who have couldnted to kill americans at a rate greater than anybody else. They have helped afghanistan. That was a shot when we found that out. They have helped sunnis and shy dedicated to so destroying the great satan in america and destroying the little satan, israel, that we have to take them serious. Too Many Americans have been but in is result of a study done from the jurem center for public affairs, a very good study done and gives working through proxies of tactics to the deaths out solt years and point hat the explosively formed penetrators, people familiar with the i. E. D. s, but these are e. D. s and they are come flauged by rocks and against jealy forces. The three iranian factories were mass trucing the boments used to kill soldiers in iraq. American troops discovered over caliber sniper50 rifles and can pierce up to a mile and humvee troop. At quantico and and it is amazing how powerful they are. But they were found in iraq and hey had apparently come from austrian manufacturer, but they were bought by iran and supplied iran to iraq to help kill army can soldiers and each soldier they killed in afghanistan. Sunday times reported that they received ,000 from iranian firm thatbul for an iraq in 010 killed Government Troops and steroid h destroyed vehicles. Displayed nd was when aapointed to be minister of defense and played a key hole in attacks and u. S. Marines and french paratroopers were killed. In 199 by ed soleimani who is with us, perhaps in spirit only now p thanks to our current president and the United States military. They helped fuel the 199 the revolution in iran and challenges any role and remains the central focus of and since the revolution, it continues to wage war against the United States and its alley. Though iran has been at war with the United States for 40 years well, ce 199 for sure, since the ayatolla and president carter said he is a man at peace but has been at war with the unings. C but that was over throw fter the of the shaw and in 1978, 1979, irans i rmpgmpcrmp has come from the the composition into an organ. The upper each hons drawn from the ranks of the irgc. They are developing an and andng lethal system any Ballistic Missiles and attack craft. They have a unit comprised of individuals known as the quds force and that is what Soleimani Killing americans as many as he could. He strategic objective is to subvert the enemies and a goal to attains by facilitating pro amainian. And the west bank, afghanistan and central asia. The Treasury Department designated r. G. C. As a terrorism supporting entity. It is quite extensive and goes on to point out many of the efforts, successful efforts to kill americans like khobart towers in 1996 and any other has ks, in 1998, soil many and he rg crmpqumpefmp created branches and sabotaged special operations. Soleimani has successfully sought the assassination on insurgent roxies and groups. We that is just in iraq but know more regarding what they have done in afghanistan, in lebanon, in syria and i see im joined by my friend who has served his country well and made his way up to the rank of germ and knows a great deal of war in iraq and afghanistan. I would yield to general scott perry. Mr. Perry thanks for taking the time to discuss this for allowing me. And i didnt want you to carry the freight. We didnt get to say everything over the proceedings and it frussthates that our colleagues will say america assassinated general soleimani. You can put a generals rank on a puppy dog or a rabbit or you name it or a car or a truck, this guy is a terrorist, no matter what he is wearing. He is a terrorist from a terrorist state. That is who he is. Response i will for the deaths of hundreds, if not thousands of americans and maiming of thousands of americans and when they say this president is starting a war, my goodness, where have you been since 19. You know when iran punched america in the face. It hasnt stopped. After 40 years of appeasement d you are a great student of history and the results of appeasement leading up to world ar ii was the untold death and miserable deaths of people because of appeasement and tried it with iran. Irpe is playing long ball. People are saying they were complying with the jc pmpomp arch. There was nothing in it they wanted to do to get to a nuclear program. So for 0 years, all they have to do is not let us not inspect it. And perfect their Ballistic Missile capability so they can deliver the payload and in 10e years we have nothing to say. And we have a terrorist nation that uses terrorism as statecraft with a nuclear missile. What is our lench. We have a another north korea. T befeudles and wellmeaning colleagues this think this is going to work. And describe the definition of insanity of doing the same thing of over and over and over again and appeasement is dangerous and it encourages december pot its to be december pots and the president gave them warning. They say it wasnt warranted. We didnt have intelligence. They told us what they were going to do. And after the fact, everybody said, where was the intelligence and Law Enforcement agencies, why werent they talking and they were going to kill the great satan and little satan and tell us what they are go to go do and not enough for my colleagues who have said, when did you know it and why deposit you do something about this. Mr. Gohmert and if the gentleman yields bag . Took me to get around to reading Winston Churchills book on world war ii. When hitler moved in, they were a disorganized that it was disaster if there was any resistance instead of chamberlain, we are go to go let him move in and if there had been any resistance at all because of the material break downs and hitler was furious and he said any resistance would girm answer the would have been humiliated and hitler got too ambitious and would have been gone and the world would have been spared the tense of millions of people that died as a result of trying to play indicate the man. So this supporting, the gentleman, the