Removing the deadline for the ratification of the equal rights amendment.

Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 233 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. Fischbach), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Madam Speaker, today, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 233, providing for consideration of H.R. 1620 under a structured rule. The rule self- executes a manager's amendment by Chairman Nadler, makes in order 41 amendments, and provides en bloc authority to Chairman Nadler.

The rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 6, H.R. 1603, and H.J. Res. 17, under closed rules.

The rule provides 1 hour of debate each, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their designees for H.R. 1620, H.R. 6, H.R. 1603, and H.J. Res. 17.

The rule provides for one motion to recommit on each bill. The rule also self-executes a manager's amendment by Chairman Nadler for H.R. 1603.

The rule provides for consideration of H.R. 1868 under a closed rule. It also provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on the Budget or their designees.

Finally, the rule provides that H.R. 232 is hereby adopted and extends the deadline for the committee funding resolution until April 22, 2021.

Madam Speaker, we are here today to protect the vulnerable among us, to strengthen the foundation of our democracy, and ensure humane working conditions for the people who feed America.

We are here to live up to our best ideals as a Nation by creating protections against some of the worst threats that a person can face, threats like domestic violence.

In the minute that I have been talking, 20 people in this country have been abused by their partner. By the time we are done tonight, that number will be over a thousand.

As someone who worked as a 911 dispatcher for nearly 18 years, as someone who has been on the other end of the line from domestic violence, as someone who has heard gunshots silence a young girl's screams for help, I am telling you, the thousand people victimized while we are here tonight need and deserve our help.

That is exactly what the Violence Against Women Act does. It makes vital new investments in prevention. It strengthens essential protections for the most vulnerable among us, including immigrant, LGBTQ, and Native American women, and it improves services for victims, prevents abusers and stalkers from getting firearms, and much, much more.

VAWA is one of many vital protections we will discuss today, but it isn't the only one.

Madam Speaker, this September will mark 100 years since an amendment was first proposed for our Constitution to guarantee women equal rights with men. It finally passed Congress in 1972.

This simple amendment, which reads in part, ``Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged,'' is being held up on a technicality. States took so long to sign on that the arbitrary deadline that was set by Congress, this body, has passed, even as 38 States have ratified the amendment.

Congress created this problem, and Congress must fix it. H.J. Res. 79 will remove the deadline for ratification and finally allow us to ensure women are treated as equals to men in our democracy.

The need for equal rights under the law is not debatable. Too often, we have seen the results of unfair and unequal policies for women. This bill will help end those injustices.

As we strive to make our Nation a more perfect union, we need to consider how we treat immigrants, too. Immigrants are the invisible backbone of this country. They are our family members, our neighbors, our frontline workers, woven into every aspect of the American fabric.

Dreamers grew up in our communities. They pledge allegiance to our flag. They played in our fields, prayed in our churches, and worked in our stores. They want to contribute to the only Nation that they have ever called home.

The American Dream and Promise Act helps them do that. It creates a pathway to citizenship for our Dreamers. And it updates our temporary protected status and deferred enforced departure laws to prevent devastating deportations.

The fact is, too often the contributions of aspiring Americans are left out of our dialogue about immigrants. But this pandemic has put a spotlight on just how vital they are.

Without immigrants working our fields, your last meal would have looked much different. Without them enduring record-setting temperatures, facing threats of wildfires, and doing it all without proper PPE, the price you pay to feed your family would go way up.

Deaths among Latino farmworkers increased by 60 percent during the pandemic. They are sacrificing their lives to feed us. The question is: What are we willing to do in return?

The Farm Workforce Modernization Act creates a pathway to legal status for more than a million farmworkers and addresses our future labor needs by modernizing our outdated system for temporary workers. This bill will give farmworkers the dignity and recognition they deserve, while giving our farmers the stability they need to run their businesses.

Now, before I move on to another topic, I want to say something about my personal immigration story. Just like many other Dreamers, I was sent here by my parents to escape the violence my family faced in Guatemala. I know exactly what it is like to decide between the violence and poverty of staying or the dangers and unknowns of trying to immigrate here.

What I know is that we cannot legislate a solution for immigration when we ignore the factors that drive it. Strongmen, narco-traffickers, have taken hold in Central America, and the rule of law is under assault.

The organizations that once fought to hold corrupt actors accountable have been dismantled, and their former employees are now being pursued by those very same corrupt actors. Attorneys General, unfortunately, are asylum seekers in our own country.

We don't just have a responsibility to help stabilize the region; it is imperative if we are ever to stop the rush of people trying to come here.

I will close by saying every policy I describe today is a policy I am truly proud of. Just like the American Rescue Plan did last week, Democrats are making clear, with our actions, exactly what our priorities are.

It doesn't matter how good our agenda is if we can't deliver on the bills we pass. The one thing standing in our way right now is an inside-the-beltway term called ``PAYGO.'' If we don't address it now, it will trigger massive cuts. It goes without saying that this would be completely unacceptable at a time when Americans are in urgent need of more support, not less.

Republicans passed legislation in 2017 to avoid PAYGO, in order to provide tax cuts for the filthy rich, so they clearly understand the need to avoid draconian cuts. I expect them to join us in preventing them.

H.R. 1868, the final bill we are here to discuss today, will do exactly that. I look forward to a fruitful debate on these bills.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas.

Madam Speaker, let the Record show that Oklahoma's Fourth District has 146,168 eligible Medicare beneficiaries that will be harmed if H.R. 1868 does not pass.

Let the Record show that Minnesota's Seventh District has 152,451 eligible Medicare beneficiaries that will also be harmed if H.R. 1868 does not pass.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record an October 18, 2019, USA Today article entitled, ``1 in 3 American Indian and Alaska Native women will be raped, but survivors rarely find justice on tribal lands.''

[From USA TODAY, Oct. 18, 2019]

1 in 3 American Indian and Alaska Native Women Will Be Raped, But

Survivors Rarely Find Justice on Tribal Lands

(By Maren Machles, Carrie Cochran, Angela M. Hill and Suzette Brewer)

Twila Szymanski lowered the scope on her rifle, took aim

and hit a target in the distance. The shooting range is where

she and her husband go to relax and forget the things they

worry about, she said.

Some experiences are hard to shake.

``To trust somebody you know after a sexual assault happens

. . . it has been so difficult to work through that,''

Szymanski said.

Szymanski, 40, has lived on the Fort Peck Reservation in

northeast Montana since she was born and is an enrolled

member of the Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux tribes. She

said she's been assaulted three times.

``I was a victim when I was 13, a victim when I was 14 and

a victim when I was 34,'' she said.

Twila Szymanski is a lifelong resident of the Fort Peck

Reservation. ``Native women have told me that what you do

when you raise a daughter in this environment is you prepare

her for what to do when she's raped--not if, but when,'' said

Sarah Deer, University of Kansas professor and author of

``The Beginning and End of Rape: Confronting Sexual Violence

in Native America.''

More than half of American Indian and Alaska Native women

will experience sexual violence in their lifetimes, according

to the Department of Justice.

``You talk to Native women who have lived their whole lives

on a reservation, and they say, `I can't think of anyone, any

woman that I know who hasn't been victimized in this way,' ''

said Deer, a citizen of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation of

Oklahoma.

National data on sex crimes in tribal communities is

scarce, so Newsy spent 18 months focused on two reservations:

the Fort Peck Reservation in Montana and the Fort Berthold

Reservation in North Dakota. After analyzing exclusively

obtained documents and conducting dozens of interviews, a

stark picture emerged.

Sexual assault investigations can fall through the cracks

when tribes and the federal government fail to work together.

Even for those few cases that end in a conviction in tribal

court, federal law prevents most courts from sentencing

perpetrators to more than a year.

Survivors who come forward to report assaults often find

themselves trapped in small communities with their

perpetrators, and several said the broken legal system

contributed to their trauma.

The federal government has a unique political and legal

relationship with the 573 federally recognized tribes. The

tribes are sovereign and have jurisdiction over their

citizens and land, but the federal government has a treaty

obligation to help protect the lives of tribal members. This

legal doctrine, called the ``trust responsibility,'' goes

back to the treaties the United States signed with tribal

nations in the 18th and 19th centuries.

The array of Supreme Court decisions and federal laws that

followed resulted in a complicated legal arrangement among

federal, state and tribal jurisdictions, making it difficult

for survivors of sexual assault to find justice.

Sarah Deer is author of ``The Beginning and End of Rape:

Confronting Sexual Violence in Native America.'' ``A lot of

times, when I try to explain it, people don't even believe me

because it's so bizarre,'' Deer said. ``And the reason it's

bizarre is because there's been this patchwork of laws that

don't talk to each other over the last century.''

Only one year

The tribal courthouse on the Fort Peck reservation is a

small brick building. The front desk is lined with pamphlets

about dating violence and sexual assault.

``The trauma that has developed over the generations . . .

some of the assaults are generational, and they're within the

same home,'' said Chief Judge Stacie Smith, a member of the

Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux tribes. ``Pretend it wasn't

there, and maybe it'll go away, you know, the next

generation, it won't happen again. But it continues.''

Smith wants to break the cycle, but tribal courts face

major restrictions, including a one-year limit on sentences

regardless of the crime and almost no jurisdiction over non-

Indians.

Stacie Smith is chief judge of the Fort Peck Tribal Court.

``When you think about rape and you think about somebody who

is a perpetrator of that kind of crime, and you think, `What

do they deserve?' one year doesn't usually sound like the

right answer,'' Deer said.

In 2010, the sentencing cap was expanded to three years per

offense through the Tribal Law and Order Act as long as the

tribes met certain requirements. Only 16 tribes have

implemented the three-year sentencing enhancement.

Fort Peck is one of them.

When the law took effect, there were no attorneys, no one

with a law degree in the court system.

Smith decided to leave her young daughters to attend law

school hundreds of miles away. This would help the tribal

court meet the federal requirements and give it more

authority.

The tribal court was able to hand out three-year sentences

starting in late 2012. From 2013-2018, there were three

sexual assault convictions, but none of them had enhanced

sentences. The longest sentence was still one year.

``We use the enhanced sentencing sparingly because we want

it to have meaning,'' said Scott Seifert, a member of the

Comanche Nation of Oklahoma and Fort Peck's lead tribal

prosecutor.

Going federal

Tribal court is not the only option for those seeking

justice for sexual assault. In most cases, the FBI, Bureau of

lndian Affairs (BIA) and U.S. attorneys' offices are

federally mandated to work with the tribes to investigate and

prosecute ``major crimes,'' which include sexual assault.

``So if you have a rape case or a child sex abuse case and

you do want to see that perpetrator put away, the best

possibility for you is that it will go federal,'' Deer said.

That responsibility falls to the U.S. attorneys' offices,

which have seen their funding and staffing in Indian

communities cut by more than 40% in the past seven years,

according to the Department of Justice.

Data Newsy obtained from the DOJ shows that the Montana

U.S. Attorney's Office declined 64% of cases of sexual

assault in the past four fiscal years.

Kurt Alme is the U.S. attorney for Montana. The U.S.

attorney for Montana, Kurt Alme, said a lot of cases are

declined because of weak or insufficient evidence, ``and it

is something that has to be worked on,'' he said.

According to the BIA, tribal courts received less than 5%

of the funding that was needed in 2016. Law enforcement

received 22% of what was needed, and jails received less than

50%.

Less than half of the law enforcement agencies that the

bureau funds and oversees are properly staffed, said Charles

Addington, director of the BIA Office of Justice Service and

a member of the Cherokee Nation.

In August 2018, Fort Peck tribal police had funding for 21

positions, but nine of them were vacant, said Ken Trottier,

criminal investigations supervisor for the Fort Peck Tribes

and a member of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa.

``We have a hiring pool that is literally nothing here on

the reservation, even though we open it up to off-reservation

people,'' he said. ``There's no houses for sale. No houses

for rent. Where's that person going to live?''

Constant turnover and understaffing can lead to an under

trained police department, Deer said.

``[The survivor is] waiting for help. They don't know if

help is coming. They don't know if the help is going to be

compassionate and trained,'' Deer said. ``The system is not

feeling like a safe, productive system to them anymore.''

