Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I was not present for rollcall vote 111. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on H.R. 3992.

Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank Congressman Mike Quigley for working to organize Women's Health Wednesday, and also all of my colleagues of the Congressional Pro Choice Caucus, of which I am also a member, for standing up for women's health every single day.

I'm here, once again, to stand against the ongoing War on Women and Women's Health.

And let me just say how unfortunate it is that we continue to have to fight for what is and should be a basic health right and necessity for women. I am sure the American people would much rather have us focusing on ways to create jobs, especially for the long-term unemployed.

Yet here we are again. Defending women's right to access basic health care services. And yes, that includes contraception.

Much of the debate around access to contraception has centered on the so-called conscience clause. The ability of a religiously affiliated business to withhold access to contraception care for women based simply on an abstract moral objection.

An objection, mind you, that not only ignores the conscience or moral beliefs of the women these businesses employ, but completely disregards the real medical needs of these women.

And let me say, as I have before, that as a former devout practicing Catholic I fully understand and respect the Church's doctrine on contraception, even though I disagree with it.

But the health care decisions a woman makes should and must be between her and her doctor. And as I have always said, the government has no place inserting itself between the medical decisions a woman makes with her doctor. Period.

Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today to recognize and highlight those women who are especially impacted by the attempts of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, as well as some religious leaders, to restrict access to vital contraception coverage.

Those who often get lost in the debate around this issue. Although I believe that women's health care decisions should not continue to be unfairly politicized.

We know the benefits of birth control for women and their families. We know how planned pregnancy and spacing children improves the quality of life and the outlook for the children and the whole family.

And we know that is also improves the health of the woman.

Often, however, we do not hear from the women for whom birth control may literally mean the difference between life and death.

I'd like to share the story of a woman named Sally who is from my district in California. She is a working mother who could not afford to have more children. After numerous miscarriages, she relied on birth control to allow her body to heal properly before becoming pregnant again. After a couple of years of taking this medication, her body healed sufficiently to allow her to finally have a viable pregnancy.

Another young woman from California has polycystic ovarian syndrome and uses birth control to regulate her hormones.

She was prescribed the medication after her gynecologist had to scrape dozens of precancerous cysts from her uterus. According to her gynecologist, had another 6 months passed, this young woman would have developed full blown cancer.

And another young woman who, after having a very difficult first pregnancy and being diagnosed with a serious heart condition, was told by her doctor that if she were to become pregnant again, it could cost her life and the life of her unborn child. And so she depends, in part, on contraception to not only to preserve her life, but to be there to raise her son.

And these are just a few of the thousands of stories from women across the country who use contraception for many many medical reasons.

Two years after the passage of the Affordable Care Act we are beginning to see true reforms in our health care system that expands access to vital preventative health services.

We must protect these gains, instead of working against them.

It is time to stop this War on Women and Women's Health Care.

Madam Speaker, last night we lost a world leader, a father, a grandfather, a brother, an uncle, a great leader who consistently brought light to human suffering taking place around the world and what we here in Washington, D.C., can do for it.

It is with a heavy heart that I rise today in memory and in honor of Congressman Don Payne, a brilliant leader, former chair of the Africa Subcommittee on Foreign Affairs, and to do what I'm sure he would be doing if he were with us today, speak out against the massacres taking place in Sudan.

These killings are taking place in the Sudanese state of South Kordofan, outside the view of this Congress, and most Americans are unaware of this humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in the same region where we saw bloodshed in Darfur for many, many years.

Madam Speaker, on this day of mourning for Representative Payne, I know he would want us to recommit ourselves to act to prevent further bloodshed and suffering in Sudan.

My thoughts and my prayers are with Congressman Payne's family, his friends, and his constituents. May his legacy live forever. I will deeply miss his wise counsel and his friendship.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, it is with a very heavy heart that I rise tonight to honor and commemorate the life of a world leader, but more importantly, a grandfather, a great-grandfather, a father, a brother, an uncle, a boss, a dedicated family member to so many. I offer my condolences and prayers to Don's family, to his staff. They need our comfort during these very difficult days.

