Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, we are nearing the 50th anniversary of the Equal Pay Act, yet too many women continue to struggle. Too many women still don't receive equal pay for equal work.

Fifty years after President Kennedy signed the Equal Pay Act, women still earn only 77 cents for every dollar earned by men. That is not only wrong, it's bad for our economy.

Working families often rely on two incomes, and more and more households have women as the primary source of income. That means women's take-home pay must cover the rent, the groceries, the doctor's visits. And when women succeed, our families succeed; so does our economy.

I was proud to cast my first vote in Congress for the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which restored women's right to challenge unfair pay in court, but there's more work to do. Over the past 50 years, the Equal Pay Act has never been updated or strengthened. That's where the Paycheck Fairness Act comes in. It strengthens and closes loopholes in the law.

So let's get this done and send an important message that work is work, no matter who is doing it. Let's pass the Paycheck Fairness Act.

Mr. Speaker, I submit this statement in support of H.R. 671, the Ruth Moore Act of 2013, introduced by Rep. Chellie Pingree of Maine.

This legislation makes it easier for veterans to receive benefits for disabilities (PTSD) that stem from sexual assaults. The Pentagon reports that the number of sexual assaults in the military has grown from 19,000 to 26,000 since last year. One in 3 servicewomen report having been sexually assaulted, but an estimated 86 percent of assaults are never reported.

Our military is a source of great strength and national pride, and we should expect nothing less than the highest standards of conduct, from rank and file troops to the upper echelons of leadership.

We must eradicate the criminal, violent acts of sexual assault, and we must remove institutional barriers that allow perpetrators to go unpunished and victims to be revictimized.

I agree with the provision of H.R. 671, which asks the Department of Veterans Affairs to lower the burden of proof to receive benefits. Currently, servicewomen are required to provide secondary evidence to show that the trauma occurred--a burden not required for other combat- related claims.

Let's stand up for our brave servicewomen by building a better system--one that honors and affirms them as members of the mightiest military force on the globe.

Mr. Speaker, today, I rise in support of H.R. 1412, The Improving Job Opportunities for Veterans Act.

This bipartisan bill helps our Nation's veterans get the training they need to build a stronger future.

It improves and increases the awareness and availability of on-the- job training and apprenticeship programs.

After all they have sacrificed for our country, we should do our part to ensure veterans have good training and good job opportunities.

I thank my colleagues from both sides of the aisle--Mr. Coffman and Mr. Takano--for introducing this bill.

Helping our veterans isn't a partisan issue--it's a national responsibility.

Mr. Speaker, today, I rise in support of H.R. 570, the American Heroes Cola Act.

I am proud to cosponsor this bipartisan bill because it helps our Nation's veterans.

More specifically, it helps veterans with service-related disabilities.

H.R. 570 would make their annual cost-of-living adjustments automatic for their disability compensation.

Making this process automatic would finally allow veterans to count on their cost of living adjustment every year instead of waiting around on Congress.

I thank my colleagues from both sides of the aisle--Mr. Runyon and Ms. Titus--for introducing this bill.

Helping our veterans isn't a partisan issue--it's a national responsibility.

Mr. Speaker, due to family obligations today, May 17, 2013, I will miss certain votes related to H.R. 1062. Had I been present, I would have voted the following way:

Representative Hurt Amendment--I would have voted ``no.''

Representative Carolyn Maloney Amendment--I would have voted ``yes.''

Democratic Motion to Recommit H.R. 1062--I would have voted ``yes.''

On final passage of H.R. 1062--I would have voted ``no.''

I ask unanimous consent to insert my statement in the Record opposing the GOP's miserable Mother's Day gift--more work and less pay for working moms. Happy Mother's Day.

Mr. Speaker, today, I introduced a bipartisan piece of legislation to help tackle the substantial backlog of veterans' claims. My bill is called the VA Claims, Operations, and Records Efficiency Act, or CORE. It directs the Department of Defense to enact an efficient electronic transfer of veterans' records instead of the outdated paperwork process that is currently being used.

