Jenny's Law

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the en bloc amendment, but in particular in support of my amendment in that amendment, number 30.

Under current American law, veterans are entitled to certain emoluments when they pass. These include burial in a veterans cemetery or in one of our national cemeteries or in a State cemetery supported by veterans' funds, a flag to drape the coffin, a military honor guard, and a certificate from the President.

In 1997, however, following the bombing in Oklahoma City, this Congress recognized that those benefits were still accorded to veterans who had committed even capital offenses, and they recognized that Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber, would have been entitled under current law to be buried with all of those honors.

So this Congress, in good judgment, decided to revoke those emoluments, those honorary benefits from veterans who had been convicted of the violent crime of murder. And, indeed, we revoked it for all capital offenses. In 1997, we expanded that and said it would be applicable to anybody convicted of a capital offense, whether they were sentenced to death or not, but we left a gaping hole in the law.

My amendment simply seeks to fill that hole. It's a gaping hole which says that if you have been convicted of the violent rape of a woman, you may still receive all of those honorary emoluments, you may still be buried in a veterans cemetery with an American flag, with a certificate from the President, and with a military honor guard. That dishonors all of our Nation's veterans who are indeed buried in those cemeteries as appreciation for their great service to this country.

I believe, and I believe that this body recognizes that rape is one of the most violent of all crimes. It's not committed in the heat of passion as murder sometimes is. It is indeed a plotted, carried-out crime, a crime of immense violence.

This issue came to my attention when Jenny Bush, a recent college graduate, went home on Halloween evening from her job, entered her home, and was accosted there by a man who had entered during the day through a first-story window. He taped her with duct tape, held her at knifepoint, and violently raped her. Fortunately, her rapist was caught, and in the course of the proceedings it was determined that he was a serial rapist. He had indeed raped 10 other women, including a 9- year-old girl. And yet under the law in America, he was entitled, upon his death, to receive all of the military honors we give to those who have not committed such heinous crimes. That is an injustice, and it is an injustice that this amendment corrects.

This amendment was brought to me by Jenny Bush's father following the incident where the rapist, the serial rapist who raped this young lady committed suicide on the morning of his sentencing and then was buried with all of those military honors.

I don't think that we should say that our veterans cemeteries are open to the burial and to utilization by sex offenders who have committed violent rape against America's women. This has been a 3-year struggle where we have sought to amend the law.

I want to thank the Rules Committee for making this amendment in order. I want to thank Steve Bush and his daughter Jenny for their courage in raising this issue. I want to thank Ann Ream, who is with the Voices and Faces Project; Stephanie Hanson and Joanne Archambault with End Violence Against Women International for their work in trying to help pass this legislation. It seems to me that it is well time for us to correct the injustice which exists in our law on this issue. I commend the committee for making it possible for us to correct this.

I want to make it clear that this amendment only takes away those honorary emoluments. It does not financially punish the family of the perpetrator of these crimes. It simply says that we are not going to give these special honors to someone convicted of such a heinous crime as rape.

I want to thank the chairman of the committee and the ranking member of the committee. I believe this is something that will in fact honor this Congress by recognizing we do not, as a Nation, tolerate violent crimes against women. Our Uniform Military Code of Justice indeed already provides that rape is in fact a capital crime. So this brings our code in line with the current provision of the law.

The FBI ranks rape second only to murder. And as I have already indicated, I believe you can make the argument that rape is indeed a more heinous crime than murder because it is always carried out with forethought and planning and perpetrated often with great violence, as it was against Jenny Bush.

This legislation mirrors a bill which I have introduced in the Congress for the last 3 years called Jenny's Law, named after Jenny Bush. It has been officially endorsed by the RAINN Network, which is the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network, and has also been endorsed by the Military Order of the Purple Heart.

I will insert a letter from the Military Order of the Purple Heart in support of this amendment for the Record at this point.

Military Order of the

Purple Heart,

Springfield, VA, March 1, 2010.

Hon. John Shadegg,

Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Shadegg: I am writing to inform you that the

Military Order of the Purple Heart (MOPH) is in total support

of H. R. 731 ``Jenny's Law.''

MOPH shares your view that regardless of the service to

America, if following that service, those individuals who are

convicted of committing certain sex crimes should not receive

certain burial benefits and funeral honors. These individuals

should not be eligible for burial in National cemeteries

administered by the Department of Veterans' Affairs,

Arlington National Cemetery and certain State Veterans'

Cemeteries.

While these individuals may have served honorably in the

Armed Forces, their crimes following that service are so

onerous that the crimes, in our opinion, negate that service.

Respectfully,

James M. Sims,

National Commander.