Don was more than a colleague to many of us, myself included. He was a very good friend. We lived near each other in Washington, D.C., here, and I had the privilege to drive him home quite often. These were special moments for me which I will always cherish; for it was during these rides that he counseled me. He cracked so many jokes to cheer me up because he always knew what we were going through, and we talked about family, friends and what was really real in our lives.

Don loved children, and he relished his membership on the committee on Education and the Workforce. Of course, before coming to Congress, he was the national president of the YMCA and an elementary school teacher. But, yes, Don was also a global

leader. And I have traveled abroad with Don, and he was greeted as a head of state and a comrade. But Don didn't especially like traveling with large congressional delegations. He liked going by himself and with his brother to the middle of conflicts, sometimes in the bush and in the jungles, to meet with guerrilla leaders and freedom fighters. He helped negotiate truces; and all sides, everywhere in the world, loved and respected him.

Now, for many years, Don was the lone voice in the wilderness calling for a declaration of genocide in Darfur, Sudan. Finally, we all got it. And as a result of Don's persistence working with both sides of the aisle to address the atrocities of genocide, his bill passed, this declaration of genocide, with bipartisan support.

I was honored to serve on Congressman Payne's subcommittee for many, many years, the Subcommittee on Africa. He was a brilliant and a fair chairman, and he helped me shepherd and negotiate many bills and many of my legislative efforts.

Yes, I was blessed to have visited Don on Thursday afternoon. He smiled, we talked, he whispered a few words, and he gave me a thumbs up.

I met Don Payne through the mail in 1998 when my predecessor, who I know sends his condolences today, Congressman Ron Dellums, told him I was running for Congress. He sent me a wonderful note then--I didn't even know him--and a contribution. And when I was elected, he came up to me; he hugged me and he became my mentor on so many issues.

In closing, let me just say that I know--and we talked a lot about this, and I've been to church with him--that Don Payne was a humble man of tremendous faith. In thinking of Don this evening, I'm reminded of a Scripture taken from 2 Timothy, chapter 4, verses 6 8. It says:

As for me, the hour has come for me to be sacrificed; the

time is here for me to leave this life. I have done my best

in the race, I have run the full distance, and I have kept

the faith. And now there is waiting for me the victory prize

of being put right with God, which the Lord, the righteous

Judge, will give me on that Day--and not only to me, but to

all those who wait with love for Him to appear.

May Don's soul rest in peace.

Madam Speaker, I'd like to yield now to the gentleman from South Carolina, our assistant leader, Congressman Jim Clyburn.

I would now like to yield to the gentleman from Illinois, Representative Danny Davis.

I would now like to yield to the gentlewoman from New York, Congresswoman Yvette Clarke.

I would now like to yield to the gentleman from North Carolina, Congressman Price.

Madam Speaker, I would like to yield now to the gentlelady from Florida, Congresswoman Brown.

I would now like to yield to the gentlelady from the Virgin Islands, Congresswoman Donna Christensen.

I would like to yield now to the gentleman from Indiana, Congressman Andre Carson.

I would like to yield to the gentleman Oregon, Congressman Blumenauer.

I would now like to yield to the gentleman from Georgia, Congressman Scott.

Madam Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?

Madam Speaker, may we request an additional 10 minutes?

Mr. Speaker, I was not present for rollcall votes 80 91. Had I been able to vote, I would have voted ``no'' on the Motion on Ordering the Previous Question on the Rule, ``no'' on H. Res. 566, ``yes'' on the journal vote, ``yes'' on the Thompson (CA)/Eshoo (CA) Amendment to H.R. 1837, ``yes'' on the McNerney (CA) Amendment (#3) to H.R. 1837, ``yes'' on the McNerney (CA) Amendment (#4) to H.R. 1837, ``yes'' on the Garamendi (CA) Amendment (#5) to H.R. 1837, ``yes'' on the Napolitano (CA) Amendment to H.R. 1837, ``yes'' on the Garamendi (CA) Amendment (#7) to H.R. 1837, ``yes'' on the Markey (MA)/ Thompson (CA)/Matsui (CA) Amendment to H.R. 1837, ``yes'' on the Democratic Motion to Recommit H.R. 1837 and ``no'' on Final Passage of

Mr. Speaker, I was not present for roll call votes 74 79. Had I been able to vote, I would have voted no on H. Res. 563, yes on the Grijalva amendment to H.R. 2117, yes on the Bishop amendment to H.R. 2117, yes on the Polis amendment #5 to H.R. 2117, yes on the Democratic motion to recommit H.R. 2117 and no on final passage of H.R. 2117.

Mr. Speaker, I was not present for rollcall vote 73. Had I been able to vote, I would have voted ``yes'' on the Motion to Concur in the Senate Amendment to H.R. 347.

Mr. Speaker, first let me just thank my colleagues, Congressman Jones, Congressman McDermott, Congressman Ellison and others, for speaking out this morning clearly, saying that it's past time to bring the war in Afghanistan to a swift and orderly end.

There's no military solution in Afghanistan. We need to bring our troops home now, and we need to make sure that we leave no permanent military bases. The American people are sick and tired of the past decade of war, and they want this war to end.

At a time when tens of millions of Americans are unemployed and nearly 50 million Americans are living in poverty, the Pentagon is requesting almost $100 billion in the President's budget to fund Overseas Contingency Operations, including the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

First of all, we all thought the war in Iraq was really supposed to be over. So why in the world are we spending billions of dollars on a war that we are no longer fighting? Mr. Speaker, we've already spent over $1.3 trillion on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and we cannot afford to blindly continue down this path.

The reason, of course, that I voted against that original resolution in 2001 authorizing the use of military force was because it was a blank check for war against any nation, anywhere, anytime, any organization, and any individual.

The situation we are in right now, being asked to spend another $100 billion on endless war, is exactly what we should have considered 10 years ago when we went down this path. This war without end must end.

While everyone would like a stable democracy in Afghanistan, the facts on the ground suggest that we are not headed in that direction, yet we've spent hundreds of billions of dollars there. Instead of a stable democracy, we have a corrupt state that relies almost entirely on foreign countries for its budget.

The reality on the ground in Afghanistan stands in stark contrast to the steady reports of progress we have been hearing from those who seek to maintain a military presence in Afghanistan in 2014 and beyond. It's time to bring our troops home from Afghanistan--not in 2014, not next year, but right now.

Later today, some of us will be meeting with the courageous Army officer Colonel Daniel Davis. Colonel Davis wrote a revealing account of the war in Afghanistan after witnessing the huge gap between what the American public was being told about progress in Afghanistan and the dismal situation on the ground.

Colonel Davis' assessment is backed up by a recently released report from Afghanistan's NGO safety officer. The report warns NGO employees in Afghanistan not to take seriously the message of advances in security coming from the Pentagon.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that this page from the Afghanistan NGO safety officer quarterly data report be inserted into the Record.

AOG Initiated Attacks

AOG initiated attacks grew by 14% over last year and

demonstrated an enhanced operational tempo--with 64% of all

operations occurring before the end of July (compared to 52%

in 2010)--and then trailing off sharply once OP BADR ended

over Ramadan.

The tactical portfolio remained consistent with 2010, with

close range engagements (SAF/RPG) making up the bulk of

operations (55%) and IED/IDF operations at 44%. Suicide

attacks remained at just 1% of the total yet caused close to

70% more fatalities this year, including roughly 400 Afghan

civilians (230 in 2010).

Throughout the year ISAF made a number of statements

claiming a 3% reduction in attacks between Jan Aug when

compared with 2010. We are not in a position to evaluate

their data but, obviously, we do not agree with their finding

and advise NGOs to simply ignore it as practical security

advice--a use for which it was likely never intended in any

case. We find their suggestion that the insurgency is waning

to be a dangerous political fiction that should be given no

consideration in NGO risk assessment for the coming year.

Interestingly, our data does find that this year's 14%

growth rate (what you might call the IEA profit margin) is

substantially lower than previous years (above right)

suggesting that there has indeed been some serious reduction

in the effort that the IEA is putting in. Whether this

reduction has been forced upon them by ISAF or whether they

consciously chose it--on the calculus that there is no point

sprinting to the finish if everyone else has dropped out of

the race--is unknown to us and, we suspect, to ISAF.

The report reads:

We find their suggestion that the insurgency is waning to

be a dangerous political fiction that should be given no

consideration in NGO risk assessment for the coming year.

``A dangerous political fiction''--that is how this organization dedicated to ensure the safety of NGO employees in Afghanistan characterizes the rosy reports of steady progress in Afghanistan. Mr. Speaker, if we're going to ask our brave men and women in uniform to continue to risk their lives in Afghanistan, the least we can do is be frank and honest about how we are doing in Afghanistan. Our soldiers deserve to know the truth, and the American people deserve to know the truth after spending the past decade fighting wars.

The war in Afghanistan has already taken the lives of almost 1,900 soldiers and drained our treasury of over $500 billion in direct costs. Those costs will only go up as we spend trillions of dollars on long- term care for our veterans, which we must do.

We are set to spend an additional $88 billion in Afghanistan over the next year while domestic cuts in education, health care, roads, bridges, and other essential priorities are sacrificed. Again, I repeat, it is time to bring our troops home from Afghanistan, not in 2014, not next year, but right now.

Let me conclude by saying that as the daughter of a 25-year Army officer who served in two wars, I salute our troops, and I honor our troops. Our service men and women have performed with incredible courage and commitment in Afghanistan. But they have been put in harm's way, and they have performed valiantly. It's time to bring them home.

Madam Speaker, as a founder and cochair of the Congressional Out of Poverty Caucus, I rise again to sound the alarm about the crisis of poverty in America.

While many of us are encouraged by the recent improvements in the unemployment rate, which fell to 8.3 percent, the rate of unemployment continues to be unacceptably high, especially for communities of color. For African Americans, the unemployment rate is 13.6 percent, and it's 10.5 percent for Latinos. The rate of unemployment for our youth is even more alarming, with over 23 percent of 16 19 year olds looking for a job. Without a job, Madam Speaker, how can we expect our youth, the future of this country, to develop the skills and experience they need to succeed and live out their American Dream.

Encouragingly, President Obama understands that we cannot speed up economic recovery without investments that create jobs. I was pleased to see in his 2013 budget proposal critical investments to create good jobs and job training programs for communities hardest hit by our struggling economy. By targeting economic assistance where it's most needed, the President's proposed budget goes a long way to level the playing field to give every American the opportunity to succeed.

There's a lot that my Republican colleagues can learn from the President's budget, especially this: that fighting poverty and reducing the deficit can be achieved together. But let me be clear. This budget is not perfect. There are cuts in this budget that would undermine some of the progress our economy is making. Cuts to safety net programs like the Community Services Block Grant, Low Income Heating Assistance, and affordable housing programs will hit already struggling families especially hard.

During these difficult times, we really do need to protect programs that are a lifeline for the most vulnerable. We need to increase funding for programs like SNAP and WIC which keep millions of American families out of poverty. But keeping people from suffering the worst effects of poverty is not enough to restore our economy. Even with the recent increases we have seen in job creation, long-term unemployment remains at record levels, with 5.5 million workers who have been out of work for 27 weeks or more. Until Republican leaders in the House can pass President Obama's American Jobs Act or put forth any kind of reasonable plan for job creation, we must ensure that the safety net is strong.

So, Madam Speaker, again I call for an immediate up-or-down vote on Congressman Bobby Scott's and my bill, H.R. 589, which will give the millions of job seekers who continue to struggle to find a job just 14 more weeks of vital unemployment benefits. This would allow them to have just a little more time to find a good job and to support their family while our fragile economy continues to recover.

Also, Madam Speaker, this Congress has a lot of work to do. We are just a few days away from when unemployment benefits are set to expire for millions of Americans across the country. Low-income families were hardest hit during the recession, and they cannot afford another year of a Republican Congress that fails to focus on jobs, refuses to strengthen our middle class, and tries to end the Medicare guarantee for all of our seniors. It is incumbent upon this conference committee to ensure that the bridge is strong enough to deliver us all, even our most vulnerable, over these troubled waters.

Madam Speaker, let's put our Nation before our party. Americans really cannot wait, and neither should this Congress.