gentleman was ointing out, it doesnt work well. And i know there are people that say, all we were doing is giving iran their money back. And you say, well maybe that specific money, that money enabled to continue supporting hezbollah and terrorists that would attack and kill america caps. Mr. Perriello if we would just give mr. Perry if we would just give the criminal, the terrorist, their money back. Its legitimate, its theirs. Disregard the fact that these are killing, murdering terrorists. Theres no moral equivalentance. You dont give murdering terrorists money, whether its theirs or anybody elses. Right you . Throw them in jail. These people should probably legitimately right . You throw them in jail. These people should probably legitimately be in the hague for crimes against humanity. Not getting their money back. Thats one of the things that frustrates me. The other one is this whole war powers things. Weve had a year in this congress, a year of escalation of iran attacking american targets. In november and december alone, 24 times, or 25 times. Over two dozen times attacking american targets. But it was never an issue. You know what else wasnt an issue . The kind gentleman from texas, it wasnt an issue for eight years. Where almost 4,000 people, 4,000 people under the Obama Administration, terrorists, rightly so were killed by drone strikes. You know who came from the other side of the aisle regarding the war powers act . Nothing. Right . And you know what, we agree with president obama on that. We didnt agree on many things as republicans with president obama, but we agreed that eradicating terrorists was a good thing. And he did it. Not in the war zone of iraq, as approved by this congress, right . He did it in yemen. Somalia. In pakistan. Sovereign nations. The United States going and killing people, including american citizens, outside the combat zone. Not a peep. Yet today, today, with iran watching, with our enemies watching, today is the day that we have to revise the war powers act and rein in a wayward president because hes trying to defend the country. And you know the good representative from texas you know, the good representative from texas, it has nothing to do with the war powers act. This resolution, thats never going to go to the president , was all about Campaign Messaging and its also messaging our enemies that were divided in this country. We are not divided. We might be divided in this house, but were not divided in this country. And i yield. Mr. Gohmert i have an article here from january, 2017, and the title from the guardian is, merica dropped 26,171 bombs in 2016. What a bloody end to obamas reign. And i remember specifically, because i had you know, been to libya, but as our defense secretary, bob gates, said in a live interview, libya is not in our vital interest. We didnt have a real dog in that fight, is what he was saying. And gaddafi, did he have blood on his hands. He wasnt a good guy. He did have blood on his hands. He wasnt a good guy. But since the u. S. Went into iraq, he opened his doors, said, you tell me what weapons i can keep, i wont pursue nukes anymore. And he had not been a problem for us. From that time forward. And yet president obama, without any authority from here, he decides basically to go to war with libya and with gaddafi and dropping bombs on them and why . Because he said nato needs us to do this. Mr. Perry if the gentleman will yield for just a moment. What ive heard on this house floor today, the president s capricious, irresponsible, doesnt have a plan, doesnt have a strategy. If the gentleman will just please tell the audience what the strategy under the Obama Administration and under secretary clinton, what was the strategy in libya . I yield to the gentleman. Mr. Gohmert there was no strategy in libya other than to take gaddafi out. Just like president carter welcoming, turning his back on the shah and welcoming the Ayatollah Khomeini in, when president obama took out gaddafi, and basically, yeah, he bombed him into oblivion, seen reports that gaddafi was begging, look, well just go into compile exile, and he asked, sent word to the president , if youll just let me leave in peace, i wont ever come back to libya, lets leave the country, you know, not destroyed, stop the bombing, and ill just leave. And he never heard back from washington. But the problem is that president obama created a failed state in libya and it has been the source of destabilizing all of north america, and i dont know if theres any other member of congress thats been allowed to have 2 1 2 hours with the head of intelligence in egypt as have, but egypt is paying heavily for president obamas wrongheadedness in taking out gaddafi and completely destabilizing north africa. I yield to my friend. Mr. Perry if the gentleman will yield. I wasnt in congress. I wasnt didnt have thebeer to be in congress at that time have the honor to be in congress at that time. Maybe you were or you were more atune to things. Im wondering, at that time, without a strategy, without a plan, firing on a sovereign nation, killing their leader, assassinating, well, their people mr. Gohmert reclaiming my time. President obama had our troops or had our forces, nato forces, but they were american, they bombed his convoy as he was leaving libya and that allowed the locals then he was assassinated there. Mr. Perry so, to make the correction absolutely clear, the United States did not kill the leader of libya. But we helped facilitate it in some respect. Mr. Gohmert in criminal terms, he was certainly an accessory. Could not have been killed without president obamas help. Mr. Perry if you were president , did somebody in this house say, this president is reckless, hes a destabilizing hes destabilizing the region, he is were assassinating or aiding and abetting the assassination of leaders in foreign countries. Was any of that occurring in this house . Mr. Gohmert yes, it was. But only, only on one side of the aisle. That was this side. Because