Let me simply conclude that I encourage my colleagues to support the en bloc amendment.

I yield to the ranking member.

Reclaiming my time, let me just briefly say I have spent a great deal of my life advocating for the victims of crime. It seems to me this is an outrage that exists in current law. The victims of crime should not be revictimized. In this case, American law does revictimize those victims of rape under these circumstances. I think it is high time that we correct it.

I thank, again, the chairwoman of the Rules Committee and the chairman and ranking member of the Armed Services Committee for making the correction of this injustice possible.

Mr. Chair, the Courtney/Petri/Matsui amendment would transfer the successful Troops to Teachers Program back to the Department of Defense and make important changes to the program to ensure it will continue to provide opportunities for veterans to transition into second careers as educators.

I have been a supporter of the Troops to Teachers program since its authorization in the 1994 Defense Authorization Act, and I am proud of its success in placing over 12,000 veterans in our Nation's classrooms. Troops to Teachers is a unique program that provides veterans with a $5,000 stipend to help cover the costs of obtaining a teaching certification in exchange for 3 years service in an eligible school. An additional bonus of $5,000 is available for teaching in a ``high need school.''

This structure has proven very effective in transitioning qualified retiring military personnel into second careers in teaching. Indeed, Troops participants fill several critical needs among educators: 80 percent are male, over one-third are ethnic minorities, and a majority bring an expertise in science and math to the classroom. Furthermore, these troops also bring valuable life experience and character traits that are uncommon in our Nation's classrooms.

However, the success of this program is in jeopardy without the needed changes that are included in the Courtney/Petri/Matsui amendment. When the program was transferred to the Education Department, a simple drafting error in the 2002 No Child Left Behind Act resulted in an Education Department ruling restricting the number of school districts in which veterans can fulfill their teaching requirement. Since the implementation of this ruling in September 2005, retiring military have found the number of schools at which they would be eligible to teach drastically reduced.

The Department's new interpretation locks out schools in many rural areas and small communities. This is a shame, especially given the success of this program and its ability to meet some of our Nation's greatest teaching needs. In my own State of Wisconsin, only 11 out of 426 school districts qualify for participants to fulfill their teaching requirements. A 2006 Government Accountability Report, GAO, of the program found that the 2005 ruling had reduced interest and participation in the program, as schools in regions where troops lived were no longer considered eligible.

Our amendment would correct this ruling and ensure that veterans participating in the Troops to Teachers program receive a $5,000 stipend for teaching 3 years in any school that is in a district receiving Title 1 funds. This would result in a 49 percent increase in the number of schools eligible under the program. The amendment does not change the criteria for the additional $5,000 bonus, maintaining the incentive for troops to teach in the highest need schools.

Let me be clear, as the language of H.R. 3943 would provide, it is the intent of this amendment to strike ``high need'' from the stipend participation language in the Troops to Teachers statute. There was a late night drafting error that mistakenly did not delete the term ``high need'' as was contemplated and is consistent with the language in H.R. 3943. So as this provision is finalized in conference, it is important that this technical change be made to implement the original intent of the amendment.

The amendment also makes the Troops to Teachers Program more accessible by reducing the length of service requirements for active military. The make-up of our military has drastically changed since this program was first authorized 16 years ago. Many of our young men and women returning from service in Iraq and Afghanistan who would like to pursue teaching careers are currently ineligible for the program.

Third, to ensure continued success of the program the amendment creates an advisory board charged with improving awareness, increasing participation and ensuring the program meets the needs of schools and veterans.

Earlier this year, Representatives Courtney, Matsui and I introduced H.R. 3943, the Post 9/11 Troops to Teachers Enhancement Act, that contains these needed improvements to the program. This bill has 169 bipartisan cosponsors and the support of both military and educational organizations. These include: the American Legion, National Education Association, Association of the United States Army, Association of the United States Navy, Military Order of the Purple Heart, National Association of the State Boards of Education and many more.

Finally, our amendment transfers the Troops to Teachers Program back to the Department of Defense. Currently, the program is operated by the Defense Activity for Non-Traditional Education Support, DANTES. The Department of Education simply transfers funds to DANTES. Both the Department of Defense and the Department of Education support this transfer, which is reflected in the Administration's Fiscal Year 2011 budget request.

I want to thank Representative Courtney and Representative Matsui for their work on this amendment, as well as both the Armed Services and Education and Labor Committees for their assistance. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 1404, I offer amendments en bloc No. 8.

Mr. Chairman, I urge the committee to adopt the amendments en bloc, all of which have been examined by both the majority and the minority.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Boswell).

(Mr. BOSWELL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my friend the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to my colleague, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly).