First, let me thank my colleagues Congressmen McGovern and Jones, Congresswomen Woolsey and Waters, and Congressman Honda for their efforts to bring the war in Afghanistan to a swift and safe end.

Mr. Speaker, I am here this morning to remind my colleagues that there is no military solution in Afghanistan. It is time to bring our troops home and to make sure that we leave no permanent military bases. While many, and a growing number, of my colleagues have come to this conclusion, there are still those who claim that Afghanistan is going well and that we should stay there indefinitely.

We are gathered here this morning to give some real and important insight into the reality that nothing could be further from the truth. We are here to discuss very important revelations brought to light by a brave Army officer, Colonel Daniel Davis.

Colonel Davis has honorably served this country for over a quarter century, and has received praise from his commanders for his maturity, determination, and judgment. He recently made the brave decision to release an unclassified account of the war in Afghanistan after witnessing the huge gap between what the American public was being told about the progress in Afghanistan and the dismal situation on the ground. Declassifying the National Intelligence Estimate on Afghanistan is a necessary step so that our policy is based on accurate information.

In an article published this past Sunday in the Armed Forces Journal, Colonel Davis asks:

``How many more men must die in support of a mission that is not succeeding and behind an array of more than 7 years of optimistic statements by United States senior leaders in Afghanistan? No one expects our leaders to always have a successful plan, but we do expect--and the men,'' and women, I must add, ``who do the living, fighting and dying deserve--to have our leaders tell us the truth about what's going on.''

Mr. Speaker, the American people deserve to know the truth after spending the past decade on failed military strategies which have cost us over $450 billion in direct funding. The costs, of course, have been even greater in injuries, lives lost, and in the trillions of dollars we will need to spend on long-term care for our veterans, including hospitals, clinics, job training, post-traumatic stress disorder treatment, housing assistance, and homeless services. But we must spend these resources for our veterans.

The American people, though, are sick and tired of these endless wars. Fully two-thirds of Americans support ending combat operations in Afghanistan in 2013, and three out of four Americans favor a speedy withdrawal of all United States troops out of Afghanistan. We are set to spend an additional $88 billion, mind you, $88 billion in Afghanistan over the next year while domestic cuts in education, health care, roads, bridges, and other essential priorities are sacrificed.

We cannot afford an indefinite stay in Afghanistan. We need to ask what we have to show for the past decade of war. Instead of a stable democracy, we have a broken state which is completely dependent on foreign countries for its budget, with rampant corruption and widespread violence. For the fifth straight year, civilian casualties rose in Afghanistan. In fact, 2011 was a record year for the number of Afghan civilians killed. There were 3,021 Afghan children, women, and men who were caught in the crossfire between an insurgency and the heavy presence of NATO troops.

The reality on the ground in Afghanistan stands in stark contrast to the steady reports of progress we have been hearing from those who seek to maintain a military presence in Afghanistan in 2014 and beyond. It's time to bring our troops home from Afghanistan--not in 2014, not next year, but right now.

Congress authorized the use of force in 2001, which I voted against because it gave the President--any President--a blank check to use force anytime, anyplace, anywhere in the world for any period of time. We should have had a debate 10 years ago when Congress failed to consider the implications of giving the Pentagon a blank check in the rush to war.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Colonel Davis for his courage and risking his career to speak out to try to let the American people and their elected representatives understand the true risks we are taking in Afghanistan. To understand what is at stake in Afghanistan, I again call on the Pentagon to declassify the National Intelligence Estimate on Afghanistan so that we can have an informed discussion moving forward.

It is time to bring our young men and women home. They have performed valiantly, with incredible courage, and have done everything we have asked them to do.

[From the Armed Forces Journal]

Truth, lies and Afghanistan

(By Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis)

I spent last year in Afghanistan, visiting and talking with

U.S. troops and their Afghan partners. My duties with the

Army's Rapid Equipping Force took me into every significant

area where our soldiers engage the enemy. Over the course of

12 months, I covered more than 9,000 miles and talked,

traveled and patrolled with troops in Kandahar, Kunar,

Ghazni, Khost, Paktika, Kunduz, Balkh, Nangarhar and other

provinces.

What I saw bore no resemblance to rosy official statements

by U.S. military leaders about conditions on the ground.

Entering this deployment, I was sincerely hoping to learn

that the claims were true: that conditions in Afghanistan

were improving, that the local government and military were

progressing toward self-sufficiency. I did not need to

witness dramatic improvements to be reassured, but merely

hoped to see evidence of positive trends, to see companies or

battalions produce even minimal but sustainable progress.

Instead, I witnessed the absence of success on virtually

every level.

My arrival in country in late 2010 marked the start of my

fourth combat deployment, and my second in Afghanistan. A

Regular Army officer in the Armor Branch. I served in

Operation Desert Storm, in Afghanistan in 2005-06 and in Iraq

in 2008-09. In the middle of my career, I spent eight years

in the U.S. Army Reserve and held a number of civilian jobs--

among them, legislative correspondent for defense and foreign

affairs for Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas.

As a representative for the Rapid Equipping Force, I set

out to talk to our troops about their needs and their

circumstances. Along the way, I conducted mounted and

dismounted combat patrols, spending time with conventional

and Special Forces troops. I interviewed or had conversations

with more than 250 soldiers in the field, from the lowest

ranking 19-year-old private to division commanders and staff

members at every echelon. I spoke at length with Afghan

security officials, Afghan civilians and a few village

elders.

I saw the incredible difficulties any military force would

have to pacify even a single area of any of those provinces;

I heard many stories of how insurgents controlled virtually

every piece of land beyond eyeshot of a U.S. or International

Security Assistance Force (ISAP) base.

I saw little to no evidence the local governments were able

to provide for the basic needs of the people. Some of the

Afghan civilians I talked with said the people didn't went to

be connected to a predatory or incapable local government.

From time to time, I observed Afghan Security forces

collude with the insurgency.

from bad to abysmal

Much of what I saw during my deployment, let alone read or

wrote in official reports. I can't talk about; the

information remains classified. But I can say that such

reports--mine and others'--serve to illuminate the gulf

between conditions on the ground and official statements of

progress.

And I can relate a few representative experiences, of the

kind that I observed all over the country.

In January 2011, I made my first trip into the mountains of

Kunar province near the Pakistan border to visit the troops

of 1st Squadron, 32nd Cavalry. On a patrol to the

northernmost U.S. position in eastern Afghanistan, we arrived

at an Afghan National Police (ANP) station that had reported

being attacked by the Taliban 2\1/2\ hours earlier.

Through the interpreter, I asked the police captain where

the attack had originated, and he pointed to the side of a

nearby mountain.

``What are your normal procedures in situations like

these?'' I asked. ``Do you form up a squad and go after them?

Do you periodically send out harassing patrols? What do you

do?''

As the interpreter conveyed my questions, the captain's

head wheeled around, looking first at the interpreter and

turning to me with an incredulous expression. Then he

laughed.

``No! We don't go after them,'' he said. ``That would be

dangerous!''

According to the cavalry troopers, the Afghan policemen

rarely leave the cover of the checkpoints. In that part of

the province, the Taliban literally run free.

In June, I was in the Zharay district of Kandahar province,

returning to a base from a dismounted patrol. Gunshots were

audible as the Taliban attacked a U.S. checkpoint about one

mile away.

As I entered the unit's command post, the commander and his

staff were watching a live video feed of the battle. Two ANP

vehicles were blocking the main road leading to the site of

the attack. The fire was coming from behind a haystack. We

watched as two Afghan men emerged, mounted a motorcycle and

began moving toward the Afghan policemen in their vehicles.

The U.S. commander turned around and told the Afghan radio

operator to make sure the policemen halted the men. The radio

operator shouted into the radio repeatedly, but got no

answer.

On the screen, we watched as the two men slowly motored

past the ANP vehicles. The policemen neither got out to stop

the two men nor answered the radio--until the motorcycle was

out of sight.

To a man, the U.S. officers in that unit told me they had

nothing but contempt for the Afghan troops in their area--and

that was before the above incident occurred.

In August I went on a dismounted patrol with troops in the

Panjwai district of Kandahar province. Several troops from

the unit had recently been killed in action, one of whom was

a very popular and experienced soldier. One of the unit's

senior officers rhetorically asked me, ``How do I look these

men in the eye and ask them to go out day after day on these

missions? What's harder: How do I look [my soldier's] wife in

the eye when I get back and tell her that her husband died

for something meaningful? How do I do that?'

One of the senior enlisted leaders added, ``Guys are

saying, `I hope I live so I can at least get home to R&R

leave before I get it,' or `I hope I only lose a foot.'

Sometimes they even say which limb it might be: `Maybe it'll

only be my left foot.' They don't have a lot of confidence

that the leadership two levels up really understands what

they're living here, what the situation really is.''

On Sept. 11, the 10th anniversary of the infamous attack on

the U.S., I visited another unit in Kunar province, this one

near the town of Asmar. I talked with the local official who

served as the cultural adviser to the U.S. commander. Here's

how the conversation went:

Davis: ``Here you have many units of the Afghan National

Security Forces [ANSF]. Will they be able to hold out against

the Taliban when U.S. troops leave this area?''

Adviser: ``No. They are definitely not capable. Already all

across this region [many elements of] the security forces

have made deals with the Taliban. [The ANSF] won't shoot at

the Taliban, and the Taliban won't shoot them.

``Also, when a Taliban member is arrested, he is soon

released with no action taken against him. So when the

Taliban returns [when the Americans leave after 2014], so too

go the jobs, especially for everyone like me who has worked

with the coalition.

``Recently, I got a cellphone call from a Talib who had

captured a friend of mine. While I could hear, he began to

beat him, telling me I'd better quit working for the

Americans. I could hear my friend crying out in pain. [The

Talib] said the next time they would kidnap my sons and do

the same to them. Because of the direct threats, I've had to

take my children out of school just to keep them safe.

``And last night right on that mountain there [he pointed

to a ridge overlooking the U.S. base, about 700 meters

distant], a member of the ANP was murdered. The Taliban came

and called him out, kidnapped him in front of his parents,

and took him away and murdered him. He was a member of the

ANP from another province and had come back to visit his

parents. He was only 27 years old. The people are not safe

anywhere.''

That murder took place within view of the U.S. base, a post

nominally responsible for the security of an area of hundreds

of square kilometers. Imagine how insecure the population is

beyond visual range. And yet that conversation was

representative of what I saw in many regions of Afghanistan.

In all of the places I visited, the tactical situation was

bad to abysmal. If the events I have described--and many,

many more I could mention--had been in the first year of war,

or even the third or fourth, one might be wiling to believe

that Afghanistan was just a hard fight, and we should stick

it out. Yet these incidents all happened in the 10th year of

war.

As the numbers depicting casualties and enemy violence

indicate the absence of progress, so too did my observations

of the tactical situation all over Afghanistan.

I want to thank the gentlelady for yielding and also for standing up for women's health, not only today and during these very difficult times, but each and every day of her life.

As a former devout practicing Catholic, I fully understand and respect the Church's doctrine on contraceptives. Even though I disagree with it, I fully respect it and I understand it. Also, I know that the separation of church and state is a fundamental principle that we must maintain.

Mr. Speaker, the administration's decision to provide choices to access quality, affordable health care, family planning services, including contraceptives, are vital for women's health and well-being. This is really not about a mandate. The rule would not force anyone with a religious objection to use or prescribe FDA-approved contraception. The fact is that Catholic bishops know that the 335,000 religious institutions and organizations and churches and places of worship are exempt. In fact, no woman will be required to use contraceptives or to even access contraceptives if she does not want to do that. This ruling is about women making their own decisions as to whether to use contraceptives or not. It's about access.

Religion must not force discrimination and discriminatory policies against, for example, an employee who works in the cafeteria of a hospital who chooses to plan her family. She should not be denied this coverage because of where she works. Low-income women finally-- finally--will have equal access to contraceptive services if they choose.

So we want to make sure tonight that the facts are presented appropriately. Yes, we've witnessed this war against women systematically come against women's health for the last year now, and it's about time we start really being truthful to the public and

get the facts out there and not allow the misinformation to really put women, once again, in a position of not having access to contraceptive care.