we were ok with president obama defending americans and american interests. But as bob gates said, that did not include libya. Now, he walked that back some. But it was clear, it was not in our vital interest, and what really got me, though, is im hearing so many people that were here back then, they didnt offer one peep about the illegality of what president obama was doing. Many of us did. But they didnt say a word. And that was outside our interest. Killing soleimani, that was protecting american lives. Going after gaddafi didnt protect any american lives and in fact its caused total disruption. Mr. Perry if the gentleman will yield. Did we have an authorization for the use of military force in libya . Mr. Gohmert no. Mr. Perry was libya an american combat theater . Mr. Gohmert no. Mr. Perry so when our good colleagues on the other side of the aisle say that this was illegal and unconstitutional, meanwhile knowing that the authorization of use of military force, whether we agree with it or not, its in law, its in statute right now, in a combat theater, where we are authorized to be by that aumf, by votes of congress, signature by a president , with an armed combatant who, by the way, as you probably know, listed on the terrorist list by the United States and others, is not supposed to be out of iran. Right . His home country. Yet was traveling to syria and then through iraq as a combatant and as a terrorist on the terrorist list. What is the point of putting terrorists on the list if youre not going to do anything about the terrorist on the list . I yield. Mr. Gohmert well, and also back to libya momentarily. It did what president obama did cost american lives. Including at benghazi. If he doesnt decide unilaterally whether nato wanted it or not, he decided for america without any consent from congress to go to war with libya, to take out their leader. It destabilized the country, it put american lives at risk that were not at that time and it actually cost american lives. And i had an article here and ive seen on facebook some comments, but an iranian american activist outraged by the Propaganda Machine glorifying soleimani. And there are so many iranians that are speaking up now going, whats wrong with you people . This guy was a terrorist. He was killing iranians, he was killing americans, he was just merciless. Mr. Perry if the gentleman will yield. I happened to notice on cnn about the time of the attack, that they had the spokesperson for the iranian government during the hostage crisis speaking on cnn. Npr did something very similar. So its not just iranian americans that are unhappy with the situation, the propaganda, not only by elected officials, but by our media that is taking up the side of the enemy that wants to destroy america. Its disgusting. Mr. Gohmert it really is. Its just a shame that at a time when we ought to come together, because unlike libya, we do have an interest in protecting american lives, we do have an interest in stopping people that want to destroy america. We ought to be united on this. This is not a time to come in and try to condemn and belittle the president that did a good thing in taking out a terrorist. One other thing, i dont remember anybody on the other side of the aisle here that made a peep when the president of the United States, president obama, gave the order to kill alwalaki and his 16yearold son. Ok so, alwalaki was an american citizen. Why . Because his parents came over on a visa, student visa, had him, took him back and taught him to hate america. But hes got an american passport, hes an american citizen. He had worked with some in the Obama Administration, apparent he will worked with some in the Bush Administration apparently worked with some in the Bush Administration, but he was really an enemy of america. And president obama gave the order not to take out a terrorist like soleimani who was in the process of stirring up terrorism and killing americans, but this was an american citizen and he gave the order to take him out with a drone strike, take out his 16yearold son. Rarledless of what regardless of what alwalaki had done, his son was not a criminal. But president obama just ordered him taken out and he was. Not one word from the other side of the aisle. I would have thought we could have come together on that. Wait, before we take out american citizens, should we give him a trial . Or should we just let the president decide . Now, i was ok with somebody that they had the evidence and that was in the process of being at war with us, but for heavens sake, for the people that didnt raise not one peep about that mr. Perry if the gentleman will yield. Was there a briefing . Was there consultation from the president to the leaders of congress or to congress . S there adequate information substantiating the imminence of an attack . Was there any of that or was there any human cry that there was none of that and then a rush to judgment on the president s authority to do that from our good friends on the other side of the aisle . Mr. Gohmert well, the media helped him out. I got the signal, we have about 30 seconds left. I will yield to my friend. Mr. Perry i yield back the balance of my time. Mr. Gohmert well. This is just an incredible time and it is a time when free people ought to be able to come together and unite together in the cause of freedom. People didnt think he and his wife would be getting back together after he was released and he said that is because ridiculous. I got along with a guy for 12 years and the only thing is the desire for freedom. That ought to bring us together here. And i yield back. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman from texas have a motion . The question is on the motion to adjourn. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. The ayes have it. The motion is adopted. House when it returns here on cspan. The house the speaker pro tempore the house will be in order. For what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition