Frank Pallone
Representative for New Jersey · Democratic · United States
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3747, the AADAPT Act. This bill reauthorizes Project ECHO, or the Expanding Capacity for Health Outcomes grant program at the Health Resources and Services Administration.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5160, the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Reauthorization Act. This bill reauthorizes the C.W.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2821, the FDA Modernization Act 3.0, led by Representative Barragan and Representative Carter of Georgia.”
“We know that more than 5.3 million Americans are living today with a lifelong disability caused by a brain injury, and we know who is most at risk: older adults who fall, servicemembers and veterans, athletes on playing fields across the country, victims of domestic violence, and far, far too many children.”
“At that time, our understanding of these injuries was so limited that public health experts called TBI the silent epidemic, and we did not know how many Americans were affected each year, who was most at risk, or how many people were left with a permanent, life-altering disability.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1493, my bill to reauthorize the Traumatic Brain Injury Act of 1996.”
The complete record
Every one of 124 lines we hold for Frank Pallone, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 3.
“Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support this bill on a bipartisan basis, in part because of how important it is but in part also because it honors my friend Congressman Bill Pascrell. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.”
“It requires the Department of Health and Human Services to conduct a study and report to Congress on traumatic brain injury, and it directs the CDC to publish information on the populations at highest risk and on the strategies to protect them so that Congress and our [[Page H4648]] public health officials can respond to the growing needs of these communities with better data and clear priorities. Mr. Speaker, this is a commonsense, bipartisan bill that benefits all Americans. It advanced out of committee without a single dissenting vote. This bill supports research. It strengthens care, and it helps ensure that Americans living with traumatic brain injuries are not left behind. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes,'' and I reserve the balance of my time.”
“Second, it reauthorizes the Administration for Community Living's State partnership grant programs, which helps States, Tribal organizations, and their partners connect survivors to rehabilitation and community-based services. Third, it reauthorizes the State Protection and Advocacy program, which safeguards the rights of Americans living with brain injury. This is a modest Federal investment with an extraordinary reach. Since 1997, 48 States, 2 territories, and the District of Columbia have used these partnership grants to build the very systems that their residents now rely on. This bill does not simply extend those programs but strengthens them.”
“Since the program's inception in 1996, Congress has reauthorized this act on a bipartisan basis time and again. However, despite bipartisan efforts by our committee to continue reauthorizing these programs, the Federal authorization lapsed in 2024. Without reauthorization, research slows, surveillance weakens, and the support services that patients and families depend on are put in jeopardy. We cannot afford to lose momentum on an issue that touches veterans, athletes, survivors of violence, older adults, and countless other Americans in every one of our districts. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1493 renews three proven programs. First, it reauthorizes the CDC's TBI program, which drives our national research, surveillance, and prevention efforts.”
“We know that more than 5.3 million Americans are living today with a lifelong disability caused by a brain injury, and we know who is most at risk: older adults who fall, servicemembers and veterans, athletes on playing fields across the country, victims of domestic violence, and far, far too many children. There is also the economic toll of treating, rehabilitating, and caring for these individuals throughout their lives. Mr. Speaker, Congress' investment gave us the tools to act on what the data revealed, from concussion guidelines to protect young athletes to targeted prevention for the older Americans who are most likely to be hospitalized. None of that existed before the Federal partnership and Representative Pascrell's leadership. All of that is at risk if we continue to allow this work to lapse.”
“At that time, our understanding of these injuries was so limited that public health experts called TBI the silent epidemic, and we did not know how many Americans were affected each year, who was most at risk, or how many people were left with a permanent, life-altering disability. That first law authorized Federal support and programs to research TBI research and conduct surveillance, both directly and through grants to public and nonprofit organizations. Mr. Speaker, this initial Federal investment has transformed what we know now and identified what we still need to do. Because Congress chose to invest, we now know that traumatic brain injury sends more than 214,000 Americans to the hospital in a single year and that it takes roughly 69,000 lives annually, nearly 190 deaths every single day.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1493, my bill to reauthorize the Traumatic Brain Injury Act of 1996. This bipartisan legislation reauthorizes through fiscal year 2030 the critical Federal programs dedicated to the prevention, detection, treatment, and surveillance of traumatic brain injuries. It also renames the national TBI surveillance program to honor the legacy of my dear friend, the late Representative Bill Pascrell, Jr., of New Jersey, who founded and led the Congressional Brain Injury Task Force for more than two decades after meeting his constituent Dennis Benigno of Clifton, New Jersey, whose son suffered a life-changing traumatic brain injury in a car crash. The Traumatic Brain Injury Act was signed into law in 1996.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I urge support for this bipartisan bill. Obviously, dental care is so important. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Kelly), a member of our committee, who has for a long time championed the healthcare concerns of low-income and underserved people.”