Big money but little justice Three hours east of Fort Peck,

the Fort Berthold Reservation in North Dakota sits on the

Bakken oil basin and has an annual budget of $400 million.

The reservation is home to the Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara

Nation, or the Three Affiliated Tribes.

Driving around the remote reservation, council member

Monica Mayer pointed to a multimillion-dollar housing project

that she said will soon have an aquatic center, baseball

diamonds and mini golf.

A $17 million public safety and judicial center was built,

and staffing increased in the court system. In the past three

years, the reservation has hired more than a dozen additional

officers to help an understaffed police department.

Monica Mayer is a tribal council member on the Fort

Berthold Reservation. Despite this financial independence,

the justice system appears to be failing sexual assault

survivors who report.

``At every level, we are not adequately functioning to

provide the services that are needed in a critical

situation,'' Mayer said.

The Fort Berthold tribal court does not have enhanced

sentencing. The court sentenced three people for sexual

assault from 2013 to mid-2018, according to court records.

Sentences ranged from eight days to six months.

The tribes' relationship with its federal partners--the

BIA, the FBI and the U.S. attorneys--is crucial to helping

survivors get justice. Based on interviews and records

obtained from federal and tribal agencies, it's unclear

whether all sexual assaults on Fort Berthold were fully

investigated by any agency in the past six years.

The tribes are supposed to refer every major crime to

either the BIA or the FBI for investigations. Both are

charged with overseeing all major criminal investigations on

Fort Berthold and will determine which agency takes the lead.

The tribal criminal investigators had records of 66 sexual

assault cases from January 2016 to September 2018. The BIA

had records of only 10 investigations during that same time

period. The FBI declined to provide any records.

After Newsy asked about the status of these cases, Three

Affiliated Tribes Police Capt. Grace Her Many Horses, a

member of the Oglala Sioux tribe from the Pine Ridge

Reservation, said she would do a case file review.

``The priority for me, right now, is to go through those

case files to find out what's been declined, why, and is

there anything we can do to make it happen,'' she said. ``I

guess part of that is on me, too. I should know this by

now.''

Her Many Horses said she finished the case file review

nearly a year later, but she did not provide the details of

what she found, nor did she disclose whether the police

referred all 66 cases up to their federal partners.

Exactly one week after Newsy's last trip to Fort Berthold,

during which reporters asked how sexual assaults and rapes

are handled on the reservation, the Department of Justice and

the BIA released a joint statement saying, ``A number of

concerns have been raised about public safety and criminal

investigations on the Fort Berthold Reservation.''

Citing ``the high rate of violence against women and

children,'' it said the BIA was increasing the number of

special agents from ``one to two.'' As of the start of

October, no second agent had started working on Fort

Berthold.

The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights issued two reports on

funding in Indian communities, one in 2003 and an update in

December 2018, called ``Broken Promises.'' The report said,

``The federal government continues to fail to support

adequately the social and economic well-being of Native

Americans,'' and this ``contributes to the inequities

observed in Native American communities.''

Trying to make a difference

Twila Szymanski works as the deputy court administrator for

the Fort Peck Tribal Court, maintaining records and stats.

Szymanski reported only one of her three assaults--the one

when she was 14. Her case made it into federal court.

The defendant pleaded guilty in 1995. He was sentenced to

three years' probation and no prison time.

Twila Szymanski is the deputy court administrator for the

Fort Peck Tribal Court. ``Justice wasn't served, in my

opinion,'' she said. ``He was back in the community quickly,

and I had to see him when this was all fresh.''

Szymanski is confronted with the memory of what happened to

her each time a case comes up and each time she sees her

perpetrator in the community.

She said she uses her position in the court to go through

cases and stop them from dropping through the cracks, and she

is running for Fort Peck associate judge in the election this

month.

``When the system has failed you time and time and time

again, you don't feel empowered,'' Deer said. ``It feels like

a disconnect between this moment of `Me Too' and the reality

of lndian country and sexual assault.''

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, the situation at the border has nothing to do with the Dream and Promise Act. If anything, former President Trump's attempt to eliminate all resources contributed to the crisis at the border. The Dream and Promise Act does not apply to future migrants, just those who were already in the country before 2021.

This Dream and Promise Act has a very high criminal bar. An applicant is disqualified if they have any one of the following: A felony conviction, one misdemeanor conviction involving moral turpitude, more than two misdemeanors, or one misdemeanor for domestic violence.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, my colleagues across the aisle are not supportive of provisions to protect LGBTQ-plus individuals in this bill, but LGBTQ-plus members of our community experience domestic violence, too. Abusers do not discriminate based on sexual orientation, and neither should this body.

Legislators who oppose equality are trying to turn this into a debate about abortion to distract from the issue at hand. I would like to clarify that the ERA doesn't include any requirement to provide specific healthcare services, including abortion. It is about equality under the law.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a March 16 USA Today opinion piece from activists Dolores Huerta, Carol Jenkins, and Eleanor Smeal titled ``There is no deadline on women's equality. Add the equal rights amendment to the Constitution.''

[From USA TODAY, March 16, 2021]

There's No Deadline on Women's Equality. Add the Equal Rights Amendment

to the Constitution.

(By Dolores Huerta, Carol Jenkins and Eleanor Smeal)

For the second time in a century, a global pandemic has

occurred at the height of a determined movement to expand

women's rights under the U.S. Constitution. The 1918 flu

pandemic nearly halted the drive for ratification of the 19th

Amendment on women's suffrage. But advocates rallied, lobbied

President Woodrow Wilson for support and urged Congress to

pass a joint resolution adopting the amendment. That was

followed by ratification by the states and final

certification in August 1920.

Today, the campaign for ratification of the Equal Rights

Amendment is in the middle of another global pandemic with

women losing jobs at a much higher rate than men, especially

affecting women of color. In these first 100 days of the

Biden-Harris administration and during Women's History Month,

there is a real opportunity to make constitutional history

again with lasting change for women's rights and gender

equality by adding the ERA to the Constitution.

No rights denied 'on account of sex'

Congress approved the ERA in 1972. It says, very simply,

that ``equality of rights under the law shall not be denied

or abridged by the United States or any state on account of

sex.''

President Joe Biden and Congress now have the opportunity

to rally as well. This week, the House of Representatives

will consider a joint resolution clearing the way for the ERA

to be added to the Constitution. If the Senate also adopts

the resolution, it could become part of the Constitution this

year.

The ERA won ratification by the necessary three-fourths of

the states when Virginia became the 38th state last year.

Earlier, Nevada ratified in 2017 and Illinois in 2018.

However, the ERA has yet to be formally enshrined into the

Constitution because of an arbitrary timeline in the

amendment's preamble--not the legislative text sent to the

states for approval--which set 1979 for ratification.

Congress changed the timeline by extending it to 1982.

Congress can again weigh in by removing the timeline and

recognizing the final three states, because Article V of the

Constitution puts the amending process with the Congress and

ratification with the states.

Button supporting the Equal Rights Amendment on April 2,

2013, in Little Rock, Arkansas. Congressional action is

needed to support the attorneys general of Virginia, Nevada

and Illinois, who went to federal court asking the national

archivist to include the ERA in the Constitution.

But a U.S. district judge ruled this month that the three

states did not have standing to bring the case, and the 1982

deadline remains in effect.

Now is the time for Congress to recognize there can be no

time limit on equality. The

House and Senate should approve a joint resolution ``removing

the deadline for the ratification of the equal rights

amendment.'' The measure, introduced in the House in January,

already has more than 200 co-sponsors.

The vast majority of Americans across demographic and

partisan lines agree that women should have equal rights with

men in this country. In a 2020 Pew Research Center survey,

more than 9 in 10 U.S. adults said it is very important (79%)

or somewhat important (18%). Fully 78% of U.S. adults--

including majorities of women, men, Republicans and

Democrats--favored adding the ERA to the Constitution.

`All men would be tyrants if they could'

Abigail Adams is often quoted as saying, ``Remember the

Ladies.'' In March of 1776, she wrote more than these three

words to her husband, John, just months before the

Declaration of Independence was adopted and as he was engaged

in drafting the U.S. Constitution. She had some ideas about

what should be included ``in the new code of laws' he was

making: ``I desire you would remember the ladies and be more

generous and favorable to them than your ancestors. . . .

Remember, all men would be tyrants if they could. If

particular care and attention is not paid to the ladies, we

are determined to formant a rebellion, and will not hold

ourselves bound by any laws in which we have no voice or

representation.''

That rebellion has been taking place through the hundreds

of peaceful ERA marches and rallies that led up to the 2017

Women's March, events that galvanized millions of women and

men nationwide to new levels of political activism. The

#MeToo movement sparked public outrage over sexual assault

and misogyny in the workplace.

In 2020, women again far outnumbered men as voters with a

gender gap that has become decisive in presidential, Senate

and House elections. And women and men alike supported the

Equal Rights Amendment by electing a pro-ERA majority of

members in the House and Senate.

An estimated 1 million more women than men have lost their

jobs during the COVID-19 lockdowns, and the pandemic shows

that most essential workers are women, most of them are Black

and Latina, and most still have the majority of caregiving

responsibilities. These along with other economic realities

make constitutional rights for women more urgent than ever

before.

The pandemic has sparked a reexamination of the role of

government and the need for social safety net and economic

policies that work for all. In short, the new reality of 2021

demands that Congress approve the ERA resolution. It will

mark a historic commitment to women's rights by ensuring

equality under the law for current and future generations.

Madam Speaker, COVID's impact on women shows the continued need for equality. We have the power to remove the ERA ratification deadline and make it a reality.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, President Biden inherited a dismantled and gutted immigration system. The prior administration's strategy of cruelty, chaos, and confusion was ineffective and set the stage for our current challenges.

I include in the Record a March 15 Columbus Dispatch article titled ``Undocumented immigrants pay billions in taxes each year--and have been for 25 years.''

[From the Columbus Dispatch, Mar. 15, 2021]

Undocumented Immigrants Pay Billions in Taxes Each Year--and Have Been

for 25 Years

(By Danae King)

Every year, Arturo pays thousands of dollars in taxes from

the revenue produced by his central Ohio-based painting

company.

But he will never receive Social Security benefits. Or

Medicare. Or Medicaid.

That's because Arturo, whose last name is not being used

for his safety, is an undocumented immigrant from Mexico--one

of about 6 million who pay taxes annually, according to the

Congressional Budget Office.

Jorge Beltran is a Columbus tax preparer who is certified

by the IRS to file taxes for undocumented immigrants. He

hopes to shatter misconceptions about immigrants not paying

taxes and being drains on society.

A report from the office shows that 50% to 75% of

undocumented immigrants pay billions in taxes each year--and

have been since the Internal Revenue Service created a

program 25 years ago allowing people without a Social

Security number to file taxes.

When it comes to state and local taxes, undocumented

immigrants pay more than $11 billion a year, according to a

2017 report from the Institute on Taxation and Economic

Policy, a nonpartisan nonprofit based in Washington, D.C. In

Ohio, they paid $83.2 million in state and local taxes in

2017, according to the institute.

Jorge Beltran, left, reviews tax documents with client Ana

Narciso. Beltran is a Columbus tax preparer who is certified

by the IRS to file taxes for undocumented immigrants. He

hopes to shatter misconceptions about immigrants not paying

taxes and being drains on society. Narciso has legal status

to be in the United States.

``When you hear people who are citizens--who may be against

immigration or immigrants, especially undocumented--say, `Oh,

they're here and sucking up all the government resources and

taking handouts and

welfare.' That's not the case,'' said Jessica Rodriguez Bell,

a Columbus immigration attorney who has undocumented clients.

``These people are not eligible for those benefits, and

many times they're paying into the system like we are. It's

frustrating to hear that a lot.''

Still, many attorneys recommend their undocumented clients

pay taxes, Rodriguez Bell said.

``The reason for that is that, one, it's income they've

been paying in and are likely entitled to a refund of some

sort,'' Rodriguez Bell said. ``Then, also because in the

future, even if they don't have a current immigration case

pending or even if they're not eligible for relief at this

time . . . oftentimes you want to demonstrate good moral

character and that you've been an upstanding citizen while

you've been here.''

Years of tax returns also establish that a person has been

living in the United States, she said.

To some, though, the issue is not whether or not

undocumented immigrants pay taxes, said Mark Krikorian,

executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a

Washington, D.C.-based conservative think tank.

``There's this sort of implicit assumption that if you pay

your taxes everything else is fine,'' he said. ``Paying your

taxes doesn't wipe away everything else that you've done.''

Krikorian said that the real question is what is the

balance of taxes undocumented immigrants pay versus the

services they consume.

``There's no real debate about less-skilled workers,'' he

said. ``Whether they're legal or illegal, they use more in

services than they pay in taxes.''

A 2010 report from another Washington, D.C., think tank,

the Brookings Institution, however, suggests that while U.S.-

citizen children of undocumented immigrants can be costly

when they're young, those costs are paid out through a

lifetime of taxes.

The mere act of filing taxes could be seen as a risk for

undocumented immigrants because it could result in the

federal government pursing legal action to return the

immigrants to their home country. But Rodriguez-Bell said she

hasn't seen any such negative consequences.

``The IRS is a separate department, so it's not something

where we've ever seen information exchanged between the IRS

and, say, ICE,'' she said, referring to Immigration and

Customs Enforcement. ``This is not something that's going to

get you in trouble, and you're not doing something illegal by

doing that. It can only help your situation in the future if

you are filing.''

In 1996, the IRS created the Individual Taxpayer

Identification Number (ITIN) to allow people working in the

United States without Social Security numbers to pay taxes.

It is a 9-digit number, the same length as a Social Security

number, issued only to those who are not eligible for Social

Security numbers.

In order to help undocumented immigrants get a tax ID

number and file, the IRS certifies what are called acceptance

agents. There are 13 in Columbus, 79 in Ohio and more than

5,000 nationwide.

Jorge Beltran, the owner of Belmont Services LLC, a tax

preparation company on Columbus' Northwest Side, has been a

certified acceptance agent with the IRS since 2008. The vast

majority of Beltran's clients are undocumented immigrants,

and he's passionate about letting people know that they pay

taxes.

``Imagine if more people knew this,'' Beltran said. ``These

are not people asking for a handout. They're not asking for

unemployment. They're not asking for any benefits. Even if

they wanted to, they couldn't.''

Consider his clients Javier and Norma--whose first names

only are being used, as with other undocumented immigrants in

this story, for their safety--who both worked in food service

before the pandemic. In March 2020, Javier got laid off but

had no access to unemployment or COVID-19 relief payments due

to his status. Over the course of the rest of the year, he

worked six different jobs to support his family, which

includes their three U.S.-born children.

The couple made $56,369 in 2020 and got a refund of $3,337,

which made a big difference in their lives, Beltran said,

possibly paying for five months of their rent. If they had

Social Security numbers, they could've gotten $6,900 in

federal COVID relief payments in 2020 to help support their

family, Beltran said.

``They contribute to all of our communities,'' he said.

``They pay the school system from their taxes. They pay for

the roads from their taxes, and they spend money they make in

the grocery stores and movie theaters and everywhere but

nobody knows about it.''

Beltran shared the story of another two of his clients,

Cirilo and Patricia, who live in Mount Vernon and have been

in the country for almost 20 years. Cirilo works two jobs as

a cook, but only made $26,784 last year, paying $3,706 in

taxes. His earnings had to support his six children--four of

whom have Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)

status, allowing them to work and go to school legally, and

two of whom were born in the United States.

Nicole, who owns a painting business with her undocumented

immigrant husband, Arturo, both pose for a portrait on

Friday, March 12, 2021. Undocumented immigrants pay taxes and

own businesses that employ people and help the local economy.

Arturo and his wife, Nicole, a U.S. citizen whose family is

from Mexico and who owns their painting company with him, are

Beltran's clients as well. They employ 47 people and paid

$118,250 in estimated taxes this year, according to Beltran.

``Talk about being productive members of society,'' he

said. ``Forty-seven people can feed their families, help pay

the schools, whatever, with the employment they have and

that's generated by this company.

More than $11,000 from the family's taxes went to the city

of Columbus.

The couple started their business after Arturo got injured

in his job as a butcher and was fired. He started working for

a friend as a painter, but had always dreamed of working for

himself and owning a business. So, with the help of a friend,

they started their own business six years ago and now support

themselves and their four children.

``He comes from nothing in Mexico. His parents are farmers,

and he has just a middle school, almost high school

education,'' Nicole said, of her husband. ``It was really

important for him not to be stuck. He came to the United

States to make something for himself, to provide a better

future for his children.''

Immigrants are here to make the country better, Nicole

said.

``This is what makes America great,'' she said.

``immigrants coming here and finding their way and helping

the country prosper, too.''

Madam Speaker, during the last 4 years, millions of immigrants faced uncertainty as the Trump administration pursued cruel immigration policies. With passage of H.R. 6, we are beginning a new chapter in our Nation's immigration policy.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a statement by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro N. Mayorkas in which he states the many issues associated with the southern border and what we are doing to address those issues.

For example, Border Patrol facilities and border personnel that had not had complete access to a COVID-19 vaccine now have complete access to the vaccine. It talks about the disruptions of the previous administration and their lack of commitment to deal with tender-age children and many other issues that could help inform this conversation moving forward.

[From the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Mar. 16, 2021]

Statement by Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro N. Mayorkas

Regarding the Situation at the Southwest Border

There is understandably a great deal of attention currently

focused on the southwest border. I want to share the facts,

the work that we in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

and across the government are doing, and our plan of action.

Our personnel remain steadfast in devotion of their talent

and efforts in the service of our nation.

The situation at the southwest border is difficult. We are

working around the clock to manage it and we will continue to

do so. That is our job. We are making progress and we are

executing on our plan. It will take time and we will not

waver in our commitment to succeed.

We will also not waver in our values and our principles as

a Nation. Our goal is a safe, legal, and orderly immigration

system that is based on our bedrock priorities: to keep our

borders secure, address the plight of children as the law

requires, and enable families to be together. As noted by the

President in his Executive Order, ``securing our borders does

not require us to ignore the humanity of those who seek to

cross them.'' We are both a nation of laws and a nation of

immigrants. That is one of our proudest traditions.

The Facts

We are on pace to encounter more individuals on the

southwest border than we have in the last 20 years. We are

expelling most single adults and families. We are not

expelling unaccompanied children. We are securing our border,

executing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's

(CDC) public health authority to safeguard the American

public and the migrants themselves, and protecting the

children. We have more work to do.

This is not new. We have experienced migration surges

before--in 2019, 2014, and before then as well. Since April

2020, the number of encounters at the southwest border has

been steadily increasing. Border Patrol Agents are working

around the clock to process the flow at the border and I have

great respect for their tireless efforts. To understand the

situation, it is important to identify who is arriving at our

southwest border and how we are following the law to manage

different types of border encounters.

Single Adults

The majority of those apprehended at the southwest border

are single adults who are currently being expelled under the

CDC's authority to manage the public health crisis of the

COVID-19 pandemic. Pursuant to that authority under Title 42

of the United States Code, single adults from Mexico and the

Northern Triangle countries of El Salvador, Guatemala, and

Honduras are swiftly expelled to Mexico. Single adults from

other countries are expelled by plane to their countries of

origin if Mexico does not accept them. There are limited

exceptions to our use of the CDC's expulsion authority. For

example, we do not expel individuals with certain acute

vulnerabilities.

The expulsion of single adults does not pose an operational

challenge for the Border Patrol because of the speed and

minimal processing burden of their expulsion.

Families

Families apprehended at the southwest border are also

currently being expelled under the CDC's Title 42 authority.

Families from Mexico and the Northern Triangle countries are

expelled to Mexico unless Mexico does not have the capacity

to receive the families. Families from countries other than

Mexico or the Northern Triangle are expelled by plane to

their countries of origin. Exceptions can be made when a

family member has an acute vulnerability.

Mexico's limited capacity has strained our resources,

including in the Rio Grande Valley area of Texas. When

Mexico's capacity is reached, we process the families and

place them in immigration proceedings here in the United

States. We have partnered with communitybased organizations

to test the family members and quarantine them as needed

under COVID-19 protocols. In some locations, the processing

of individuals who are part of a family unit has strained our

border resources. I explain below additional challenges we

have encountered and the steps we have taken to solve this

problem.

Unaccompanied Children

We are encountering many unaccompanied children at our

southwest border every day. A child who is under the age of

18 and not accompanied by their parent or legal guardian is

considered under the law to be an unaccompanied child. We are

encountering six- and sevenyear-old children, for example,

arriving at our border without an adult. They are vulnerable

children and we have ended the prior administration's

practice of expelling them.

An unaccompanied child is brought to a Border Patrol

facility and processed for transfer to the Department of

Health and Human Services (HHS). Customs and Border

Protection is a passthrough and is required to transfer the

child to HHS within 72 hours of apprehension. HHS holds the

child for testing and quarantine, and shelters the child

until the child is placed with a sponsor here in the United

States. In more than 80 percent of cases, the child has a

family member in the United States. In more than 40 percent

of cases, that family member is a parent or legal guardian.

These are children being reunited with their families who

will care for them.

The children then go through immigration proceedings where

they are able to present a claim for relief under the law.

The Border Patrol facilities have become crowded with

children and the 72-hour timeframe for the transfer of

children from the Border Patrol to HHS is not always met. HHS

has not had the capacity to intake the number of

unaccompanied children we have been encountering. I describe

below the actions we have taken and the plans we are

executing to handle this difficult situation successfully.

Why the Challenge is Especially Difficult Now

Poverty, high levels of violence, and corruption in Mexico

and the Northern Triangle countries have propelled migration

to our southwest border for years. The adverse conditions

have continued to deteriorate. Two damaging hurricanes that

hit Honduras and swept through the region made the living

conditions there even worse, causing more children and

families to flee.

The COVID-19 pandemic has made the situation more

complicated. There are restrictions and protocols that need

to be followed. The physical distancing protocol, for

example, imposes space and other limitations on our

facilities and operations.

The prior administration completely dismantled the asylum

system. The system was gutted, facilities were closed, and

they cruelly expelled young children into the hands of

traffickers. We have had to rebuild the entire system,

including the policies and procedures required to

administer the asylum laws that Congress passed long ago.

The prior administration tore down the lawful pathways that

had been developed for children to come to the United States

in a safe, efficient, and orderly way. It tore down, for

example, the Central American Minors program that avoided the

need for children to take the dangerous journey to our

southwest border.

The previous administration also cut foreign aid funding to

the Northern Triangle. No longer did we resource efforts in

El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras to tackle the root

causes of people fleeing their homes.

And, there were no plans to protect our front-line

personnel against the COVID-19 pandemic. There was no

appropriate planning for the pandemic at all.

As difficult as the border situation is now, we are

addressing it. We have acted and we have made progress. We

have no illusions about how hard it is, and we know it will

take time. We will get it done. We will do so adhering to the

law and our fundamental values. We have an incredibly

dedicated and talented workforce.

Actions We Have Taken

In less than two months, Customs and Border Protection

stood-up an additional facility in Donna, Texas to process

unaccompanied children and families. We deployed additional

personnel to provide oversight, care, and transportation

assistance for unaccompanied minors pending transfer to HHS

custody.

We are standing up additional facilities in Texas and

Arizona to shelter unaccompanied children and families. We

are working with Mexico to increase its capacity to receive

expelled families. We partnered with community-based

organizations to test and quarantine families that Mexico has

not had the capacity to receive. We have developed a

framework for partnering with local mayors and public health

officials to pay for 100% of the expense for testing,

isolation, and quarantine for migrants. ICE has also

developed additional facilities to provide testing, local

transportation, immigration document assistance, orientation,

travel coordination in the interior, and mechanisms to

support oversight of the migrant families who are not

expelled.

Working with Mexico and international organizations, we

built a system in which migrants who were forced to remain in

Mexico and denied a chance to seek protection under

the previous administration can now use a virtual platform--

using their phones--to register. They do not need to take the

dangerous journey to the border. The individuals are tested,

processed, and transported to a port of entry safely and out

of the hands of traffickers. We succeeded in processing the

individuals who were in the Matamoros camp in Mexico. This is

the roadmap going forward for a system that is safe, orderly,

and fair.

To protect our own workforce, we launched Operation

Vaccinate Our Workforce (VOW) in late January. At the

beginning of this administration, less than 2 percent of our

frontline personnel were vaccinated. Now more than 25 percent

of our frontline personnel have been vaccinated.

We directed the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)

to assist HHS in developing the capacity to meet the surge of

unaccompanied children. FEMA already established one new

facility for HHS to shelter 700 children. They have

identified and are currently adding additional facilities. We

are working with HHS to more efficiently identify and screen

sponsors for children. In two days, we recruited more than

560 DHS volunteers to support HHS in our collective efforts

to address the needs of the unaccompanied children.

We are restarting and expanding the Central American Minors

program. It creates a lawful pathway for children to come to

the United States without having to take the dangerous

journey. Under this expansion, children will be processed in

their home countries and brought to the United States in a

safe and orderly way.

In addition, DHS and HHS terminated a 2018 agreement that

had a chilling effect on potential sponsors--typically a

parent or close relative--from coming forward to care for an

unaccompanied child placed in an HHS shelter. In its place,

DHS and HHS signed a new Memorandum of Agreement that

promotes the safe and timely transfer of children. It keeps

safeguards designed to ensure children are unified with

properly vetted sponsors who can safely care for them while

they await immigration proceedings.

The Path Forward

We are creating joint processing centers so that children

can be placed in HHS care immediately after Border Patrol

encounters them. We are also identifying and equipping

additional facilities for HHS to shelter unaccompanied

children until they are placed with family or sponsors. These

are short-term solutions to address the surge of

unaccompanied children.

Longer term, we are working with Mexico and international

organizations to expand our new virtual platform so that

unaccompanied children can access it without having to take

the dangerous journey to our border. As mentioned, we are

expanding the Central American Minors program to permit more

children to be processed in their home countries and if

eligible, brought to the United States in a safe and orderly

way.

We are developing additional legal and safe pathways for

children and others to reach the United States. While we are

building a formal refugee program throughout the region, we

are working with Mexico, the Northern Triangle countries, and

international organizations to establish processing centers

in those countries so that individuals can be screened

through them and brought to the United States if they qualify

for relief under our humanitarian laws and other authorities.

For years, the asylum system has been badly in need of

reengineering. In addition to improving the process by which

unaccompanied children are placed with family or sponsors, we

will be issuing a new regulation shortly and taking other

measures to implement the long needed systemic reforms. We

will shorten from years to months the time it takes to

adjudicate an asylum claim while ensuring procedural

safeguards and enhancing access to counsel.

President Biden laid out a vision of a ``multi-pronged

approach toward managing migration throughout North and

Central America that reflects the Nation's highest values.''

To that end, we are working with the Departments of Health

and Human Services, Justice, and State in an all-of-

government effort to not only address the current situation

at our southwest border, but to institute longer-term

solutions to irregular migration from countries in our

hemisphere that are suffering worsening conditions. This is

powerfully exemplified by the President's goal to invest $4

billion in the Northern Triangle countries to address the

root causes of migration.

Conclusion

The situation we are currently facing at the southwest

border is a difficult one. We are tackling it. We are keeping

our borders secure, enforcing our laws, and staying true to

our values and principles. We can do so because of the

incredible talent and unwavering dedication of our workforce.

I came to this country as an infant, brought by parents who

understood the hope and promise of America. Today, young

children are arriving at our border with that same hope. We

can do this.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, as difficult as the situation is at our southern border, we are addressing it.

The Biden administration has acted, and they have made progress. They have no illusions about how hard it is, because they inherited a dismantled program. And to protect our own workforce, they have launched Operation Vaccinate our Workers, VOW, in late January.

At the beginning of the Biden administration, less than 2 percent of our frontline personnel were vaccinated. To date, more than 25 percent of our frontline personnel have been vaccinated. That is leadership. That is not avoidance of the problem that we face.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Last week, we passed a historic American Rescue Plan, which set out a vision of who we are as a nation. We are a country that can conquer this virus, a country that cares about eliminating childhood poverty, and a country that is dedicated to ensuring that

everyone--everyone, not just the rich--are able to emerge from the pandemic and do better.

The bills before us today are a continuation of this vision of a country committed to doing better for the people. Too many people in America live in fear, fear because they are not protected under the law, but these bills before us today say: ``No more.''

The Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act says to domestic abuse survivors: ``You are safe. You are going to be safe.''

H.J. Res. 17, which removes the deadline for the ratification of the equal rights amendment says to women: ``You are equal.'' ``We are equal.''

The Dream and Promise Act says to Dreamers: ``You, too, can have a shot at the American Dream.''

And the Farm Workforce Modernization Act tells our farm workers: ``You can do your job without fear of deportation.''

H.R. 1868 tells Americans: ``Don't worry about draconian cuts. Let's focus on recovery.''

Madam Speaker, the bills before us today will continue the Democratic Congress' work to do better by all the American people.

Madam Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and the previous question.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Madam Speaker, I thank the Chairwoman and all of the very important people on the Appropriations Committee for their work on this bill.

I ask the question, what side do you want to be on? Do you want to be on the side that provides our hardworking military pay raises for the troops, to be able to get money away from a misdirected war?

Do you want to be on the side that provides for working families?

Do you want to be on the side that stops those who can't pay for daycare to have that?

Do you want to be on the side of those who say, ``I am a Federal employee, and I have been shut out of my job''?

What side do you want to be on? I want to be on the side of negotiating an omnibus that works for the American people. I want my Republican friends to know that we have tried to negotiate, but we are adults and we are not going to let this government shut down.

What we are going to do is recognize these are dangerous times. We know that there is now an omicron variant. We are not going to play the antivaxxer game, we are not going to say that it is about vaccine mandates because we know that most of the Federal Government has been vaccinated; but what we are going to do is extend this resolution to keep the government open because the side that Democrats are on is the side of the American people and our government workers who go out and work every day and the families who go out and work every day.

I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. A shutdown would induce furloughs that could hit 62 percent of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, right in the middle of COVID-19.

In addition, families would be desperate as well.

I want you to understand that veterans would suffer. During the Thanksgiving holiday, I went to the veterans hospital. I can tell you, it is not empty. Veterans are there every day, and when they are there, they are getting services. Do you want to be part of a government shutdown where veterans hospitals are closed and veterans are standing outside with their hand asking what is happening?

I want to be on the side of those who understand the value of working for the American families and doing what Democrats have done, passing bills, passing laws that serve the American people.

Vote for the CR and vote for the omnibus so that we can get the job done. I thank the gentlewoman for her courtesies.

Madam Speaker, as a senior member of the Committees on the Judiciary, on Homeland Security, and on the Budget, I rise in support of H.R. 6119, the ``Further Extending Government Funding Act,'' which provides funding to continue the operations of the federal government through February 18, 2022, and avoids a wasteful and irresponsible shutdown, and also the underlying bill.

House Democrats passed government funding bills to create good paying jobs, support the hard-working middle class, and protect our national security; Senate Democrats have also released all their appropriations bills.

Without an omnibus, there will be a shortfall that will cause veterans not to receive their benefits in full.

For our national security, we need an omnibus to support defense readiness and modernization, sustain good-paying American jobs, secure our cyber infrastructure, and strengthen American leadership abroad.

Without an omnibus, a pay raise for troops will not be funded while funds will be misdirected to a war we are no longer fighting.

With a new deadline of February 18, we need Republicans to offer constructive proposals to address the critical issues facing the country by funding the federal government's important work for the American people.

Madam Speaker, I need not remind my colleagues that we are at a critical point in the fight against this pandemic--less than 24 hours ago, it was reported that the first case of the Omicron variant was confirmed in the United States.

Our response in the following days and weeks will be crucial.

Yet some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle in the House and the Senate have indicated that they intend to block the passage of this stopgap spending bill in order to trigger a shutdown of the Federal government unless a bill is passed that undoes President Biden's initiatives to vaccinate and test employees at large companies.

Simply put, this is irresponsible and dangerous at a time when we have a new threat on our soil in the form of the Omicron variant.

A government shutdown would induce furloughs that could hit 62 percent of employees at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control.

It would be nothing other than reckless to hamstring the agency at the center of America's fight against the COVID-19 pandemic at this time--we need all hands on deck.

In September, Congress voted on a bipartisan basis to extend government funding through December 3 to allow time for bicameral, bipartisan negotiations to complete omnibus government funding legislation.

Since then, House and Senate Republicans have refused to negotiate with Democrats on government funding.

In fact, while House and Senate Democrats have put forward their proposals, Republicans have not presented an offer of their own.

Therefore, the Appropriations Committee introduced H.R. 6119, the Further Extending Government Funding Act, which continues government funding at current levels through February 18.

It makes minimal changes to address the most urgent of needs during the period of the Continuing Resolution.

Although this bill is necessary, working families, small businesses, veterans, and our military need the certainty that comes with passing an omnibus as opposed to short-term funding patches.

Republicans must join us for bipartisan, bicameral negotiations to resolve our differences and keep government working for the people.

For our communities, we need an omnibus to create jobs by supporting small businesses, bolster our public health infrastructure to prevent future pandemics and medical research to save lives, strengthen public schools with a focus on those serving students with the highest need, protect our air and water through environmental protection and enforcement efforts, combat the opioid epidemic on the ground in our communities, and support core services such as food safety and consumer product inspections.

Without an omnibus, investments in all these areas will be denied.

For our veterans, we need an omnibus to provide sufficient funding for veterans' benefits, reduce backlogs for veterans and their families seeking assistance, and meet the needs of the VA's health care system.

Throughout the 117th Congress, House Democrats have worked to deliver results for the American people, passing legislation to address each pillar of the ``For The People'' agenda: lower health care costs, higher wages by rebuilding America, and cleaning up corruption and strengthening our Democracy.

And under the leadership of Speaker Pelosi, the House has passed hundreds of bills, including legislation to crush the COVID-19 pandemic, build our economy back better, lower health care and prescription drug prices, raise wages, advance economic and retirement security, end gun violence, act on the climate crisis, protect Dreamers, and strengthen voting rights.

For example, in this Congress the House has passed and sent to the President the following legislation that has been signed into law:

H.R. 1799, Paycheck Protection Program Extension Act:

This legislation extended the Paycheck Protection Program application deadline for two months through May 31, 2021 to help struggling businesses keep workers employed during COVID-19.

H.R. 1276, SAVE LIVES Act:

This law ensured that more veterans, their families, and caregivers got access to COVID-19 vaccines in a timely manner.

S. 937, COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act:

This law addresses the dramatic increase in hate crimes targeting the AAPI community since the start of the pandemic. This law designates a point person at the Department of Justice to review hate crimes related to the COVID-19 pandemic, bolsters state and local governments to improve their reporting of hate crimes and ensures that hate crime information is more accessible to Asian-American communities.

S. 475, Juneteenth National Independence Day Act:

This law established the first federal holiday in 38 years to formally recognize Juneteenth National Independence Day and commemorate the end of slavery in the United States.

House Democrats have also worked to advance critical pieces of legislation, which await action in the Senate:

H.R. 1, For The People Act:

This comprehensive legislation would promote government transparency, strengthen access to the ballot box and make it easier for Americans to exercise their right to vote, secure election infrastructure, and curb the influence of dark money in politics.

H.R. 5, Equality Act:

The Equality Act would codify consistent anti-discrimination legal protections for LGBTQ Americans by amending several existing civil rights laws to include explicit non-discrimination protections in key areas of life.

H.R. 6, Dream and Promise Act:

The Dream and Promise Act would protect Dreamers, Temporary Protected Status (TPS), and Deferred Enforced Departure (DED) status holders from deportation and provide an opportunity to obtain permanent legal status that would enable these groups to work legally within the United States and continue to contribute to their local communities and economy.

H.R. 7, Paycheck Fairness Act:

This bill would strengthen labor protections around equal pay by prohibiting the use of salary history to set compensation, provide more transparent options for joining class-action lawsuits challenging systemic discrimination, and require employers to show that gender pay gaps are job-related and consistent with business need.

H.R. 8, Bipartisan Background Checks Act and H.R. 1446, the Enhanced Background Checks Act:

These bills would modernize federal laws around gun sales. The former would close current loopholes that allow buyers to purchase guns without a background check in certain venues, while the latter would prevent gun sales from going through before background checks are completed.

H.R. 1280, the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act:

This bill, which House Democrats also passed in the 116th Congress 30 days after the murder of George Floyd, will address racial bias in policing, ensure accountability for police brutality and misconduct, and work to change the culture of law enforcement to promote better relationships with the communities they serve.

H.R. 842, Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act:

This bill aims to strengthen labor protections for union workers through overriding Republican-led ``right to work'' laws, promoting free and fair union elections, and holding companies that attempt to restrict union activity accountable.

H.J. Res. 17, Removing the Deadline for Ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment:

This resolution would remove the deadline for ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment in order to enshrine women's equality in the Constitution.

H.R. 1620, Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act:

This long-overdue legislation to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act passed the House with bipartisan support. It would reauthorize funding to vital grant programs that help prevent sexual assault, domestic violence, and improve access to resources for victims and survivors.

H.R. 3237, the Emergency Security Supplemental to Respond to 1/6 Appropriations Act:

This bill provides $1.9 billion in funding to secure the U.S. Capitol Complex and ensure the brave men and women of the U.S. Capitol Police have the resources they need to do

their jobs. The legislation responds to the direct costs incurred by the National Guard and DC police on January 6, provides funding to improve the security of windows and doors in the Capitol complex, and secures funds to improve Capitol Police training and equipment.

H.R. 3005, Legislation to #RemoveHate from the Capitol Building:

This bill would remove statues of those who perpetuated and supported slavery and segregation in this country, along with statues or busts of those who served voluntarily in the Confederate States of America, from public display in the U.S. Capitol.

H.R. 1603, the Farm Workforce Modernization Act:

This bipartisan bill would stabilize the agriculture industry's labor supply by reforming the H-2A guest worker program and creating a pathway to citizenship for agricultural workers, many of whom worked through the pandemic.

H.R. 51, the Washington, DC Admission Act:

This bill would admit Washington, DC as the 51st state in the Union and end the injustice in denying nearly 700,000 citizens the right to be represented fully in Congress. It would also end the unjust practice of treating District of Columbia residents differently when allocating government resources or relief.

H.R. 3985, ALLIES Act:

This bill would increase the visa cap and expedite the visa process for Afghan allies who worked alongside American military personnel, diplomats, development professionals, and partner forces, to help ensure they make it safely out of harm's way.

H.R. 803, Protecting America's Wildness and Public Lands Act:

This comprehensive bill would conserve and protect natural landscapes across America, designating over 1.5 million acres of public land as protected wilderness and withdrawing significant amount of public land from drilling and mining activities to promote a healthier environment.

H.R. 2467, the PFAS Action Act:

This bipartisan bill would improve the safety of Americans' drinking water by requiring the EPA to set a drinking water standard, prevent the future release of PFAS chemicals into our bodies of water, and start the process of cleaning up affected communities.

H.R. 256, Repeal of the 2002 AUMF Against Iraq:

This bill, which passed with bipartisan support, would repeal the 2002 Authorization of Military Force Against Iraq.

H.R. 1230, the Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act:

The bipartisan Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act restores protections for older workers that were weakened in a 2009 Supreme Court ruling that made it harder for older workers to prove age based discrimination in the workplace.

H.R. 2662, the Inspectors-General Independence and Empowerment Act:

This bill seeks to promote government transparency and accountability by ensuring the independence of federal inspectors-general, allowing government watchdogs to act freely without fear of political pressure or threats. It would also protect whistleblowers from threats of retaliation by making it a violation of House rules for Members to reveal their identities.

In addition, three Congressional Review Act resolutions have been signed into law, overturning dangerous rules put in place by the Trump Administration:

S.J. Res 13, a CRA overturning an EEOC rule to address discrimination in the workplace;

S.J. Res. 14, a CRA addressing dangerous methane emissions; and

S.J. Res. 15, a CRA to protect against predatory lenders.

These along with many, many others are among the bills awaiting Senate action.

Madam Speaker, let me briefly list several of the programs vital to Americans that are protected or extended by H.R. 6119. The bill:

Provides waiver language for certain intelligence programs as well as agencies that operate under the State Department Basic Authorities Act and Foreign Relations Authorization Act;

Allows the Food and Nutrition Service to spend at a higher rate during the period covered by the legislation to provide supplemental USDA foods to low-income seniors (age 60 and over) and to some low- income women, infants and children up to age six.

Allows a higher spending rate for the White House to support continuing COVID-19 operations.

Allows the Small Business Administration flexibility to spend at the rate necessary to accommodate potential demand increases for commitments for business loans through the 7(a) and 504 business loans, for the Secondary Market Guarantee Program, and for the Small Business Investment Company (SBIC) program.

Allows District of Columbia voucher schools an additional year to be accredited and therefore remain in the program. The accrediting process requires in-school visits, which are not happening during the coronavirus.

Allows the District of Columbia to spend FY 2021 funds received from local tax revenues and other non-Federal sources in the amount and for the programs and activities provided in DC's FY 2021 Budget Act.

Extends the term of certain bankruptcy judgeships.

Allows the Federal Emergency Management Agency to access the entire DRF appropriation for fiscal year 2021 under the continuing resolution as necessary to respond to declared disasters.

Continues the authorization for the NFIP.

Extends funding for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program and the Child Care Entitlement to States program during the period of the continuing resolution. The extension will allow HHS to make first-quarter payments to States.

Extends the availability of funding for multiyear research grants supported by the National Institutes of Health that were interrupted in fiscal year 2020 by COVID-19 and would have expired at the end of the fiscal year.

Madam Speaker, our colleagues across the aisle have in both chambers have been obstructive, dilatory, petulantly uncooperative throughout the first session of the 117th Congress.

Nowhere was this more apparent than the refusal of the majority of J Republican members in the House voted 175-35 against H.R. 3233, legislation modeled after the 9/11 Commission establishing a National Commission to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol Complex Act.

Madam Speaker, American families do not get to choose which bills to pay and which ones to ignore; neither can the United States Congress without putting the nation into default for the first time in its history.

Long ago, in 1789, Alexander Hamilton, the nation's first and greatest Treasury Secretary, understood that the path to American prosperity and greatness lay in its creditworthiness which provided the affordable access to capital needed to fund internal improvements and economic growth.

The nation's creditworthiness was one of its most important national assets and according to Hamilton: ``the proper funding of the present debt, will render it a national blessing.''

But to maintain this blessing, or to ``render public credit immortal,'' Hamilton understood that it was necessary that: ``the creation of debt should always be accompanied with the means of extinguishment.''

In other words, to retain and enjoy the prosperity that flows from good credit, it is necessary for a nation to pay its bills.

To preserve the sanctity of the full faith and credit of the United States, protect American jobs and businesses of all sizes, and ensure the continued growth of the economy, I strongly support the provision in the bill before extending the public debt limit to December 16, 2021.

Madam Speaker, I would also like to discuss an important topic that is closely related to this bill and that this House must address very soon--raising the debt ceiling.

Preserving the full faith and credit of the United States by raising to the debt limit to ensure that America pays the bills for past expenditures when they come due is not a partisan exercise but an act of patriotism, a recognition and embrace of the solemn obligation to preserve the unrivaled advantages that flow from the ability provided in the Article I, Section 8, clause 2 of the Constitution to ``borrow money on the credit of the United States.''

Long ago, in 1789, Alexander Hamilton, the nation's first and greatest Treasury Secretary, understood that the path to American prosperity and greatness lay in its creditworthiness which provided the affordable access to capital needed to fund internal improvements and economic growth.

It is because of the existence and wise use of the Borrowing Power that the nation was able to expand its reaches, resources, and riches by financing the Louisiana Purchase, the purchase of Alaska from Russia, to fund the investments to end the Great Depression, to finance the mobilization of resources needed in World War II to defeat fascism and save freedom in the nation and the world, to revive the economy after the catastrophic Great Recession of 2008, and most recently, to protect the public health and safety and restore the economy during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This is why the ability to borrow money on the credit of the United States to finance its growth and protect its people and interests is essential to the national security and led Hamilton to proclaim that ``the proper funding of the present debt, will render it a national blessing.''

But to maintain this blessing, or to ``render public credit immortal,'' Hamilton understood that it was necessary that: ``the creation of debt should always be accompanied with the means of extinguishment.''

In other words, to retain and enjoy the prosperity that flows from good credit, it is necessary for a nation to pay its bills.

The United States has never defaulted on the payment of any debt incurred, and because of the size and strength of its economic and unmatched creditworthiness, is able to borrow on the lowest and most favorable terms of any nation or entity in the history of the world.

So secure and reliable is a bond issues by the Department of Treasury that the Unites States is the preferred haven for investments of foreign governments, corporations, and sovereign wealth funds.

The interest rate charged the federal government of the United States is the base for which every rate, from the prime rate charged the richest corporation to rates charged small business on purchases to the mortgages rates and students loans taken out by consumers.

If you raise the cost of borrowing for the government of the United States, you set off a chain reaction of increased interest rates for every other borrower in the United States and around the world.

This is why leading public finance experts and agencies, like Moody's Chief Economist Mark Zandi, have said it would be ``cataclysmic'' for the United States to default on its loan obligations.

Republicans know the debt ceiling needs to be raised; in 2019 during the Trump Administration, the Republican Senate Majority Leader marshalled Senate Republicans to vote to raise the debt ceiling, saying: ``We raised the debt ceiling because America can't default[,] that would be a disaster.''

Madam Speaker, this debate over extending the debt limit is not about restraining future spending, it is about paying the bills piled up already under both Republican and Democratic administrations.

The question of raising the national debt limit does not depend on how one feels about the Build Back Better agenda, as wildly popular as it is among all Americans, Democrats, Independents, and Republicans included.

It is instead about preserving the singular asset of the United States, its enviable and unrivaled creditworthiness, to finance future investments beneficial to the national interest, like the provision of free college for two years, or $2 billion investment to reduce violence in communities approved by the Committee on the Judiciary, or investments to preserve and strengthen Medicaid expansion programs, or extend broadband to underserved rural and urban areas, an action that will be as life-changing as the rural electrification program was in the 1930s.

Madam Speaker, if our friends across the aisle really want to shrink the deficit, reduce the national debt, practice fiscal responsibility, and bring about sustained economic growth and prosperity, there is a much better, easier, and more certain way to achieve these goals than by tampering with the U.S. Constitution.

The easier and better way is for the American people to keep a Democrat in the White House and place Democratic majorities in the House and Senate.

In the 1990s under the leadership of President Clinton the budget was balanced for four consecutive years, the national debt was paid down, the national debt, 23 million new jobs were created, and projected surpluses exceeded $5 trillion.

Under President Obama the financial crisis and economic meltdown inherited from his Republican predecessor was ended, the annual deficit was reduced by 67 percent, the auto industry was saved from collapse, and 15 million jobs were created.

In contrast, under every Republican administration since President Reagan the size of the deficit bequeathed to his successor was substantially larger than the deficit he inherited, a major economic recession occurred, and economic growth was lower than it was at the beginning of his administration.

To preserve the sanctity of the full faith and credit of the United States, protect American jobs and businesses of all sizes, and ensure the continued growth of the economy, raised.

Madam Speaker, I rise to support the continuing resolution, which extends government funding at current levels until we pass a full appropriations package for the next fiscal year.

It is my strong hope that this short-term extension will be the last one and that my colleagues across the aisle will acknowledge our solemn duty to exercise the power of the purse.

A continuing resolution that lasts a full year does not serve the American people. As the chair of the Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies, I can attest that the investments in the House interior bill would benefit all of our constituents, for those of us on both sides of the aisle.

The bill makes long-overdue investments to protect human health, to fight the climate emergency, and to meet our trust obligations to Tribal nations. It provides critical resources to rebuild the Federal workforce so that these agencies can meet their missions and better serve the public.

Failing to complete a full-year bill means no additional investments in the EPA to research and develop standards for harmful pollutants like PFAS, no further investments in domestic renewable energy, and insufficient resources for the healthcare of nearly 2.2 million American Indians and Alaska Natives.

Regardless of whether we pass a full-year bill, we can be certain that millions of Americans will be exposed to pollution, that healthcare costs will rise, and that our window for mitigating climate change will shrink.

To ignore these threats is not in the Nation's best interest, nor any of ours. We were sent to Congress to improve the lives and livelihoods of our constituents.

Madam Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support this bill, but I encourage my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to finish the bill.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from The Ad Hoc Group for Medical Research.

The Ad Hoc Group

for Medical Research,

November 15, 2021.

Hon. Rosa DeLauro,

Chair, Committee on Appropriations,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Hon. Kay Granger,

Ranking Member, Committee on Appropriations,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Hon. Patrick Leahy,

Chair, Committee on Appropriations,

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

Hon. Richard Shelby,

Vice Chair, Committee on Appropriations,

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

Dear Chairwoman DeLauro, Chairman Leahy, Ranking Member

Granger, and Vice Chairman Shelby: Thank you for your past

leadership in championing sustained, real growth in medical

research funding. As Congress begins to draft a final fiscal

year (FY) 2022 spending package, the 314 undersigned members

of the Ad Hoc Group for Medical Research urge you to invest

robustly in agencies and programs to improve the nation's

health and well-being, including base funding for the

National Institutes of Health (NIH), as a key national

priority and to finalize the appropriations process as

expeditiously as possible. The Ad Hoc Group for Medical

Research is a coalition of patient and voluntary health

groups, medical and scientific societies, academic and

research organizations, and industry, dedicated to enhancing

the federal investment in biomedical, behavioral, social, and

population-based research supported by the NIH.

We greatly appreciate that both the House-passed (H.R.

4502) and Senate draft Labor-HHS-Education spending bills

include strong increases for the NIH base in FY 2022, which

would provide greater hope and opportunity for every patient

awaiting a cure, every researcher working toward the next

breakthrough, and every aspiring scientist considering a

career in the lab. To maximize the potential of medical

research to make rapid progress toward these goals, we urge

you to provide at least $46.4 billion for NIH's base, as

included in the House-passed bill. Continuing the momentum of

the prior six years of bipartisan support for meaningful

funding growth in the NIH's existing institutes and centers

is key to ensuring that the nation can continue to accelerate

the development of life-changing cures, pioneering treatments

and diagnostics, and innovative preventive strategies.

Additionally, we appreciate that both bills ensure that the

new investment for the proposed Advanced Research Projects

Agency for Health (ARPA-H) supplements, rather than

supplants, the NIH's base. While complementary, NIH and ARPA-

H have distinct and important missions. As such, investment

in ARPA-H must not come at the expense of the NIH base.

Instead, to fully realize the benefits of the envisioned new

entity while simultaneously allowing NIH to keep pace with

discovery, an FY 2022 appropriation of at least $46.4 billion

for NIH's base budget is needed. Prioritizing strong

investments for foundational research discoveries funded by

the NIH will be critical to the success of the visionary new

research initiative, particularly as it builds its

operational capacity in its inaugural year and beyond.

Likewise, avoiding further delays in finalizing funding

determinations will enable both ARPA-Hand NIH's planned and

existing programs to be maximally efficient and strategic in

their work in FY 2022.

To that end, our organizations strongly support an approach

to the final FY 2022 spending package that avoids additional

CRs past December. Aside from the budget implications, CRs

create inefficiencies and add uncertainty to a system that is

already

under stress with the continued reverberations of the ongoing

COVID-19 pandemic. We strongly urge you to work swiftly in

securing bipartisan, bicameral agreement on topline

discretionary spending allocations and to ensure any final

budget agreement reflects a strong commitment to the nation's

health.

Once again, we commend you for continuing to recognize the

incomparable value of the federal investment in the NIH, and

we look forward to working with you to secure $46.4 billion

for the agency's base in FY 2022, in addition to funding you

provide for ARPA-H.

Sincerely,

314 Signatories as of November 15, 2021

Academic Consortium for Integrative Medicine & Health,

Academic Pediatric Association, Academy for Eating Disorders,

Academy for Professionalism in Health Care, Academy for

Radiology & Biomedical Imaging Research, ACT for NIH,

AdventHealth, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Alliance

for Academic Internal Medicine (AAIM), Alliance for Aging

Research, ALS Association, Alzheimer's Association and

Alzheimer's Impact Movement, Alzheimer's Foundation of

America, American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry (AAAP),

American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology, American

Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine, American Academy

of Neurology, American Academy of Pediatrics, American

Academy of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation.

American Academy of Sleep Medicine, American Association

for Anatomy, American Association for Cancer Research,

American Association for Dental, Oral, and Craniofacial

Research, American Association for the Advancement of

Science, American Association for the Study of Liver

Diseases, American Association of Chairs of Departments of

Psychiatry, American Association of Colleges of Nursing,

American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine,

American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy, American

Association of Directors of Psychiatry Residency Training,

American Association of Immunologists, American Association

of Neurological Surgeons, American Association of

Neuromuscular & Electrodiagnostic Medicine, American

Association of Physicists in Medicine, American Association

of Veterinary Medical Colleges, American Brain Coalition,

American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, American

College of Academic Addiction Medicine (ACAAM), American

College of Cardiology.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists,

American College of Physicians, American College of

Radiology, American College of Surgeons, American Council on

Education, American Gastroenterological Association American

Geriatrics Society, American Headache Society, American

Institute for Cancer Research, American Institute for Medical

& Biomedical Engineering, American Institute of Ultrasound in

Medicine, American Liver Foundation, American Lung

Association, American Massage Therapy Association, American

Pediatric Society, American Physiological Society, American

Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association,

American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology,

American Society for Investigative Pathology.

American Society for Microbiology, American Society for

Nutrition, American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental

Therapeutics, American Society for Reproductive Medicine

(ASRM), American Society for Virology, American Society of

Anesthesiologists, American Society of Hematology, American

Society of Human Genetics, American Society of Nephrology,

American Society of Neuroradiology, American Society of

Pediatric Nephrology, American Society of Radiologic

Technologists, American Surgical Association, American

Thoracic Society, American Urogynecologic Society, American

Urological Association, Anxiety and Depression Association of

America, Associated Medical Schools of New York.

Association for Anatomy, Cell Biology and Neurobiology

Chairs (AACBNC), Association for Clinical and Translational

Science, Association for Clinical Oncology, Association for

Prevention Teaching and Research, Association for

Psychological Science, Association for Research in Vision and

Ophthalmology (ARVO), Association of Academic Health Centers

(AAHC), Association of Academic Health Sciences Libraries,

Association of Academic Physiatrists.

Association of American Cancer Institutes, Association of

American Medical Colleges, Association of American

Universities, Association of Bioethics Program Directors,

Association of Chairs of Departments of Physiology,

Association of Independent Research Institutes, Association

of Medical and Graduate Departments of Biochemistry (AMGDB),

Association of Medical School Pediatric Department Chairs,

Association of Minority Health Professions Schools,

Association of Pathology Chairs, Association of Population

Centers, Association of Psychologists in Academic Health

Centers, Association of Public and Land-grant Universities,

Association of Schools and Colleges of Optometry (ASCO),

Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health,

Association of University Professors of Neurology,

Association of University Professors of Ophthalmology,

Association of University Radiologists, Atrium Health, Autism

Speaks.

AVAC (AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition), Barnes-Jewish

Hospital, Bassett Healthcare Network, Biophysical Society,

BJC HealthCare, Boston Medical Center, Boston University,

Boyce Thompson Institute for Plant Research, Brown

University, Carle Illinois College of Medicine, Case Western

Reserve University, CDH International, Cedars-Sinai, Child

Neurology Foundation, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta,

Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Children's Hospital of

Philadelphia, Children's Mercy Kansas City,

Cholangiocarcinoma Foundation, ChristianaCare.

Christopher & Dana Reeve Foundation, Clinical Research

Forum, Coalition for Clinical and Translational Science,

Coalition for the Life Sciences, College on Problems of Drug

Dependence, Columbia University, COMBINEDBrain, Conference of

Boston Teaching Hospitals, Congress of Neurological Surgeons,

Consortium of Social Science Associations, Cooley's Anemia

Foundation, Coriell Institute for Medical Research, Cornell

University, Council of University Directors of Clinical

Psychology, Council on Social Work Education, Crohn's &

Colitis Foundation, CURE Epilepsy, Cystic Fibrosis

Foundation, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Dartmouth-Hitchcock

Health.

Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance, Digestive Disease

National Coalition, Dravet Syndrome Foundation, Drexel

University, Duke Health, Duke University, Dystonia Medical

Research Foundation, East Carolina University, ECAN

Esophageal Cancer Action Network, Emory University, Endocrine

Society, Epilepsy Foundation, Federation of American

Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB), Federation of

Associations in Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Fight

Colorectal Cancer, Foundation for Sarcoidosis Research, Fox

Chase Cancer Center, Friends of the National Institute on

Drug Abuse, GBSICIDP Foundation International, Global Health

Technologies Coalition.

Global Liver Institute, Harvard University, HealthyWomen,

Henry Ford Health System, HIV Medicine Association, Hope For

Stomach Cancer, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai,

Indiana University, Indiana University Health, Infectious

Diseases Society of America, Initiative to End Alzheimer's

Disease Board of Visitors, International Foundation for

Gastrointestinal Disorders, International Society for Stem

Cell Research (ISSCR), Interstitial Cystitis Association,

JDRF, Jeffrey Modell Foundation, John & Amy Mewhiney Cancer

Foundation, Johns Hopkins University and Medicine, Joslin

Diabetes Center, KidneyCAN.

Lewis Katz School of Medicine at Temple University, Lewy

Body Dementia Association, LGS Foundation, Lupus Foundation

of America, Lymphatic Education & Research Network, Magee-

Womens Research Institute and Foundation, March of Dimes,

Mass General Brigham, Medical College of Wisconsin, Medical

Image Perception Society, Medical Library Association,

Memorial Sloan Kettering, MemorialCare Health System,

Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation, METAvivor,

Michelson Center for Public Policy, Michelson Medical

Research Foundation, Michigan State University, Moffitt

Cancer Center, National Alliance for Eye and Vision Research.

National Alopecia Areata Foundation, National Association

for Biomedical Research, National Eczema Association,

National Fragile X Foundation, National Kidney Foundation,

National Pancreas Foundation, NephCure Kidney International,

New York Medical College, New York University, North American

Vascular Biology Organization, Northeastern University,

Nutrition & Medical Foods Coalition, NYU Langone Health,

Oakland University, Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation,

Pancreatic Cancer Action Network, Patient Services, Inc.,

Pediatric Policy Council, Penn State University, Personalized

Medicine Coalition.

Population Association of America, Project Sleep, Prostate

Cancer Foundation, Pulmonary Fibrosis Foundation, Pulmonary

Hypertension Association, Radiological Society of North

America (RSNA), Recurrent Pregnancy Loss Association,

Research!America, RESOLVE: The National Infertility

Association, Restless Legs Syndrome Foundation, Rosalind

Franklin University of Medicine and Science, RTI

International, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey,

Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute,

Scleroderma Foundation, Sjogren's Foundation, Sleep Research

Society, Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM),

Society for Imaging Informatics in Medicine.

Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Society for

Neuroscience, Society for Pediatric Radiology, Society for

Pediatric Research, Society for Reproductive Endocrinology

and Infertility, Society for Reproductive Investigation,

Society for Women's Health Research, Society of Academic

Associations of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine

(SAAAPM), Society of Behavioral Medicine, Society of General

Internal Medicine, Society of Gynecologic Oncology, Society

of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Society of

Skeletal Radiology, Society of Surgical Chairs, Society of

Toxicology (SOT), Society of University Surgeons, St. Louis

Children's Hospital, Stanford University, Stony Brook

University, Syngap1 Foundation.

Temple University, Texas A&M Health, The American College

of Rheumatology, The American Society for Transplantation and

Cellular Therapy, The Gerontological Society of America, The

Jackson Laboratory, The Maya's Wings Foundation, The Michael

J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research, The Ohio State

University Wexner Medical Center, The State University of New

York,

The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, The

University of North Carolina System, The University of Texas,

Southwestern Medical Center, Triage Cancer, TSC Alliance,

Tulane University School of Medicine, UC San Diego, UCLA, UNC

Health and UNC School of Medicine, University of Arkansas for

Medical Sciences.

University of California, Irvine, University of Chicago

Medical Center, University of Cincinnati, University of

Colorado System, University of Connecticut, University of

Hawai'i System, University of Illinois College of Medicine,

University of Iowa, University of Maryland, Baltimore,

University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, University

of Michigan, University of Nebraska Medical Center,

University of Pennsylvania, University of Pittsburgh,

University of Pittsburgh Health Sciences, University of

Rochester, University of South Carolina, University of

Southern California, University of Washington, US Hereditary

Angioedema Association (HAEA).

USF Health Morsani College of Medicine, UVA Health,

Vanderbilt University, Vanderbilt University Medical Center,

Virginia Commonwealth University, Washington State

University, Washington University in St. Louis, West Virginia

University, Yale University.

Madam Speaker, we have just been engaged in presenting to the public the Violence Against Women Act. But all of it stands on the shoulders of the equal rights amendment, which has been long overdue.

What an amazing journey that this legislation has taken, and how sad it is to acknowledge that we are one of only a few nations that does not have an equal rights amendment in its constitution.

I remember going to Afghanistan and working with the women of Afghanistan to include the rights of women in their Constitution. I want to say that again: To include the rights of women in their Constitution.

So let me speak clearly to vital points of this resolution. This is not an abortion bill. However, we realize that the right to choose is embedded in the Constitution in the Ninth Amendment. But this is not that.

It is a bill that says that women have a right, as Alice Paul said so many years ago, to be able to have rights of equality under this flag, under this Constitution. Are we suggesting that that should not be?

In addition, let it be very clear that any court decision that was issued, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, that is, the Commonwealth of Virginia v. Ferriero, we can explain that case, because the Court said the only authority to extend the deadline was Congress, and here we are. Congress is now intending to extend that deadline.

Nothing in the Constitution prohibits that. It is not embedded in the amendment. And by Article V, we are able to deal with deadlines. Deadlines are a simple process of statutory authority, and that is what we are doing today.

I don't think my friends on the other side of the aisle want to leave without recognizing the fact that women make 80 cents for every $1 a man earns, and that they are treated unfairly in the workplace.

If you want equal dignity, if you want the rights of women to be promoted, vote for the ERA.

Madam Speaker, I strongly support H.J. Res. 17. H.J. Res. 17, introduced by Representative Jackie Speier with 209 co-sponsors, would take a critical step towards ensuring that the Equal Rights Amendment, or ``ERA'', becomes part of the Constitution.

The resolution provides that notwithstanding the ratification deadline of 1979 that Congress set for the ERA and later extended to 1982, the ERA ``shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution whenever ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States.''

The purpose of the ERA is simple and fundamental: It ensures that everyone is treated equally under the law, regardless of sex or gender. Almost one hundred years ago, Alice Paul, who helped lead the campaign to secure women's right to vote, proposed the first version of the ERA.

She and her fellow suffragists knew that if women were to achieve true equality, our Nation's founding document needed to be amended to reflect that core principle. Nearly a century later, it is long past time to make that dream a reality.

In 1971 and 1972, the House and Senate, respectively, passed the ERA by well more than the constitutionally-mandated two-thirds majority in each chamber.

It contained these simple words: ``Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.'' In the years that quickly followed, dozens of States ratified the ERA through their legislatures.

By the end of the 1970s, the ERA was just a few States short of full ratification. But then progress slowed, and the deadline Congress had set for ratification passed. A well-organized counter-movement scared the American people into thinking that a guarantee of equality would somehow harm women who stay at home to raise their children or would erode American families. What had started as a matter of broad consensus became another divisive wedge in the culture wars.

Today we know better. We know that in the year 2021, it is unacceptable that women still make only 80 cents for every dollar men earn. We know that when women are treated with equal dignity and respect in the workplace, in the home, by our institutions of government, and in our society at large, all of the American people stand to benefit. And we know that a simple but fundamental guarantee of equality should be welcomed rather than feared.

Thankfully, the momentum for ERA ratification has picked back up. Nevada ratified the ERA in 2017, and Illinois followed suit the next year. Then, in January 2020, Virginia made history and became the 38th State to pass a resolution ratifying the ERA. So long as these last three ratifications are valid, the ERA will become law.

Unfortunately, a federal district court ruled two weeks ago that these states were too late because the ratification deadline that Congress set had expired already in 1982.

Importantly, that court affirmed that Congress has the power to set ratifications deadlines, as Article V of the Constitution, which governs the constitutional amendment process, does not itself provide for ratification deadlines of any kind. Of course, the power to set deadlines necessarily includes the power to remove those deadlines.

By removing the ratification deadline that Congress set previously, H.J. Res. 17 ensures that the recent ratifications by Nevada, Illinois, and Virginia are counted and that the ERA becomes part of our Constitution.

We are on the verge of a breakthrough for equality in this country, despite all the obstacles in our current political and social climate. This resolution will ensure that no deadline stands in the way. Therefore, I strongly support H.J. Res. 17 and urge its passage by the House.

Madam Speaker, I include the following letters of endorsement for H.R. 1620, the Violence Against Women's Act (VAWA) into the Record.

Letters are from: The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, National Resource Center on Domestic Violence, The National Center on Violence Against Women in the Black Community, YWCA, End Sexual Violence, National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, National Congress of American Indians, LegalMomentum: The Women's Legal Defense and Education Fund, JWI, and Casa de Esperanza.

March 8, 2021.

Hon. Sheila Jackson Lee,

Hon. Brian Fitzpatrick,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Hon. Jerrold Nadler,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Chairwoman Jackson Lee, Representative Fitzpatrick,

and Chairman Nadler: The National Coalition Against Domestic

Violence, (NCADV) applauds you for introducing the Violence

Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2021. The Violence

Against Women Act (VAWA) is one of the three pillars of the

Federal response to domestic violence. First passed in 1994

under the leadership of then-Senator Biden, VAWA has been

reauthorized three times since then, most recently in 2013.

VAWA's authorization lapsed in 2018.

Every reauthorization included critical updates to enhance

America's response to domestic violence and other forms of

gender-based violence. These enhancements reflect the

evolution of our understanding of the dynamics of violence

and the needs of impacted communities. The Violence Against

Women Reauthorization Act of 2021 is the successor bill to

these previous reauthorizations and is a slightly updated

version of the H.R. 1585/S. 2843, the Violence Against Women

Reauthorization Act of 2019, which passed the House of

Representatives with strong bipartisan support before dying

in the Senate.

Like its predecessor, the updated 2021 bill invests in

prevention; keeps guns out of the hands of adjudicated dating

abusers and stalkers; promotes survivors' economic stability;

ends impunity for non Natives who commit gender-based

violence on Tribal lands by expanding special tribal criminal

jurisdiction beyond domestic violence; and increases

survivors' access to safe housing. The Violence Against Women

Reauthorization Act of 2021 also recognizes the disparate

impact of gender-based violence on communities of color due

to systemic racism and increases funding for culturally

specific organizations serving these communities. The

Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2021 expands

VAWA's life-saving provisions to increase access to safety

and justice for all survivors.

It is particularly critical to reauthorize and improve VAWA

as we continue to battle the COVID-19 pandemic. In a recent

survey of domestic violence programs, 84% reported that

intimate partner violence has increased in their community

during the pandemic. Fifty percent reported the use of

firearms. against intimate partners has increased, and one-

third reported intimate partner homicides have increased in

their communities. The Violence Against Women Reauthorization

Act of 2021 responds to the needs of survivors and supports

the programs that serve them.

We thank you, again, for your leadership, and we urge the

House to pass the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act

of 2021 as a matter of upmost urgency.

Sincerely,

The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1620, the ``Violence Against Women Act of 2021,'' that will reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) of 1994.

The Violence Against Women Act is landmark legislation first enacted in 1994 and signed into law by President Bill Clinton which has-- through policy reforms, interstate cooperation and grant allocation-- been pivotal in providing a national response to protecting half of the population.

Equally important, it has ushered in a seismic transformation on how society perceives violence against women.

VAWA was enacted in response to the prevalence of domestic and sexual violence, and the significant impact of such violence on the lives of women.

I remember those days well because I was serving on the board of the Houston Area Women's Center (HAWC), at that time the sole shelter in the Houston area offering sanctuary to victims and women at risk of domestic violence.

Despite its import, VAWA has been expired since September 30, 2018, and we as a body are now called upon by survivors to reauthorize it.

VAWA has a proven success record--in the quarter-century since it passed, domestic violence has decreased by approximately two-thirds, and intimate partner homicides decreased by approximately one-third.

However, despite these gains, domestic violence and sexual assault cases I have rapidly increased during this COVID-19 crisis, where perpetrators are spending significant amount of time at home with their victims.

This landmark, transformative legislation is needed now more than ever.

Police departments around the country have reported increases in domestic violence: 18 percent increase in San Antonio; 22 percent increase in Portland, Oregon; 10 percent increase in New York City.

A recent meta-analysis of 18 different studies concerning domestic violence during the pandemic found that domestic violence cases have increased an average of over 8 percent across the country.

In the United States, an estimated 10 million people experience domestic violence every year, and more than 15 million children are exposed to this violence annually.

According to the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, about 20 people per minute are physically abused by an intimate partner.

About 1 in 4 women and 1 in 9 men experience severe intimate partner physical violence, sexual violence, and/or partner stalking with injury.

Today, in Texas, 35.10 percent of women and 34.5 percent of men are subjected to domestic violence.

We cannot forget the victims of domestic violence like Yashica Fontenot, who was murdered in Harris County, Texas, by her husband just one day after Christmas last year while she was trying to escape her relationship.

Nor can we forget Debra Seidenfaden, who was murdered by her husband in Houston after an argument.

Nor can we forget the Houston woman who was tied up and sexually assaulted in her own home just last week; or the Houston woman who was shot multiple times by her husband at a medical office this month; or the Houston mother and grandmother who was murdered by her son-in law while she attempted to protect her daughter and grandchildren.

There are countless stories like this throughout this country, which is why it is imperative to reauthorize VAWA by passing H.R. 1620.

The stories of these women remind us of the urgency to protect survivors now, before it is too late, because many of these deaths are preventable.

Since VAWA's codification in 1994, more victims report episodes of domestic violence to the police and the rate of non-fatal intimate partner violence against women has decreased by almost two-thirds.

VAWA has also led to a significant increase in the reporting of sexual assault.

From 1994 to 2015, the rate of women murdered by men in single victim/single offender incidents dropped 29 percent.

In the first 15 years of VAWA's validity, rates of serious intimate partner violence declined by 72 percent for women and 64 percent for men.

Research suggests that referring a victim to a domestic violence or sexual assault advocate has been linked to an increased willingness to file a police report--survivors with an advocate filed a report with law enforcement 59 percent of the time, versus 41 percent for individuals not referred to a victim advocate.

Prior to VAWA, law enforcement lacked the resources and tools to respond effectively to domestic violence and sexual assault, and this progress cannot be allowed to stop.

Congress must continue sending the clear message that violence against women is unacceptable.

VAWA has been reauthorized three times--in 2000, 2005, and 2013--with strong bipartisan approval and overwhelming support from Congress, states, and local communities.

Each reauthorization of VAWA has improved protections for women and men, while helping to change the culture and reduce the tolerance for these crimes.

H.R. 1620 continues that tradition, and therefore, is intended to make modifications, as Congress has done in the past to all previous reauthorizations of VAWA.

H.R. 1620 is a bipartisan bill, reflecting a reasonable and compromise approach to reauthorize grant programs under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).

These moderate enhancements will address the many growing and unmet needs of victims and survivors of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking.

H.R. 1620 addresses the needs of sex trafficking victims while creating a demonstration program on trauma-informed training for law enforcement.

H.R. 1620 increases access to grant programs for culturally specific organizations and ensure culturally specific organizations are included in the development and implementation of service, education, training, and other grants.

H.R. 1620 adds a purpose area to assist communities in developing alternatives to housing ordinances that punish survivors for seeking law enforcement intervention.

H.R. 1620 expands protections for vulnerable populations such as youth, survivors without shelter, Native American women, and LGBTQ persons.

H.R. 1620 ensures Deaf people are included in grants relating to people with disabilities.

VAWA is central to our nation's effort to fight the epidemic of domestic, sexual, and

dating violence and stalking, and we as a body are now called upon by survivors to reauthorize it.

It is important to note that H.R. 1620 did not happen on its own.

It was the product of a collaborative effort of stakeholders, including victim advocates.

It was the product of those willing to share their stories of the abuse suffered at the hands of those who were entrusted to love, but instead harmed.

The courage, strength, and resilience displayed by survivors has reminded all that we must continue to foster an environment for victims of violence to come forward and expose episodes of violence against women.

Having listened to concerned stakeholders from all pockets of the country, we have put pen to paper and produced a bill that is endorsed by the bipartisan National Task Force to End Sexual and Domestic Violence (NTF), which is a national collaboration comprising a large and diverse group of 35 national, tribal, state, territorial, and local organizations, advocates, and individuals that focus on the development, passage and implementation of effective public policy to address domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking.

This bill recognizes the urgency and dire need faced by the victims and survivors throughout this country during a significant moment of ongoing domestic violence caused by this pandemic and experienced by both women and men.

The love for a spouse, the comfort of a mother and the best wishes for a sister know no political allegiance.

I am determined to work with my colleagues and others to complete the mission I accepted in the 115th Congress when the House passed the VAWA legislation I authored, H.R. 1585, the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2018, all the way this time through passage by the Senate and to presentment for signature to President Biden, a strong supporter of the bill and the original creator of VAWA.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 829, I call up the bill (H.R. 6119) making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2022, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise

and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the measure under consideration.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, before I go any further, I would first like to take a moment to mourn the loss of Congresswoman Carrie Meek. She was an extraordinary force in the Congress and a pioneer who was never deterred by any challenge that came her way. I like to say that though she was unassuming and soft-spoken, she carried a big stick. That is evident in her enduring legacy today. I had the honor of serving together with Congresswoman Meek on the Appropriations Committee years ago, and I feel immensely privileged to have worked with her to help expand opportunity for all Americans. We all mourn her loss.

Madam Speaker, I will be frank. Instead of being here today discussing another continuing resolution, I wish that we were here to present a bipartisan, bicameral appropriations agreement. Continuing resolutions are not the way to govern. They are a short-term patch that leaves the American people behind. But we are here today because my colleagues across the aisle have refused time and time again to begin negotiations or even offer a proposal of their own for government funding that delivers for the American people.

House and Senate Democrats have put forward their proposals, but Republicans have not presented an offer of their own. There is not one piece of paper describing what Republicans want. It has been 30 days since I brought together a bipartisan, bicameral four-corners meeting on November 2, and to date we have not heard one word from them--not one word.

But now my Republican counterparts want more time--something that they have had since we came to this floor to pass the last funding extension 62 days ago, which means we now have no choice but to pursue a short-term extension. Make no mistake, Madam Speaker, a vote against this continuing resolution is a vote to shut the government down.

The legislation before us, the Further Extending Government Funding Act, continues government funding at current levels through February 18. It makes minimal changes to address the most urgent of needs during the period of the continuing resolution and provides $7 billion to continue supporting Afghanistan evacuees after the end of 20 years of war.

While I wish the February 18 end date were earlier--and I pursued earlier dates--I believe this agreement allows the appropriations process to move forward toward a final funding agreement that addresses the needs of the American people.

Let me be clear, working families, small businesses, veterans, and our military need the certainty that comes with passing omnibus funding legislation instead of short-term funding patches. Republicans must join us for bipartisan, bicameral negotiations to resolve our differences and keep government working for us all.

For our communities, we need an omnibus to create and sustain good- paying jobs, support small businesses, prevent future pandemics, and advance lifesaving medical research. We need an omnibus to strengthen public schools, protect our air and water, combat the opioid epidemic, and support core services such as food safety and consumer product inspections. Without an omnibus, investments in all these areas will be denied.

For our veterans, we need an omnibus to provide sufficient funding for veterans' benefits, reduce backlogs for veterans and their families, and meet the needs of the VA's healthcare system. Without an omnibus there will be a shortfall that will cause veterans not to receive their benefits in full.

For our national security, we need an omnibus to support defense readiness and modernization, secure our cyber infrastructure, and strengthen American leadership abroad. Without an omnibus, a pay raise for troops will not be funded while funds will be misdirected to a war we are no longer fighting.

As I said before, I wanted to be here today passing a bipartisan, bicameral appropriations agreement. Sadly, we are not. But as Republicans take the next 2\1/2\ months, Democrats remain ready, willing, and able to move this process forward. We are ready to go, but we need willing partners to put the American people first.

With a new deadline of February 18, it is long past time for our Republican colleagues to offer constructive proposals to address the critical issues facing the country by funding the Federal Government's important work. As the American people put their faith and trust in us, they deserve no less.

Madam Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), who is the chairwoman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, and Related Agencies.

Madam Speaker, once again, the Republicans refuse to come to the table to negotiate, thereby jeopardizing benefits for our veterans and our national security. We can move if they come to the table.

I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), the chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies.

Madam Speaker, antiscience fearmongering about vaccines is wrong. Fears about government requirements for vaccines are flat-out silly. And the Republicans are prepared to shut down the government based on this. Incredible.

I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Roybal-Allard), the chair of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop), the chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), the chairwoman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs.

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from California.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), the chair of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense.

Madam Speaker, once again, it has been the Republicans' refusal to come to the table to negotiate that has stopped the process and forced us to do a short-term stopgap measure. We shouldn't be doing it, but Republicans need to come to the table.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan), the chairman of the Subcommittee on the Legislative Branch.

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Ohio.

Madam Speaker, if the Republicans wanted to do something about our defense and our security in the military, they would move to work with us to pass the defense appropriations bill and the omnibus.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz), the chair of the Subcommittee on Military Construction and Veterans' Affairs.

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Florida.

Madam Speaker, I want to remind my colleague on the other side of the aisle that a continuing resolution is a cut to defense. If you come to the table, we will discuss it, then we can move forward on the defense of this Nation.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Maine (Ms. Pingree), the chair of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies.

Madam Speaker, I just want to remind the gentleman that antiscience fearmongering about vaccines is wrong. Science is on our side, and history is on our side. Vaccines work.

I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Quigley), the chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Cartwright), the chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Madam Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline).

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Let me just say to you that we have heard from a number of advocacy groups urging the Congress to move on taking up a full-year omnibus. Let me just tell you the groups that have written to us.

We are looking at the National Defense Industrial Association: On behalf of thousands of companies represented by the National Defense Industrial Association, we write to request the expedited completion of the defense appropriation bill.

We talk about the Association of American Universities: Urge you to reach a bipartisan agreement to complete the FY22 appropriations process before the end of the year.

The Aerospace Industries Association: Our essential partners are urging us to avoid a further CR beyond December 3, wanting us to come to the table in order to be able to have a full-year appropriations bill.

The Coalition for Health Funding, the same message to all of us: Relying on continuing resolutions would be a grave, missed opportunity to improve the lives of all Americans. A full-year appropriations bill.

The Ad Hoc Group for Medical Research telling us the very, very same thing: To maximize the potential of medical research, we need to move forward with a full-year bill.

The veterans organizations saying the same thing: Do not shortchange veterans and their benefits by holding back on a full-year appropriations bill.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record statements in support of the bill from a broad coalition of groups urging negotiations now, as well as letters from veterans' organizations and America's leading research universities.

Broad Coalition of Groups Urging Negotiations Now

A broad coalition of groups have joined Chair DeLauro and

Democratic Appropriators urging negotiations and agreement on

fiscal year 2022 appropriations bills. These organizations

include:

Ad Hoc Group for Medical Research

Our organizations strongly support an approach to the final

FY 2022 spending package that avoids additional CRs past

December. Aside from the budget implications, CRs create

inefficiencies and add uncertainty to a system that is

already under stress with the continued reverberations of the

ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. We strongly urge you to work

swiftly in securing bipartisan, bicameral agreement on

topline discretionary spending allocations and to ensure any

final budget agreement reflects a strong commitment to the

nation's health.

Aerospace Industries Association

The United States aerospace and defense industries are an

essential partner with the federal government in an array of

efforts vital to our economy and our national security. Each

fall, that partnership is tested when those programs are

slowed down or deferred by the use of multiple continuing

resolutions (CR) to keep the government running . . . If

Congress fails to once again enact full-year appropriations

bills, or continues running the government into 2022 under

continuing resolutions, it will send the wrong signal to the

government's partners, like those in our industry. We count

on stable, reliable and adequate funding to support

the critical capabilities that we provide for all Americans.

American Association for Cancer Research

As the nation continues to combat the COVID-19 pandemic,

cancer has not stopped, and remains the second leading cause

of death in the United States. To better prevent, detect, and

treat cancers, Congress must act swiftly to increase

investments in cancer research and prevention. A full-year

continuing resolution or funding lapse would threaten our

nation's research enterprise and stall medical breakthroughs

that could benefit the lives of millions of patients with

cancer and survivors. The AACR urges congressional

negotiators to come to the table and agree to Fiscal Year

2022 allocations that would support robust and sustained

funding for cancer research and prevention.

Association of American Universities

Higher education, research, and innovation play integral

roles in our nation's competitiveness, security, health, and

ability to combat and overcome the pandemic. Our nation

cannot afford continued inaction on FY22 appropriations. In

the absence of final appropriations, federal agencies

postpone research award decisions and prepare for potential

lapses in funding. Continuing resolutions (CRs) slow the pace

of scientific innovation and create funding uncertainty for

researchers and students. It is vital that Congress complete

appropriations this year and avoid serial stop-gap measures

and a yearlong CR.

Coalition on Human Needs

The nation's recovery depends on strengthening a host of

domestic programs that have been allowed to shrink for years,

not just to get to where they had been before, but to respond

to needs far greater because of the pandemic and its global

economic dislocations. A long-term continuing resolution

would be a severe failure to address these needs. We strongly

urge you to enact omnibus appropriations legislation

including all twelve bills as soon as possible.

Joint Coalition of the Campaign to Invest in American's Workforce, the

Coalition for Health Funding, the Coalition on Human Needs, and the

Committee for Education Funding

The bill passed by the House this summer and the bill

proposed by the Senate Appropriations Committee this fall

provide vital increased funding for the programs and services

that have a profound impact on health and well-being, child

development, educational and skills attainment, employment,

and productivity. Failing to enact the FY 2022 bill and

relying on continuing resolutions (CRs) would be a grave

missed opportunity to improve the lives of all Americans.

National Defense Industrial Association

We cannot stress enough the importance of the defense

appropriations bill to our national security and to a healthy

defense industrial base. The limbo caused under CRs wastes

precious time and money our nation cannot recover. Delayed

new starts and initiatives place a strain on companies and

their workforce, particularly as they recalibrate operations

to a post-pandemic normal. Our nation's competitors face no

similar challenges putting us at a competitive disadvantage,

particularly with emerging technologies, and place our supply

chains at increasing risk, something we cannot afford after

the nearly two years of pandemic impacts.

Veterans Service Organizations, including the American Legion and the

Veterans of Foreign Wars

A full-year continuing resolution could result in an

estimated $7 billion shortfall in funding for mandatory

compensation and pension benefits, in large part due to an

increased number of benefit claims resulting from

congressional approval of new diseases related to Agent

Orange exposure for Vietnam veterans . . . we call on you to

reject consideration of a full-year continuing resolution

that would reduce veterans' funding below what has already

been approved in an overwhelming bipartisan vote.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the majority leader of the House of Representatives.

Madam Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Madam Speaker, I have a motion at the desk.