The average veteran waits more than 250 days for a decision on a claim. About 175 days of that time is the VA waiting for the DOD to send the complete records. In Arizona's District One, one of my veterans' caseworkers is helping several vets who waited more than 2 years. This wait time is simply unacceptable. Federal agencies must leave paperwork in the past and adopt an efficient electronic approach.

I thank my colleague, Chairman Coffman, for cosponsoring this bill. Helping our veterans isn't a partisan issue; it's a national responsibility. Let's end the backlog so we can keep the promises we've made to our veterans.

Mr. Speaker, I stand here on behalf of my district's seniors, veterans, and working families to say that I strongly oppose cuts to Social Security in the President's budget. Every week, my case workers in Arizona report back to me about our constituents, and every week I hear about another senior who is struggling or another veteran who is struggling.

Our rural towns are filled with hard workers, but work is hard to find. These are folks who may never have the protections of a pension, so they must have the protection of Social Security.

The President's budget uses a formula called chained CPI. It recalculates how the cost of living is calculated, and it will not keep up with inflation.

So let's call this formula what it really is: a shrinking Social Security check for the people who need it most. Yes, we have to make cuts, and we need to do more with less, but seniors and veterans are already doing that. We can do better than sticking them with the tab.

Madam Speaker, I was born and raised on the White Mountain Apache Nation. The necklace I wear today was made by an Apache woman. I've seen firsthand the troubles and hardships that our tribes experience. Now I represent 12 Native American tribes, and I'm here standing on the floor of Congress to give them a voice.

Our Native American women, who need resources and protection, face great hardships. They often live in very remote areas. Unfortunately, Native American women are two-and-a-half times more likely to be assaulted in their lifetimes than other women.

As a prosecutor, I also saw firsthand the need to protect those who are vulnerable. That's why I have pushed so hard for the bipartisan Senate-passed version of this legislation. This legislation strengthens protections for Native American women and so many others.

My district needs this legislation. I urge my colleagues from both sides to come together and pass the Senate version of the Violence Against Women Act today.

Madam Speaker, the voters sent us to Congress because they want solutions, but reckless, across-the-board cuts are not solutions. We are just 2 days away from the start of these cuts known as sequestration, 2 days away from hurting, rather than helping, the people who elected us.

Let me share with you some examples.

I represent Arizona's District One. This is a vast, beautiful, mostly rural district. It's larger than the State of Pennsylvania. My district includes one of the greatest natural resources of the world, the Grand Canyon, and many other national parks. The Grand Canyon is not only an environmental treasure; it is an economic driver. It brings $700 million to our economy and creates 12,000 jobs annually.

If our national parks are forced to cut operating hours, cut services or even close facilities, we will be hurting the economy, not helping it. Thousands of jobs and small businesses are connected to the national parks in my district and across our Nation. Hurting our national parks is not a solution.

I'm also concerned about how sequestration will hurt education. Thousands of low-income students in Arizona would no longer receive aid to help cover the cost of college. Work study jobs would be eliminated, and Arizona is the largest recipient of impact aid funding in the Nation. Impact aid compensates local school districts for revenue they lost due to the presence of federally owned and, therefore, tax-exempt property.

It compensates local school districts for costs incurred due to federally connected students.

What are federally connected students?

These are students who are Native American, who have a parent in the military, or who live on Federal property.

In my district in 2012, for example, the Chinle Unified School District received more than $22 million in impact aid. Sequestration cuts would deeply affect a district like Chinle's. It would hurt its capacity for everything from transportation to staffing and from construction to classroom size. Hurting our schools and our students is not a solution.

Madam Speaker, what about our tribal communities?

My district has 12 Native American tribes; 25 percent of my district is Native American. These are residents of some of our most remote and rural communities. The median household income is $7,000 a year. These folks often struggle with access to the most basic medical care and resources. If sequestration takes effect, their primary source of health care, the Indian Health Service, will take a major hit. Other Federal programs, such as Medicare, Medicaid and veterans benefits, are exempt from sequestration cuts. The Indian Health Service is not exempt. IHS may be cut by over $200 million.

What does a cut like that mean to tribal communities in my district?

It would mean losing hundreds of jobs. It would mean cuts in primary health care. Nationwide, it's estimated that 3,000 fewer people would be admitted for inpatient care and that 800,000 fewer Native Americans would be able to receive outpatient visits.

Hurting our tribal communities is not a solution. The consequences of these cuts are not TV sound bites. They are real, and they hurt my district and our Nation. It will take both parties working together to find a responsible, thoughtful solution to our budget challenges. It will take both parties working together to put a stop to these reckless cuts of sequestration.

So let's work together, and let's show the American people that we are a Congress that can find solutions.

Mr. Speaker, in Arizona's First District, Native Americans make up about 25 percent of my constituents. Unfortunately, Native American women are two and a half times more likely to be assaulted in their lifetime than other women.

Reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act is important to my district. That's why I'm very concerned about the impact of sequestration cuts on programs supported by the Violence Against Women Act. More than $20 million in cuts are at stake.

What does a $20 million cut mean? It means thousands more victims would be denied shelter and legal services. It means thousands fewer police officers, prosecutors, judges, and victim advocates would get specialized training.

As a former prosecutor, I know we need to do all we can to keep victims safe and hold perpetrators accountable, and that means we need to do all we can to stop these sequestration cuts.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Claims Resolution Act. This legislation will have an enormous impact on Indian Country, and it will also help meet our trust obligations to tribal nations.

Included in this legislation is the White Mountain Apache settlement that resolves the water rights of the tribe and communities in the White Mountains of Arizona. Growing up in that area, I remember having to boil water before using it. That is simply not acceptable in the 21st century. This legislation is critical, and I was proud to have it be the first bill I introduced.

I want to thank tribal Chairman Lupe, Senator Kyl, Chairman Rahall, and the other stakeholders involved in this process. It was a collaboration of many partners and many years. I am proud to see it passed into law today.

I urge my colleagues to pass the Claims Resolution Act.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of my legislation, H.R. 5110, the Casa Grande Ruins National Monument Boundary Modification Act.

In Coolidge, Arizona, we have the largest prehistoric structure in the Nation--the Casa Grande Ruins National Monument. Throughout Coolidge and the nearby city of Florence, there is evidence of prehistoric structures--homes, irrigation canals and potential recreational facilities.

Each year, thousands of visitors come to Pinal County to visit the ruins, to learn about the ancient Hohokam culture that lived there, and to see the amazing prehistoric architecture they left behind. Protecting more of these sensitive areas will allow further development of tourism to the area, and it will help fulfill the mission of the monument.

The legislation under consideration today does two things. First, it allows an expansion of the boundary of the monument to include land nearby, which will greatly enhance the existing site. Second, it provides for a study to determine what additional sites in Coolidge and Florence could be incorporated in the future.

This bill is critical to the economic development of Coolidge and Florence and of the entire county. It is critical for the preservation of cultural and historical sites, which is unequaled anywhere else on the continent. It is the kind of low-cost, job-creating project we need in Arizona.

Mr. Speaker, since I have been in Congress, I have been the voice of fiscal discipline, and I have been looking for low-cost, job-creating projects. This is one of them. This project would create hundreds of jobs in an area where it does have double-digit unemployment. Talk about double-digit unemployment--that's in my district. That is what this is going to address. This is a low-cost jobs project.

Let me tell you that this is exactly why the American people right now are so angry and frustrated. It is why I am angry and frustrated, and it is why you are angry and frustrated. It is because Washington is not listening to the local people. The people of Coolidge and Florence have worked on this project for years. It is not about partisanship. They have come together as local community leaders and as private businesses to support this job-creation project. It makes common sense. Yet, once again, Washington is not going to listen to the voices of the American people. Once again, Washington is going to impose its partisan bickering to stop jobs and to not listen to the American people. That is what is wrong with Washington.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this critical legislation.

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of my legislation, H.R. 4823, the Sedona Red Rocks National Scenic Area Act.

I have often said that the congressional district I am fortunate to represent is the most beautiful in the country. The iconic red rocks that surround the Sedona community and extend into the Verde Valley are indeed a national treasure that is unparalleled. Millions of visitors come from across the Nation and around the globe each year to see the red rocks.

The communities throughout Red Rock Country in Arizona have, for years, discussed the long-term protection of the amazing national resource that surrounds the area. A nonpartisan community coalition came together to advocate for protection of the red rocks through a National Scenic Area, as designated by Congress.

Preserving the natural beauty of the red rocks will ensure that our great-grandchildren will be able to enjoy this unique site just as we do. Just as important, it will attract new visitors and more business to the surrounding communities, getting folks to work during this economic downturn. This bill is necessary to secure these tremendous benefits.

Last year, I circulated draft legislation to local stakeholders, to supporters, and to those with concerns. The Forest Service, the city government, the local Chamber of Commerce, the coalition, Realtors, small business owners, and concerned citizens provided valuable comments and edits to the text of this proposed bill. Through the House Natural Resources Committee, the bill has been further amended by both Republicans and Democrats and was reported from committee without objection.

Good ideas and good policy come from the people, and this bill is the culmination of much debate and feedback in the communities it will affect. Thanks to the involvement of so many people with so many different perspectives, we have put together legislation that will work better for the Sedona area now and in the future. It is the first step forward in moving towards meaningful, long-term protection of the area and towards economic development for the region.

Once again, Mr. Speaker, this is a low-cost jobs project. There is no cost to this. It is a project that I have been looking for that creates jobs that requires Federal action, not Federal spending.

It's appalling, but not surprising, that my esteemed colleagues on the other side of the aisle oppose a low-cost jobs project. They clearly do not understand what's happening to the American people who do not have a job. And when you do not have a job right now, nothing else matters. And it is unbelievable to me that, again, partisan bickering in Washington--not in Sedona--is going to stop a job creation bill.

It's time that Washington started listening to the American people. The people in Sedona are able to put aside partisan bickering and come together for the good of the community and to create jobs, and Washington cannot do the same? Believe me, I will let the folks back home know who rose in opposition, who let partisan bickering drown out their voices and drown out their common sense.

I have always said it is the American people that are going to turn this country around, not Washington, and this is exactly why. This is exactly why: Partisan bickering that gridlocks Washington.

Shame on you.

Mr. Chair, the House considers today H.R. 4785, the Rural Energy Savings Program. I am a cosponsor of the original, bipartisan legislation that would address a critical need in rural America--energy efficiency improvements that will reduce our energy consumption and lower consumers' utility bills.

This original bill creates new loans under the Department of Agriculture's Rural Utilities Service. The voluntary loans to electric cooperatives will facilitate their providing low-interest loans to consumers, to be repaid

through utility bills. Loans will allow cooperative customers to make only energy efficiency improvements that are proven to be worth the investment. After the small loans for improvements are repaid, consumers will have a lasting reduction in their bills as their energy consumption declines. The federal government will be repaid, wisely leveraging these taxpayer dollars for long-term benefits. This program is a win-win-win for consumers, the cooperatives that serve them, and taxpayers, and I strongly support this model.

Unfortunately, the bill we are considering today also includes the Home Star Energy Retrofit Act--a measure the House considered in May of this year and that I opposed. This bill--also known as ``Cash for Caulkers''--would authorize more than $6 billion in new federal spending for rebates to home improvements. I heard from constituents before last spring's vote that this bill will simply not work for Greater Arizona. The rebates require homeowners to have means to make the improvements in the first place, and in this economic downturn that is simply not an option for many families.

In addition, the Home Star Energy Retrofit Act could cost the taxpayers more than $6 billion over the life of the program. I just spent six weeks back in Greater Arizona meeting with small businesses, working families, and local leaders. The concern I heard expressed most frequently was concern that our deficit is growing too quickly and that our national debt is mortgaging our children's future. We must stop spending and start to address our long-term fiscal imbalance, and moving forward with this bill is not going to get the job done.

I support our rural electric cooperatives, but I cannot support a bill that will add so significantly to our deficit or that will not help families struggling in these tough times.