I yield 2 minutes to my friend the gentleman from California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren).

That is correct. The amendment is simply asking for a plan to speed up the process, as appropriate. The sponsor of the amendment believes, as do I, that all appropriate security and background checks must be carried out in the right way to best protect our national security.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my friend the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Titus).

Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 1404, I offer amendments en bloc No. 9, including modifications to amendment No. 32.

Mr. Chairman, I urge the committee to adopt the amendments en bloc, all of which have been examined by both the majority and the minority.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my friend, the gentlelady from California (Ms. Matsui).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my friend, a member of the Armed Services Committee, the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney).

I might make a comment about the gentleman from Missouri. It was our fellow Missourian, Harry Truman, upon awarding a Medal of Honor to a World War II marine, said he would rather have that than be President. And it is quite an honor, and it's a good thing that you do.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my friend, the gentlelady from Colorado (Ms. Markey).

I yield 2 minutes to my colleague, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Klein).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my friend, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt).

Mr. Chairman, I wish to pay special tribute to the ranking member, Buck McKeon, a gentleman of the first order who has not only continued the bipartisan attitude and bipartisan work in our committee, but has made it work very, very well. We all owe him a debt of gratitude, and I want to say a special word of thanks to him for his excellent work and cooperation in making our committee so bipartisan in nature.

A special thanks also to the fantastic staff that we have. We Members take credit for all of the good work that they do. So often they go as unsung heroes, but they really make this committee work so well and so solidly; and to each one of them, who are professionals, I express deep thanks and gratitude.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I continue to reserve.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition, but I do not oppose the amendment.

I do not oppose the amendment; in fact, I support the amendment, and I thank the gentleman for taking care of this problem.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition; however, I do not oppose the amendment.

I will support the amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment; however, I don't intend to oppose the amendment.

At this time I would like to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Shadegg).

I want to thank the gentleman for bringing this amendment. This is something I was totally unaware of. I appreciate his work. This is a great addition to the bill. I support it wholeheartedly.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer).

Mr. Chairman, I guess this is the end of our debate. This is the last of the amendments.

I want to thank the chairman for the good work that he's done on this bill. I want to thank all of the staff. Everybody has worked very hard. The subcommittee chairs, ranking members, for all of the work that they've done to get us to this point.

I'm sorry that Democratic leadership didn't give us more time to debate Don't Ask, Don't Tell so I had to spend a lot of time talking about it at other times. In fact the time they gave us for the debate was less time than we had to vote on it. Ten minutes to debate, 15 minutes to vote.

But I announced with my opening statement that if that amendment passed, the Don't Ask, Don't Tell amendment passed, that I would reluctantly have to vote against the bill. It will be the first time in my 18 years here that I will vote against the defense reauthorization bill. And I do that with a very heavy heart.

But I, again, thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's been a joy, a pleasure, working with you, and I appreciate your integrity and the leadership that you provide to the committee.

With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the en bloc amendments, of course.

When we did this in committee last week, I was called to the floor and I didn't get to talk about the little item I had in there to do with a study on breast cancer in women soldiers. It passed. I am proud of that, and I want to thank you for it. I want to thank the ranking member as well. But it occurs to me we need to talk about this just a little bit.

I stand before you as a person that a surgeon told me what I went through was Agent Orange, but we didn't do anything about it until way down the line.

I have a lady veteran in my office that went to a reunion after Iraq. In that small group, five of the women got breast cancer, and they had no connection to anything else in their lives.

I feel like that we can't just let this go. Fifteen percent of our force is women. It is going to be 20 percent in a short time. We have to do some things different. So I appreciate the fact that we have asked the Department of Defense to take a look at this and see if it is something they will study.

I don't want it to be another Agent Orange. I hope it won't. But I am very adamant about supporting the troops, you know that, you know my history, and I am not going to ever back off from that. We have to do all the things we have to do.

But the women of the United States Armed Forces deserve some special attention in this, and I think that we ought to give some serious thought as we go into the future, maybe the very near future, to give this consideration beyond what we have done.

My intuition tells me that this is important. What checking we have done, there seems to be a problem, and we ought to get to the bottom of it as fast as we can for the sake of these outstanding women that serve in our Armed Forces.

For one little reunion, to find out that five women soldiers are afflicted, is kind of a startling thing. It needs some attention, and I just would hope that as we go forth, in the time ahead, that we will make the effort to be sure that this is looked into, and we don't look back a few years from now, like we have on Agent Orange, and say oh, my, I wish we had known. It won't cost us that much to find out when we decide to do it, and I hope we decide to do it relatively soon.