[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 151 (Thursday, September 19, 2019)]
[House]
[Pages H7819-H7824]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   COMBAT CLIMATE CHANGE WITH AGGRESSIVE ACTION AND GLOBAL LEADERSHIP

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Tlaib). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 3, 2019, the gentleman from California (Mr. Levin) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. LEVIN of California. Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by 
saying that the issue of climate change is very personal to me. I have 
a 5- and a 7-year-old at home, and like any parent, there is a lot that 
I worry about for their future. One of the things I worry most about is 
the planet that we are going to leave behind for them and for their 
future children.
  The path we are on right now leads to a grim future for our planet. 
We have burned fossil fuels like coal and oil at unsustainable rates, 
releasing extraordinary amounts of greenhouse gas emissions into the 
air. We have destroyed forests and other carbon sinks around the world 
that previously absorbed some of those emissions.
  The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a collection of 1,300 
independent scientific experts from countries all over the world, 
concluded there is a more than 95 percent probability that human 
activities over the past 50 years have warmed our planet.
  As a result, the last 5 years were the hottest ever recorded, 
according to the Trump administration's own weather and space agencies. 
Over the past century, average global temperatures have increased 
steadily. Sixteen of the last 17 years have been the warmest ever 
recorded by human observations.
  In my home State of California, the indicators of our rapidly 
changing climate are unmistakable. Our summers are hotter, our droughts 
are more severe, and our land is drier, creating fuel for year-round 
wildfires that have wiped out entire communities.
  According to the Trump administration's own report on climate change 
compiled by more than 300 experts across 13 Federal agencies, the 
impacts of climate change are already being felt in communities across 
the country and will become increasingly devastating over a short 
period of time.
  The President would be well served to read the report of his own 
agencies.
  We are having more frequent and extreme weather, like hurricanes and 
floods. We are experiencing sea-level rise and coastal erosion. Our 
national security agencies have warned us that unless we take 
aggressive action to combat climate change, we will see a deterioration 
in global stability caused by food and water insecurity, worsening 
public health, economic distress, and damage to military infrastructure 
as a result of sea-level rise and more extreme storms.
  Climate change is a defining issue of our time. If we don't take bold 
action to address this crisis now, our children and grandchildren will 
suffer the worst consequences.
  Unfortunately, this President and many in the Trump administration 
are content with inaction or worse. In fact, some refuse to admit 
climate change is real, instead pushing policies that would exacerbate 
the problem, catering to the fossil fuel industry and corporate 
polluters at the expense of our air, land, and water.
  While we should be taking aggressive action to combat climate change 
and pushing countries around the world to do the same, the White House 
gladly surrenders our standing as a global leader.
  My colleagues and I are here to say that we will lead. We will 
continue to fight for action. My colleagues that you will hear from, 
they are leading right now.
  Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Hill), 
my friend from California's 25th District.
  Ms. HILL of California. Madam Speaker, I am both a millennial and one 
of the youngest Members of Congress. I joined Congress at a moment when 
communities from California to the Bahamas are enduring the effects of 
climate change. In my own community, we are experiencing lengthening 
fire seasons and longer droughts.
  As the climate crisis grows, those of us who have refused money from 
Big Oil and who will be the ones who have to live with the effects of 
climate change have to take it upon ourselves to fight for our 
generation and the generations to come.
  Tomorrow, young people across the world will begin a week of climate 
action with the Global Climate Strike. We may not have made this mess, 
but we will fight to clean it up.
  That is why I sent a letter to Donald Trump, along with 110 of my 
fellow Members of Congress, to call for a renegotiated NAFTA deal that 
meaningfully addresses the climate crisis. From moderates to 
progressives, we are coming together to call for binding climate 
standards and a recommitment to the Paris climate agreement in the 
updated NAFTA.
  So far, that is not what Trump has in mind. The current NAFTA 2.0 
deal that Trump negotiated with Mexico and Canada fails to mention 
climate change.
  We cannot afford to pass another trade deal that is on the wrong side 
of our historic fight to tackle climate change.
  With 76 percent of Americans now saying that climate change is a 
crisis or a major problem, it is common sense that our trade deals 
should support, not undermine, climate action. In fact, this is a 
longstanding demand, one that leading environmental organizations, 
labor-environment coalitions, climate economists, and Members of 
Congress have been elevating over the last 2 years of NAFTA talks.
  The fact of the matter is that the climate crisis threatens our 
communities and our future every single day. While we are fighting to 
tackle the crisis, we are seeing corporate polluters pad the pockets of 
too many of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to protect 
their bottom lines. I see colleagues in both Chambers of Congress who 
won't have to deal with the repercussions of their actions bargaining 
with my future and the future of generations to come.
  This cycle must end now. It is past time for rhetoric and empty 
promises. We need new policies that offer real solutions to the climate 
crisis. That doesn't include just H.R. 9, which, to be honest, has very 
little chance of being taken up in the Senate. It also has to include 
our trade policies.
  The reality is that this moment is too important to throw away. This 
is an unprecedented opportunity to put our money where our mouth is on 
climate. We should ensure that any renegotiated NAFTA prioritizes 
climate

[[Page H7820]]

by including binding climate standards and getting a guarantee from 
Trump himself that the United States will remain a member of the most 
universal and basic worldwide climate agreement for our health, for our 
safety, for our future, and for the people.
  Mr. LEVIN of California. Madam Speaker, I thank Representative Hill, 
and I very much appreciate her leadership.
  Over the next several days, the eyes of the world will turn to the 
climate crisis with the Youth Global Strike for Climate set to take 
place in over 150 countries just before the United Nations holds a 
Climate Action Summit in New York City.
  While millions of people across the globe call for action on climate 
change and world leaders come together to show how they will honor 
their commitment to the Paris Agreement, it is safe to say that the 
White House won't step up to lead, let alone take any meaningful 
action. Instead, the Trump administration is pulling us out of the 
Paris Agreement, which nearly 200 countries from Afghanistan to 
Zimbabwe and all in between have signed.
  Where President Obama created a leading role for the United States on 
the world stage, the Trump administration has retreated.
  The U.N. Secretary General has called on all leaders to come to the 
Climate Action Summit with concrete, realistic plans to enhance their 
nationally determined contributions by 2020, in line with reducing 
greenhouse gas emissions by 45 percent over the next decade and to net 
zero emissions by 2050.
  The United States has an important opportunity to show leadership and 
to push other countries to follow us, and that is how we should 
evaluate all of these measures, on the basis of followership. That 
requires that we lead.
  That is critically important, the work that we do. The amount of 
collective action that will be needed must start with leadership from 
the United States. That is the only way we are going to combat the 
climate crisis.
  I was very proud to help introduce, among other bills, the Climate 
Action Now Act, the first major climate change legislation that we had 
in the 116th Congress, in fact, that we have had for a number of years 
in the U.S. House of Representatives. The bill would prohibit the 
administration from withdrawing the United States from the Paris 
Agreement and would also call on the President to develop and make 
public a plan for how the Nation will meet the pollution reduction 
goals in the Paris Agreement.
  The bill isn't just about staying in Paris. It is about creating 
good-paying, green jobs right here in America. It is about public 
health. It is about protecting our air. It is about protecting our 
water. It is about defending our national security from the threats 
that climate change poses. It is about again leading in the world.
  That is how the United States should be leading. We should set the 
example.
  Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore), 
my friend.

                              {time}  1815

  Ms. MOORE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Levin) so much for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, 12 years, we are told that we have 12 years to limit 
the effects of climate change on our planet and ensure a better world 
for our children, our grandchildren, and future generations to come--12 
years.
  I mean, it really seems like a long time, but now scientists are 
saying that the actions we take in the next 18 months will determine 
our ability to meet our climate goals by 2030.
  In 18 months, we will experience two more winters and another summer, 
each bringing with them more extreme weather and more catastrophic 
natural disasters. The stakes are so high.
  Less predictable climates produce lower crop yields, drive up the 
costs of healthy food; meanwhile, extreme weather events and heat waves 
resulting from a changing climate may worsen a growing array of public 
health problems like waterborne diseases, asthma, mental illness, heart 
disease, stroke, and more.
  In Wisconsin, from where I hail, we still remember the deathly chill 
of the polar vortex this past winter, matched only in intensity by the 
summer's record-setting heat, heavy downpours, and flooding. Our storm 
in July produced severe enough damage that several counties across 
Wisconsin received Federal disaster relief funding.
  But do you know what, Madam Speaker? Disaster funding can help 
rebuild communities, but it cannot prevent them from being torn apart 
by climate change.
  As we debate which urgent actions must be taken within the next 18 
months to prevent further decay of our climate, we must work not only 
to support a swift transition away from fossil fuels to renewable 
energy sources, but also to fortify our communities.
  The fact is climate change has a disparate impact on low-income and 
minority communities. Indeed, these communities are already 
disproportionately impacted by other environmental hazards, and we are 
just piling on.
  Air pollution from both stationary and mobile sources are a primary 
source of environmental health risks, particularly in urban areas. Low-
income, high-minority population communities, which unfortunately are 
highly segregated, tend to be closer to industrial sources of 
pollution, including chemical plants, steel mills, oil refineries, peak 
load power plants, and hazardous waste incinerators.
  One study found that Blacks, the poor, and people with low 
educational attainment were substantially more likely to live within 1 
mile of a polluting facility, and that within urban areas, racial 
disparities were particularly evident in the Midwest and the West.
  As it pertains to our warming climate, another study found that, as 
urban areas heat up, so-called urban heat islands, low-income and high-
minority communities will boast higher heat indexes during extreme heat 
events, thereby compounding the already dire and deadly impacts that 
heat waves have on urban populations. Or, just to put it bluntly, the 
urban poor in dozens of large U.S. cities will actually experience more 
heat than the wealthy simply by virtue of where they live.
  With climate change, extreme heat is expected to become more common 
and more severe for the poor and already vulnerable communities. This 
will likely result in increases in heat-related illnesses, including 
cardiovascular and respiratory complications, kidney disease, and can 
be especially harmful to outdoor workers, children, our elderly, and 
low-income households.
  It is also worth mentioning that these communities, which already 
suffer resource deficits, cannot simply relocate out of flood zones. 
They also face challenges adopting new clean energy technologies.
  Now, while this administration continues to fiddle when it comes to 
taking the threat of climate change seriously and exercising 
leadership, while they ignore the admonition of science that if we 
don't do something within the next 18 months we may not be able to 
reverse these impacts within 12 years, I will tell you something. In 
June, my city of Milwaukee announced a comprehensive action-based plan 
to meet the U.S.' commitment under the Paris climate accord, despite 
what this administration is doing. We are moving forth to create green 
infrastructure and to create jobs.
  In August, our Wisconsin Governor, Tony Evers, signed an executive 
order aimed at eliminating the use of carbon-based fuel in Wisconsin by 
2050. We also created a diverse task force comprised of city and county 
officials that will chart a path to reducing greenhouse gas emissions 
by 45 percent of 2015 levels by 2030 and eliminate them altogether by 
2050, a goal which I wholeheartedly support.
  But let's just keep this real, Madam Speaker. While actions by State 
and local officials are welcome and necessary, we know they can't do it 
alone. On such a vital issue, the Federal Government should not lead 
from behind. The Federal Government cannot be missing in action and 
absent from the table, and it will be absolutely critical for them to 
ensure that we protect and help the most vulnerable populations so that 
they have access to adequate healthcare, clean drinking water, healthy 
food, quality air, and affordable housing.

[[Page H7821]]

  But leading from behind is exactly what this administration is doing. 
Besides pulling out of the Paris climate accord without any plan or 
alternative for addressing climate change, this administration has 
moved to roll back the Obama era Clean Power Plan and other efforts to 
address greenhouse gas emissions.
  We must not only make sure that we recognize the disparate impacts of 
climate change as we act, but we must also bring our most at-risk 
citizens to the table and educate them and discuss the actions that we 
will take together to address climate change.
  We need to do right by our fellow human beings and by our beloved 
shared planet and protect ourselves and our planet against the threats 
we face today and in the future. Even if this administration wants to 
turn its back, this House must not. We must continue to 
pass legislation that will help us meaningfully address climate change.

  Twelve years from now? Eighteen months from now? How about right now?
  Mr. LEVIN of California. Madam Speaker, I thank Representative Moore 
for those powerful words.
  Madam Speaker, I also want to address something that has been in the 
news, and that is the President's announcement yesterday that he will 
revoke California's waiver under the Federal Clean Air Act to set its 
own auto emissions standards. This is something, as a native southern 
Californian, that is near and dear to my heart.
  So many southern Californians have had to endure poor air quality 
over the years, and this, honestly, is something that has never been 
partisan. Since the late 1960s, California has been able to set its own 
air quality standards, because the standards that we set when Ronald 
Reagan was Governor of California in the late 1960s exactly preceded 
those standards set by the Federal Government.
  Clean air is not a partisan issue. This is absolutely ridiculous that 
the administration would want to go after California once again in this 
manner.
  So another thing to refute are the claims made by the President about 
vehicle safety and cost--completely baseless. Fuel-efficient cars meet 
the same exact safety standards as any other passenger vehicle and have 
proven to be more cost-effective. The auto manufacturers want to 
accelerate the transition to more electric vehicles, more sustainable 
vehicles.
  Everybody wants California to be able to have its own standards, with 
two exceptions: President Trump and Big Oil. Those are the only two 
exceptions. So it is pretty clear to see whose direction the President 
is taking when it comes to this decision.
  We also need to acknowledge that his decision here flies in the face 
of established climate science. Transportation is the largest source of 
greenhouse gas emissions in our country. The science tells us that 
greenhouse gas emissions are driving climate change, so we should be 
doing everything we can to reduce those emissions from transportation.
  The Clean Air Act clearly gives California the authority to set its 
own emission standards, and this authority has been repeatedly 
confirmed by the courts, the Congress, and previous administrations, 
Republicans and Democrats alike.
  Again, this is not a partisan issue. Even the auto companies want to 
see this happen.
  So why are we still here? Why are we fighting over this ridiculous 
assumption by the President that he can roll back five decades of 
progress for cleaner air in California?
  We are not going to let it stand. I will do everything in my power as 
a Member of Congress, as I know my colleagues will, and California will 
prevail.
  Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Huffman), my friend and the Representative from California's Second 
District.
  Mr. HUFFMAN. Madam Speaker, from the Representative of the 
northernmost district on the coast of California, I really do want to 
thank my friend from southern California for yielding to me. San Diego 
and Orange Counties are so well-served by his intelligent, principled 
leadership, and especially on this issue, this existential crisis that 
we are trying to confront of global climate change. The gentleman's 
leadership on this issue has certainly been noted.
  Madam Speaker, our leader, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, did a very unusual 
thing in reaching out and choosing a freshman Member of Congress, and 
it is because of Mr. Levin's background and clarity on these issues 
that she put him on the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis, 
where I am proud to serve with him. So I thank the gentleman so much 
for that leadership.
  And, Madam Speaker, he is doing more than that. He is putting great 
bills into the hopper. He is leading this debate this evening. So we 
are well served with Mr. Levin's leadership in southern California.
  Now, one of the previous speakers mentioned that we are gathered here 
on the eve of this global climate strike tomorrow. Tens of thousands of 
students all over the United States, 800 different sites, are working 
in harmony with 156 other countries where young people are doing the 
same thing worldwide. This is a week of action.
  These are high school kids, and even younger in some cases. They 
understand what is at stake here. The part of their message that I 
think we really need to hear is that we don't have time.
  There is an extreme urgency to confront this crisis, and they 
understand that the longer we wait, the harder it is going to be to 
preserve a livable future for their generation. Of course, if we wait 
too long, it is game over.
  They are scared, and they ought to be scared. We all ought to be 
scared about the fact that we are running out of time to address this 
crisis.
  Yesterday, I had a chance to sit down with a few of these young 
leaders. I am super grateful that four of those that Chairman Grijalva 
and I met with for a couple of hours were from Sonoma County in my 
district. So I want to thank Olivia, Kate, Christian, and Jonah. They 
were from the National Children's Campaign and also Schools for Climate 
Action. They came all the way to Washington, D.C., to make sure that 
the country heard their story.
  That story, of course, involves the terrible firestorm of October 
2017 that the folks in the North Bay had to live through. These young 
people had their lives uprooted and impacted in profound ways, and it 
helped sharpen their climate activism. They brought that story to a 
very important, urgent conversation that Chairman Grijalva and I were 
part of yesterday.
  More and more people like them are living the very real impacts that 
climate change is having right now. This is not some abstract thing in 
the future. It is happening now, and it is going to get worse as we go 
forward, especially if we don't act.
  So this message of urgency, clearly the public understands it. 
Congressman Levin and I were just in the Cloakroom, and MSNBC showed a 
brand-new poll that shows that 65 percent, I believe, of the American 
people understand this is a crisis.
  It is not just an important issue. It is a crisis.

                              {time}  1830

  The public gets it. The rest of the world gets it. In fact, on 
Monday, the nations of the world will gather in New York to map out the 
next steps on climate action. They will be building on the Paris 
climate agreement. They will be working together to figure out how we 
can reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 45 percent over the next decade.
  But if the American people get it and all of these young people all 
over the world get it, it is fair to ask: Where is American leadership 
right now? Where is this administration right now? Unfortunately, Mr. 
Levin alluded to the worst of it: this fight over California's clean 
car authority. They are trying to take us backward in the wrong 
direction. We just don't have time for that if we are serious about 
this crisis.
  Mr. Levin talked about the fact that our authority under the Clean 
Air Act goes back to 1967. I think it was a Governor named Ronald 
Reagan, actually, who got us started on this critical authority. It has 
been so successful. California has used it to protect clean air over 50 
times.
  Madam Speaker, I would ask Congressman Levin if he knows how many of 
those times, the 50 times that we have used that Clean Air Act 
authority, how many of those were revoked?

[[Page H7822]]

Zero. It has never been revoked. It has always been upheld, and it has 
been wildly successful in helping California improve air quality, 
reduce smog, and improve public health. We have added jobs and the 
economy has continued to grow.
  We have been able to do all this in a way that helped stimulate the 
auto industry, to innovate, and to bring new and very desirable models 
of vehicles to market that wouldn't be there if it weren't for 
California's leadership on clean car standards, and, of course, more 
than a dozen other States that have followed suit and joined us as 
clean car States.
  What President Trump is trying to do is absolutely unprecedented in 
American history and it is legally dubious. He is wrong on the law and 
he is wrong on the policy. It is the most serious assault on State 
authority and on public health that you could imagine. And yet, with 
this administration, hey, it is just another day in the Trump White 
House, unfortunately.
  This House, of course, the people's House, gets it. We have already 
started to take action. We are working to block the Trump 
administration's worst climate rollbacks.
  Just last week, a bipartisan majority of this House voted to approve 
my bill to protect the Arctic refuge from this crazy ``drill 
everywhere'' mandate that they put into the Republican tax scam in 
2017. We also passed bills to protect the Pacific, Atlantic, and 
Florida Gulf Coasts from these plans to do more offshore drilling. 
These are important steps in the fight to confront the climate crisis.
  And, of course, there was H.R. 9, the Climate Action Now Act, which 
would block President Trump's attempt to take us out of the Paris 
climate agreement.
  Let's keep working together in the people's House. Let's keep working 
with this energized, motivated, incredibly passionate new generation of 
leaders that we are seeing all over the country and all over the world.
  Madam Speaker, I thank Congressman Levin for his leadership.
  Mr. LEVIN of California. Madam Speaker, I thank Congressman Huffman 
for his friendship, for his mentorship, and for all the work that he 
does. He is a true environmental champion. I am really, really grateful 
to call him a friend. We have got a lot of work to do.
  I think it is really important that, as we think about this issue, we 
begin to address some of the myths and the misconceptions that are out 
there. One of the biggest that I hear from my friends across the aisle 
is that we cannot combat climate change without destroying our economy, 
when exactly the opposite is true.
  If we invest in the clean energy jobs of the future, we will see 
incredible economic growth and we will protect the environment at the 
same time. Nowhere has that been more true in the United States than in 
our State of California, where I am proud to tell you that we have the 
most clean-energy jobs in the United States.
  If you look at this chart, there are over 500,000 jobs in the clean 
tech sector. I am proud to have come from the clean tech sector. I am 
proud to have started a trade association in Orange County, California, 
which historically has been seen as one of the most conservative places 
in the United States. We created a booming clean tech industry that is 
growing stronger than ever before. The same is true in San Diego 
County, where we have some of the leading clean energy companies in the 
United States. We can protect the environment and we can grow the clean 
tech economy at the same time.
  In California, it has never been a partisan issue. When we passed AB 
32 in 2006, Arnold Schwarzenegger was the Governor, Republican 
Governor. Then when we passed cap and trade, we had nine Republican 
legislators who helped get that passed in the California legislature.
  Governor Schwarzenegger and those Republican legislators at the time 
understood that if we made climate change a primary focus, if we 
reduced greenhouse gas emissions, that not only was it the right thing 
to do for our State and for the planet, but it was the right thing to 
do for our economy. That is exactly what has happened.
  My friend, Marshall Burke, is a researcher at Stanford University, my 
alma mater. He has studied the costs of action on climate change, but, 
more importantly, the costs of inaction. There is an inherent cost to 
doing nothing. My friends across the aisle always like to tell you 
about the cost of doing something. They will say bold and aggressive 
measures will cost too much. Well, Mr. Speaker, the costs of inaction 
are even greater.
  My friend, Marshall Burke, has said that if we don't take substantial 
action to mitigate the climate crisis, it will cost the U.S. economy 
$25 trillion to $35 trillion over the coming decades. That is with a T: 
$25 trillion to $35 trillion.
  The good news is that we can take the steps we need to in order to 
act. We can combat the climate crisis, and we can create those clean 
energy jobs.
  I have introduced bipartisan legislation to reduce our dependence on 
fossil fuels by promoting development of renewable energy on public 
lands.
  We can expand those technologies that grow our economy and protect 
the environment by extending important tax credits like the solar 
investment tax credit, which drives job creation, reduces greenhouse 
gas emissions, and helps level the playing field for clean energy. And 
we need it for things like battery storage, as well.
  I have introduced legislation that presents an ambitious plan for 
transitioning the United States to 100 percent zero-emission vehicles, 
which will also have an enormous health benefit to the United States of 
America.
  According to a 2016 report issued by the American Lung Association, 
transitioning to zero-emission vehicles would deliver $33 billion in 
total health and climate savings by 2050. The 90 percent reduction in 
the pollution that causes smog and soot would translate to 195,000 
fewer lost work days, 96,000 fewer asthma attacks, and 2,200 fewer 
premature deaths.
  And I have introduced legislation, as well, to expand electric 
vehicle charging on public lands across the United States and convert 
National Park Service and United States Forest Service fleets to zero-
emission vehicles.
  This commitment will also help the United States lead the world in 
developing and manufacturing innovative zero-emission vehicle 
technology.
  Since California first instituted a zero-emission vehicle requirement 
in 1990, the overall economy has flourished, cutting-edge companies 
like Tesla have generated billions of dollars in economic activity for 
our State, and leading automotive companies across the country and the 
world have done everything they can to invest in the cleaner technology 
of the future zero-emission vehicles.
  Alternatively, if we fail to act, if American car companies don't 
lead, and if we don't have a supportive Federal Government helping them 
to lead the way in these zero-emission vehicles of the future, we will 
allow other countries to take the lead. China, India, and nations in 
Europe will reap the economic rewards that should be staying right here 
in the United States of America. We will find ourselves purchasing 
foreign vehicles that should have been made right here in the USA.
  Many of my colleagues are doing great work. They have introduced or 
passed legislation that addresses the climate crisis in many different 
ways and promotes the clean energy jobs of the future. You just heard 
from a few of them.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to wrap up here by pointing out one more key 
fact. The American people overwhelmingly support aggressive action to 
combat climate change.
  Public opinion polling shows that the majority of Americans say that 
it must be addressed, and it has got to be addressed now. The majority 
of Americans overwhelmingly believe this is a crisis, and they are 
right to believe that.
  Unfortunately, our President right now calls climate change a hoax. 
He says that it was brought on by China to undermine American economic 
competitiveness. He is not willing to listen to the science. He should 
listen to the scientists from his own agencies. He should just take the 
half hour necessary to even read the executive summary from his own 
scientists' report. That is all I would ask.
  He should think about climate change when he makes appointments. 
Unfortunately, he has been appointing climate science deniers like 
William

[[Page H7823]]

Happer, a gentleman who once said that if the plants could vote, they 
would vote for coal. He said that more CO2 in the atmosphere 
is a good thing. This is a person advising the President of the United 
States on climate science.
  And it is not that the administration is too close to the oil and 
coal industry, it is that they are the oil and coal industry. It is 
literally a revolving door between 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, those coal 
companies, and those oil companies. The American people demand better 
than that.
  This complete rejection of established science is dangerous, and it 
is irresponsible.
  It is dangerous and irresponsible for the White House to pressure the 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA, into 
supporting the President's false claims about Hurricane Dorian. You 
don't see any Sharpies on this chart.
  It is dangerous and it is irresponsible that the White House refuses 
to accept climate science and act on it. It is dangerous. It is 
irresponsible. We must embrace science. We must embrace facts.
  As I said in the beginning of this, this is about our children and 
our grandchildren. I am thinking today about my own two children: my 
daughter, Elizabeth, who is 5, and my son, Jonathan, who is 7. Maybe my 
wonderful wife, Chrissy, will cue up C-SPAN and play this for them.
  My son, who is 7, just started second grade. We have 12 years. By the 
time my son is ready to graduate high school, according to the best 
science, we better have gotten this crisis figured out or we are going 
to have irreparable damage as a result. It is on us.
  When I am done with my service in the House of Representatives, which 
I hope comes many years from now, I want to be able to look back, as I 
know so many of my colleagues do, and know that we gave it everything 
we had to try to address what we believe is the most pressing issue 
facing the United States of America and the world.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib).


                      Tribute to Michael Preadmore

  Ms. TLAIB. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in tribute to the city of 
Melvindale and the city of Dearborn Fire Department Captain Michael 
Preadmore, who, today, retires after 23 years of service. He knows 
safety doesn't take a day off, so he maintained a perfect attendance 
record since becoming a firefighter in 1996. He has also received such 
awards as the Fire Chief Life Saving Award and the department Medal of 
Valor Award for his bravery in the line of duty.

  Please join me in saluting Captain Preadmore in wishing him a happy 
retirement.


                    Honoring General Motors Workers

  Ms. TLAIB. Mr. Speaker, today, I stand with the United Automobile 
Workers by honoring General Motors workers on day 4 of their strike.
  This is Grayson Riley Poland, a child of a General Motors worker. She 
is only 5 years old. She periodically gets treatment for her cerebral 
palsy that keeps her legs from scissoring due to her muscles tightening 
up. Her next treatment, Mr. Speaker, is on October 1. Her father is on 
strike right now and worried about whether or not he has healthcare 
coverage anymore.
  Mr. Speaker, the General Motors CEO makes $22 million, 281 times the 
median income of their workers. Yet, workers are being asked to pay 
more for healthcare.
  General Motors workers gave up so much to keep the company afloat. 
They didn't abandon GM during their toughest time, but now they are 
asking for fair wages and coverage for their healthcare.
  Mr. Speaker, I am urging my colleagues and the country to join me in 
solidarity with them today.

                              {time}  1845

  Mr. LEVIN of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from 
Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky), my friend.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for leading this 
discussion about climate. What I really love about so many of our 
freshman Members, like Congressman Levin, is that they say how urgent 
the need is right now to act, a sense of urgency.
  I am on the Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change, and we 
had a hearing yesterday. We had nice people testifying, but we still 
heard, particularly from our Republican colleagues, that it is a 
decision between jobs and a clean environment. Are you kidding me?
  We have known about this crisis, which it is, for decades. We knew 
about it even in the Johnson administration, long ago.
  We have had this debate about jobs and environment as if you have to 
pick one or the other. As Representative Levin went over and over, 
about how good for the economy, how good for workers, how good the jobs 
are, we are now wasting time in addressing this problem. It was really 
frustrating to me that we continue to go over this.
  In the meantime, the forests are burning in California. The fields 
are flooding in Illinois, where I am from. The hurricanes are 
destroying islands, Florida, and all up and down the coast--except for 
Alabama, not really.
  It is really so important that we are listening to the children. 
Yesterday, we had this amazing young woman, Greta Thunberg, who is from 
Sweden. She is 16 years old, but she is also a veteran fighting 
worldwide, an international figure calling for us to act.
  This is one of the things that she said yesterday when she was here 
in Washington. This is Greta, now 16 years old, who said: ``Please, 
save your praise. We don't want it. Don't invite us here to just tell 
us how inspiring we are without actually doing anything about it, 
because it doesn't lead to anything.''
  Greta is fierce, but she is not the only one. I am hoping that I am 
going to be able to get home in time to my district to join my grandson 
outside of his school tomorrow afternoon at one of the demonstrations, 
the many demonstrations that are going to be taking place across the 
country on climate where young people are telling us: We can't wait. 
This is our century. This is our time. We are going to take the lead.
  I think it is our job now to follow them. There is a court suit right 
now where 21 young people have sued the Government of the United States 
of America for violating their constitutional rights by ignoring this 
issue of climate and the crisis that we are creating.
  Our species is in danger. Every species living on Earth today is in 
danger. This is truly a matter of life and death.
  We already are seeing climate refugees, people who can't live in 
places because they can't grow crops anymore. We are seeing the 
spreading of the Sahara desert. We are seeing the Amazon rainforest 
burning. Every fifth breath that every person takes on Earth is because 
of the oxygen that comes out of the rainforest in the Amazon.
  What are we doing? We are still debating this. We are still talking. 
We are having conversations about it and way too little action.
  I am really happy that, last week, we passed a bill, at least in the 
House, to stop offshore drilling in the Atlantic Ocean, in the Pacific 
Ocean, and in the Gulf. I am really happy that we are trying to reverse 
the drilling in ANWR up in Alaska.
  But we have to do big things. We have to take action together with 
countries around the world.
  We have to listen to the children. They are begging us. They are 
acting, and they are speaking out. All we really need to do is follow.
  Again, I thank Representative Levin and so many of the freshmen who 
have come here to the Congress and said: This is urgent. We can't wait 
anymore. We can't dawdle anymore. We must act.
  I really appreciate the opportunity to come down here today.
  Mr. LEVIN of California. Madam Speaker, I thank Representative 
Schakowsky for coming.
  It is a great honor to sit on the new Select Committee on the Climate 
Crisis under the chair, Kathy Castor from Florida. I serve with many 
other great Members, and we have an honest dialogue about the action 
that we are going to need to take to combat this crisis.
  Of course, I thank our great Speaker Nancy Pelosi for creating that 
select committee as part of the 116th Congress.
  Governor Jay Inslee said: ``We're the first generation to feel the 
sting of climate change, and we're the last who can do something about 
it.''
  I couldn't agree more with Representative Schakowsky. We have to

[[Page H7824]]

listen to the children, our own children and the children we see here 
in Washington. When we go back home to our districts, we have to listen 
to those voices. We have to make those changes. They are counting on 
us.
  In these walls, right here, they are counting on the 435 people who 
are so honored to serve as United States Representatives to get this 
right for future generations.
  I am honored to be one of those Members trying to fight the good 
fight. We have so much work to do.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________