“These programs seek to enhance dental workforce planning and development through the support of innovative programs that meet the individual needs of each funded State. I hope my colleagues will join me in this effort to strengthen and expand access to oral healthcare. Mr. Speaker, I encourage all of my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 2001, and I reserve the balance of my time.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2001, the Action for Dental Health Act, led by Representative Kelly. Access to oral healthcare is critical to ensuring a person's health and well-being. Too often, however, oral health is overlooked. Tooth decay is the most common chronic disease in both children and adults in the United States. In fact, more than one in four adults have untreated cavities, and nearly half of American adults show signs of gum disease. We need to expand access to oral healthcare, including strengthening the oral healthcare workforce. The Action for Dental Health Act reauthorizes State oral health workforce improvement programs.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3747, the AADAPT Act. This bill reauthorizes Project ECHO, or the Expanding Capacity for Health Outcomes grant program at the Health Resources and Services Administration. This program uses videoconferencing technology to train, advise, and support clinicians to improve access to specialty treatment in rural and underserved areas. By connecting primary care providers in rural areas with specialists in academic medical centers or other specialized settings, these providers receive the support they need to manage complex patient conditions, and rural patients are more likely to receive the care that they need closer to home. Mr. Speaker, I encourage all of my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 3747, and I reserve the balance of my time.”
“Mr. Speaker, I urge support for this bill. It is not only bipartisan, it is very important. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. {time} 1520”
“The National Cord Blood Inventory program maintains a robust inventory of high-quality cord blood units that can be used for research or transplantation. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased we are considering this bill to extend these programs. I encourage all my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 5160, and I reserve the balance of my time.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5160, the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Reauthorization Act. This bill reauthorizes the C.W. Bill Young Cell Transplantation Program and the National Cord Blood Inventory, two programs that serve as national registries to connect patients with lifesaving care. [[Page H4643]] Each year, thousands of Americans are diagnosed with conditions that could require stem cell transplants, such as leukemia, lymphoma, sickle cell anemia, and other immune system disorders. Some patients have a fully matched relative who can serve as a donor, but most patients require a search for an unrelated donor. This transplantation program helps identify, match, and facilitate the distribution of stem cells and cord blood from unrelated donors.”
“4348 would expand research, improve testing, and coordinate vector-borne disease efforts across the Federal Government. The bill would also reauthorize funding for Regional Centers of Excellence for surveillance, prevention, and response to vector-borne diseases and reauthorize grants to State health departments to support vector-borne disease infrastructure. Tick and vector-borne disease have rapidly increased, Mr. Speaker, particularly in the northeastern part of our country. I encourage all of my colleagues to honor the legacy of Senator Kay Hagan, who died of complications from a tick-borne disease, by voting ``yes'' on H.R. 4348. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4348, the Kay Hagan Tick Act, sponsored by my colleagues Chris Smith of New Jersey and Lloyd Doggett of Texas. I understand that Mr. Kean from New Jersey is also a sponsor. This bill reauthorizes the national strategy and regional centers of excellence in vector-borne diseases. Tick-borne diseases, including Lyme disease, have rapidly increased over the last decades. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that nearly a half million people may, in fact, be diagnosed and treated for Lyme disease every year in the United States. That is a dramatic increase from 30,000 annual cases just two decades ago. {time} 1500 H.R.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2821, the FDA Modernization Act 3.0, led by Representative Barragan and Representative Carter of Georgia. The FDA Modernization Act 3.0 would require the Food and Drug Administration to update regulations to replace references to animal tests, data, studies, models, and research in specified sections of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations with references to nonclinical tests. This would bring FDA's regulations in line with a law passed in 2022 that allowed for alternatives to animal testing in drug development, including those that leverage recent scientific advancements, such as computer modeling and cell-based assays. I encourage all my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 2821, and I reserve the balance of my time.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Carter), a member of our committee, my colleague, and the Democratic sponsor of this bill.”
“Providing the FDA with the authority to compel destruction and requiring the importer to pay for such destruction will provide a strong disincentive to those seeking to prioritize profits over product safety. We need to make sure Americans are not unwittingly exposed to harmful products, and this authority is going to prevent that. Mr. Speaker, I encourage all my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 2715, and I reserve the balance of my time.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2715, the Destruction of Hazardous Imports Act, led by Representatives Carter and Higgins of Louisiana. This bill would provide the Food and Drug Administration with the authority to require importers to destroy products that pose a significant public health concern, preventing them from being shipped to another port of entry. These products have, in fact, included food contaminated with salmonella, listeria, and carcinogenic unapproved animal drugs, as well as misbranded medical devices. It also includes illegal e-cigarette products that are flooding the market from places like China. These are dangerous products, Mr. Speaker.”
“Speaker, while I support this bill, I am concerned that the bill only helps higher income seniors who can afford to pay out of pocket for these additional upgrades beyond what is covered under the Medicare program. The universality of the Medicare program and the fact that all beneficiaries have access to the same benefits is an important principle in my opinion. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on H.R. 1703, the Choices for Increased Mobility Act. Mr. Speaker, this bill will clarify Medicare payment rules for ultra lightweight manual wheelchairs and allow Medicare beneficiaries to upgrade to wheelchairs with titanium or carbon fiber materials at their own cost. The bill would give beneficiaries the choice to select a wide range of wheelchairs. Under the bill, seniors would have the choice to acquire a wheelchair with titanium or carbon fiber materials through the Medicare program with additional out-of-pocket costs. I am glad that the bill would require suppliers to notify beneficiaries of the additional financial liability. Mr.”
“WATSON COLEMAN, Mses. MOORE of Wisconsin, ANSARI, and Messrs. TONKO, BARR, GROTHMAN, and LAWLER changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.'' Ms. UNDERWOOD and Mr. VARGAS changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.'' So the bill was passed. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. ____________________”
“Gooden Gottheimer Graves Gray Green, Al (TX) Griffith Guest Guthrie Hamadeh (AZ) Harder (CA) Haridopolos Harris (NC) Harshbarger Hern (OK) Higgins (LA) Hinson Houchin Houlahan Hudson Huffman Huizenga Hunt Hurd (CO) Issa Jack Jackson (TX) Jacobs Johnson (GA) Johnson (LA) Johnson (SD) Johnson (TX) Jordan Joyce (OH) Joyce (PA) Kaptur Keating Kelly (IL) Kelly (MS) Kelly (PA) Kennedy (NY) Kennedy (UT) Khanna Kiggans (VA) Kiley (CA) Kim Knott Kustoff LaHood LaLota Landsman Langworthy Latimer Latta Lee (FL) Letlow Levin Loudermilk Lucas Luna Luttrell Lynch Mackenzie Magaziner Malliotakis Maloy Mann Mannion Massie Mast Matsui McBath McBride McCaul McClain McClain Delaney McClintock McCormick McDowell McGovern McGuire McIver Meeks Mejia Menefee Menendez Messmer Meuser Mfume Miller (IL) Miller (OH) Miller (WV) Mills Min Moolenaar Moore (AL) Moore (NC) Moore (WV) Moran Moskowitz Moulton Mrvan Mullin Murphy Neal Nehls Norman Nunn (IA) Obernolte Ogles Olszewski Onder Owens Pallone Palmer Panetta Patronis Pelosi Perez Perry Peters Pettersen Pfluger Pingree Pou Randall Reschenthaler Rivas Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rose Rouzer Ruiz Rulli Rutherford Ryan Salazar Sanchez Scalise Schakowsky Schmidt Schneider Scholten Schrier Schweikert [[Page H4451]] Scott, Austin Sessions Sewell Sherman Shreve Simon Simpson Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smucker Soto Spartz Stansbury Stauber Steube Strickland Strong Stutzman Subramanyam Suozzi Taylor Tenney Thanedar Thompson (CA) Thompson (PA) Tiffany Timmons Torres (CA) Trahan Tran Underwood Valadao Van Drew Van Duyne Van Epps Van Orden Vargas Vasquez Wagner Walberg Waters Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Whitesides Wied Williams (TX) Wilson (FL) Wilson (SC) Wittman Yakym NAYS--117 Amo Ansari Auchincloss Balint Barr Barragan Beyer Biggs (AZ) Bonamici Bynum Casar Case Castor (FL) Chu Clarke (NY) Clyburn Courtney Crawford Crow Davids (KS) Dean (PA) DeGette DeLauro Deluzio DeSaulnier Doggett Escobar Espaillat Foushee Frankel, Lois Frost Garcia (IL) Garcia (TX) Gillen Gomez Goodlander Gosar Grijalva Grothman Hageman Harrigan Harris (MD) Hayes Hill (AR) Himes Horsford Hoyer Hoyle (OR) Ivey Jackson (IL) Jayapal Jeffries Kamlager-Dove Kean Krishnamoorthi Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Lawler Lee (NV) Lee (PA) Liccardo Lieu Lofgren McClellan McCollum McDonald Rivet McGarvey Meng Moore (UT) Moore (WI) Morelle Morrison Nadler Neguse Newhouse Norcross Ocasio-Cortez Omar Pappas Pocan Pressley Quigley Ramirez Raskin Riley (NY) Ross Roy Salinas Scanlon Scott (VA) Self Smith (NJ) Smith (WA) Sorensen Stanton Stefanik Steil Stevens Sykes Takano Thompson (MS) Titus Tlaib Tokuda Tonko Torres (NY) Turner (OH) Veasey Velazquez Vindman Walkinshaw Wasserman Schultz Watson Coleman Westerman Williams (GA) Womack Zinke NOT VOTING--6 Dexter Fields James Leger Fernandez Mace Miller-Meeks {time} 1717 Mrs.”
“238] YEAS--308 Adams Aderholt Aguilar Alford Allen Amodei (NV) Arrington Babin Bacon Baird Balderson Barrett Baumgartner Bean (FL) Beatty Begich Bell Bentz Bera Bergman Bice Biggs (SC) Bilirakis Bishop Boebert Bost Boyle (PA) Brecheen Bresnahan Brown Brownley Buchanan Budzinski Burchett Burlison Calvert Cammack Carbajal Carey Carson Carter (GA) Carter (LA) Carter (TX) Casten Castro (TX) Ciscomani Cisneros Clark (MA) Cleaver Cline Cloud Clyde Cohen Cole Collins Comer Conaway Correa Costa Craig Crane Crank Crenshaw Crockett Cuellar Davidson Davis (IL) Davis (NC) De La Cruz DelBene DesJarlais Diaz-Balart Dingell Donalds Downing Dunn (FL) Edwards Elfreth Ellzey Emmer Estes Evans (CO) Evans (PA) Ezell Fallon Fedorchak Feenstra Figures Fine Finstad Fischbach Fitzgerald Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Fletcher Flood Fong Foster Foxx Franklin, Scott Friedman Fry Fulcher Fuller Gallagher Garamendi Garbarino Garcia (CA) Gill (TX) Gimenez Golden (ME) Goldman (NY) Goldman (TX) Gonzalez, V.”
“Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, this 15- minute vote on passage of the bill will be followed by 5-minute votes on: The motion to recommit on H.R. 1181; and Passage of H.R. 1181, if ordered. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 308, nays 117, not voting 6, as follows: [Roll No.”
“Studies have also shown that increases in stroke rates with the time change are even higher for some of our most vulnerable populations, and that includes seniors, for example. The bottom line is, Americans' safety is put at greater risk in the days after a time change, and disrupting our sleep has been shown to lead to higher rates of fatal motor vehicle crashes, crimes like robbery and workplace injuries. Whether or not you agree what should be permanent, the bottom line is that sticking to the status quo and continuing to change our clocks is really the worst option. I am going to stand with the 56 percent of Americans in a recent poll who prefer a shift to permanent daylight savings time to give families more sunlight in the evening hours. I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.”
“Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to really stress, again, why I think that the status quo is bad. I mean, obviously, some people here--I think a majority--would like to see a permanent daylight savings time and some who I think are in the minority would like to see a permanent standard time. However, the bottom line is we just can't continue the status quo, Mr. Speaker, because the science and research really is clear. It shows that springing forward and falling back twice a year is harmful to our health. It makes Americans less safe, and it is very unpopular. Studies have shown increases, as I mentioned before, in heart attacks and strokes, mood and sleep disturbances, and hospital admissions in the days after a time change.”
“Passing this bill now also in the peak summer months gives everyone-- and that is schools, workplaces, transit systems--time to plan for this change well in advance of the darkest winter months, and I think that is important also. I am also confident that we are setting ourselves up to succeed this time around so Americans can reap the benefits of eliminating the time change. Again, it is the time change that really is the problem. Most of us, whether you are for permanent daylight savings time or permanent standard time, don't want to see the switching back and forth. I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and, again, I reserve the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I just want to address the issue that was mentioned that in 1974 Congress voted to move to permanent daylight savings time and then reversed that decision. I think that 50 years later, things are different. First of all, in the 1970s, when that was the case, things have changed in the sense that schools have pushed start times later in many districts, including in my district and dramatically fewer kids walk to school. Also, remote and hybrid work has had significant impact on Americans' commuting patterns. Things are not the same today as they were in the 1970s in terms of what people did and how they worked and how they went to school.”
“For States that have already chosen to follow permanent standard time due to the unique needs of their climate or location--and that includes Arizona and Hawaii--under this bill, they can continue to do so. Other States are allowed under the legislation to adopt permanent standard time prior to the bill's enactment. Ultimately, the benefits of stopping the biannual changing of the clocks are numerous and clear. Moving to permanent daylight saving time will bring much-needed evening sunlight to communities across the United States. It is time we finally end the process of springing forward and falling back. I urge my colleagues to support the Sunshine Protection Act, and I reserve the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.”
“Meanwhile, Americans are facing an affordability crisis, forcing families to [[Page H4447]] make difficult tradeoffs, including forgoing summer travel. For communities like mine that rely on tourism for our local economies, an extra hour of daylight can make all the difference. Extra daylight also helps to deter crime. Researchers at the Brookings Institution found that criminal incidents decreased during an hour of sunlight added to the evening following the springtime change. Making that extra sunlight permanent will help keep our communities safer. All of these benefits clearly explain why 19 States have already voted to adopt permanent daylight saving time if Federal law changed because, right now, it doesn't allow them to do that. These States recognize the benefits, and it is time that Congress allows them to reap those benefits.”
“Extra sunlight means more time at the beach, more time eating out at restaurants, and more time doing outdoor leisure activities. In my district along the Jersey Shore, tourists can enjoy beautiful coastal areas with serene beaches, embark on fishing ventures along the Atlantic Coast, enjoy a nice outdoor concert from iconic musicians in places like Asbury Park, and so much more. Last year alone, New Jersey welcomed more than 120 million visitors to our State, and they contributed more than $50 billion to our State's economy. Our tourism industry needs the boost today more than ever. The Trump administration's policies, including high visa fees and the detention and harassment of legal tourists, have discouraged travelers from visiting our country because they simply do not feel welcome.”
“Disturbingly, studies have shown that the increase in stroke rates after the time change is even higher for some of our most vulnerable populations. For example, cancer patients' stroke rates increase by 25 percent, and people over the age of 65 are 20 percent more likely to have a stroke in the days following the time change. The Sunshine Protection Act would implement permanent daylight saving time and stop the twice-a-year change that disrupts our sleep and our health. Taking this action will increase the sunshine hours in the evening, allowing many Americans to leave work for more sunlight in the winter months, not darkness. The increased evening sunlight will also provide a needed boost to our tourism industry.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Sunshine Protection Act. This act addresses an issue on which many Americans actually agree, and that is stopping the biannual process of changing our clocks. Only 12 percent of Americans prefer to switch their clocks twice a year. Far more Americans recognize that the practice is inconvenient and, frankly, disruptive. Stopping the twice-yearly time change benefits the health and well- being of all Americans. The time change inevitably disrupts sleep patterns and is especially disruptive to the sleep of young children and pets. Time change also is associated with an increase in the rate of heart attacks and strokes in the days immediately following the change.”
“Branden holds a Bachelor of Science in Computer Science from Mount Saint Mary's University and a Master of Science in Computer Science from Towson University. Branden is a talented research scientist at a research and engineering company. Together, Emily and Branden have built a strong, loving partnership that reflects their shared values and passions. Mr. Speaker, please join me in leading this body in recognition of Emily McLaughlin Wisniewski and Branden Anton Ehrenreich as they embark on their marriage together. It is with great pleasure that I join their friends and family in honoring their exceptional union. I wish them a lifetime of happiness, love, and adventure. ____________________”
“This union is a testament to the driven, thoughtful, and vibrant paths they have led to this important moment. Emily, native to New Jersey, is the daughter of John and Deborah Wisniewski. Born and raised in La Plata, Maryland, Branden is the son of Kurt and Tammy Ehrenreich. Emily is a graduate of New York University, where she earned a Bachelor of Arts in Economics and Political Science, and Georgetown University, where she obtained a Master of Science in Quantitative Economics and Econometrics. Emily has made significant contributions in her career, working for the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and as a statistician for the U.S. Census Bureau. The Royal Conservatory of Music has rated her an accomplished, certified pianist.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 171 Issue 72 (Wednesday, April 30, 2025) [Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 72 (Wednesday, April 30, 2025)] [Extensions of Remarks] [Page E367] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] RECOGNIZING THE MARRIAGE OF EMILY McLAUGHLIN WISNIEWSKI AND BRANDEN ANTON EHRENREICH ______ HON. FRANK PALLONE, JR. of new jersey in the house of representatives Wednesday, April 30, 2025 Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Mrs. Emily McLaughlin Wisniewski and Mr. Branden Anton Ehrenreich, who were joined in marriage on Saturday, April 26, 2025. This special occasion celebrated the love between two remarkable individuals and marked the beautiful journey they have shared together.”
“Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. ____________________”
“In 2026, dirty diesel is projected to cause nearly 500,000 lost workdays, impacting our Nation's productivity; over 3,500 heart attacks; thousands of cases of respiratory illness; and, yes, over 8,000 deaths. Dirty diesel will cost Americans over $90 billion in health damages. Republicans are fighting for resolutions that are hurting people's health and putting lives at risk. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.”
“Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Speaker, my Republican colleagues are really misleading the American people with their claims about the Heavy-Duty Low NO X Omnibus rule. This rule actually gives California and other States the ability to clean up pollution from dirty diesel trucks, protecting the health of Americans and saving lives. Heavy-duty engines emit harmful NO X and other toxic pollutants that are significant contributors to ozone and particulate matter. The health effects of this air pollution are well-documented and include respiratory illness, cardiovascular problems, and even death. Madam Speaker, the Clean Air Task Force recently issued a report showing the impacts of dirty diesel on communities. The figures are staggering, and here are just a few highlights.”
“Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui), the ranking member of our Communications and Technology Subcommittee.”
“This resolution is a waste of our time because, as I have said on the other two, both the GAO and the Senate Parliamentarian have concluded that this waiver is not a rule and, therefore, cannot be revoked using the Congressional Review Act. It is just another attempt by the Republicans to distract from the economic chaos and uncertainty that Trump is creating with our economy. This resolution is going nowhere, but for all these reasons, Madam Speaker, I oppose the resolution. I reserve the balance of my time.”
“People who live near ports, highways, and warehouses are disproportionately exposed to high concentrations of this pollution. Now, the California standard aims to address this pollution and reverse course on these deadly trends. This is based on California's unique circumstances. They have an air pollution problem that is a lot worse than many of the other States. [[Page H1757]] Despite Republicans' false claims, the California program does not ban internal combustion engine trucks. Maintaining the California program is critical to improve public health outcomes and secure the right to clean air for everyone. Repealing California's Federal preemption waiver for its heavy-duty omnibus plan will rob Americans of over $23 billion of health benefits through 2050 and increase premature mortality, hospitalizations, and emergency room visits.”
“Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.J. Res. 89, yet another extremist, and I believe illegal, Congressional Review Act resolution attacking a commonsense regulation to protect Americans' health and the environment. Now, H.J. Res. 89 would block the California waiver for the heavy- duty omnibus rule that sets stronger standards to lower nitrogen oxide and particulate matter emissions from heavy-duty engines. The trucking industry makes up just 10 percent of vehicles on the road, but 45 percent of nitrogen oxide and 56 percent of particulate matter pollution. Nitrogen oxide is a precursor for smog that can exacerbate numerous health conditions and is associated with premature death.”
“Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. ____________________”
“That is why I oppose this resolution and will oppose all three resolutions today. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.”
“Unhealthy air leads to hospitalization, increased infant and fetal mortality, impaired development in children, and the higher likelihood of illness and cancer, among other detrimental health impacts. We know that air pollution has serious impacts on the most vulnerable among us, especially pregnant women and children, populations my Republican colleagues claim to care a lot about. If you want women to have more children but can't muster the courage to ensure pregnant women and children have safe air to breathe, what are you talking about? The bottom line is, we have to do something about the air pollution in this country. If some States like California and mine want to have more strict standards, they should be allowed to do so because they have more air pollution problems. It is that simple.”
“Other States do have the flexibility to voluntarily adopt California standards in whole or in part, modify the standards to their specific needs, or just not adopt the standards entirely. As I have mentioned, most of the speakers on the Republican side, their States haven't adopted the standards at all. If your State doesn't want to [[Page H1755]] follow California, you don't have to. Each State is allowed to decide what works best for them, but today's resolution threatens that choice and is basically an affront to States' rights. Now, just last week, the American Lung Association issued its annual ``State of the Air'' report, which shows that nearly half of all Americans breathe unhealthy levels of air pollution.”