So I believe that this decision was right. I know that it allows for religious exemptions. And this rule should now allow for employees, for nurses, for health care workers to access contraception when they want to, and if they choose not to. They don't have to. But we should not allow discrimination to take place anymore.

I yield now to the gentlelady from California, Congresswoman Lois Capps.

Mr. Speaker, as the founding cochair of the Congressional HIV/AIDS Caucus, I rise to recognize National Black HIV/ AIDS Awareness Day.

While I believe every day should be HIV awareness day, February 7 is an important day to recognize the effect this epidemic has on African Americans. Although only 14 percent of the U.S. population, African Americans account for almost half of those living and dying with HIV and AIDS in this country.

This year's theme is ``I am My Brother's Keeper, I am My Sister's Keeper.'' People of faith know it is unacceptable that a woman of color in the United States is 15 times more likely to be living with HIV than a white woman her age. People of faith know that it's unacceptable that our young men, particularly gay and bisexual men, are most affected in this country. We cannot allow this crisis to continue.

We have the tools we need to end the AIDS epidemic. I urge everyone to get tested and take steps to protect themselves from the virus.

I call on members of the faith community, the private sector, health organizations, community leaders, teachers, parents, and the media to come together like never before.

The story of African Americans is one of resilience. I have great hope and expectation that we can once again persevere and we can stamp HIV and AIDS from the face of the Earth.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate and honor Mrs. LaVerda O. Allen as she turns 80 years old. On behalf of our diverse Bay Area community, I would like to personally wish Mrs. Allen a very happy birthday surrounded by family, friends, colleagues and community leaders. Her efforts to advance equal education and work opportunities for women and people of color have spanned over 6 decades. Mrs. Allen is truly an icon in the African American community, and the broad reach of her influence continues to touch communities, both near and far.

A long-time Oakland and East Bay resident, Mrs. Allen moved to Oakland with her family in 1943. After graduating early, with honors, from Oakland Technical High School, she attended the University of California, Berkeley and San Francisco State University, where she received a B.A. in Social Work and an M.A. in Education Administration. During her early career as an educator, Mrs. Allen helped to develop curriculum throughout the Berkeley Unified School District and Peralta Community College District. She also assisted in developing the first financial aid program for state community colleges. Together with her husband and business partner, she ran Bay Cities Beauty Supplies, an entrepreneurial enterprise focused on hair care products for African Americans. Furthermore, her trailblazing experience as a woman and minority business owner led her to a path of advocacy that would pave the way for countless others to follow.

For more than 20 years, Mrs. Allen has been Owner and Principal of The Allen Group, LLC, (TAG) a project and construction management firm committed to advocating on behalf of minority businesses in the engineering-construction industry. She is a stalwart leader in the development of minority, woman-owned and disadvantaged business enterprise programs, and has been a consultant developing agendas to empower architects, engineers and construction contractors in this field since 1971. She and TAG have held management roles in large- scale, complex projects that have been critical to the future of sound Bay Area infrastructure.

Among her many accolades, LaVerda Allen has received an Honorary Doctorate Degree from the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley. She is an active and prominent member of myriad organizations advocating for the rights of children and the mentally ill. She co-authored the Nation's first Affirmative Action program that called for minority participation by craft, has served on the San Francisco Human Rights Advisory Committee, and was instrumental in the passage of the San Francisco Minority and Woman Owned Business ordinance in 1988. She was a cofounder of the National Association of Minority Contractors, served as the chair of the Berkeley chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Education and Labor Committee during the civil rights movement, and was a board member of the Berkeley Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Therefore, on behalf of California's 9th Congressional District, Mrs. LaVerda O. Allen, I salute you for your amazing achievements and on this remarkable milestone. Thank you for your many continued contributions to equality, prosperity and justice in our communities. I wish you much more success, happiness and well-being in the coming years. And, once again, Happy Birthday.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today with Chairman Emanuel Cleaver II and my colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus, CBC, to honor the extraordinary life of Mr. Ofield Dukes. A trailblazing public relations titan known far beyond the communications world, Ofield Dukes will be remembered as a civil rights champion, an inspiring educator, a skilled mentor, and a trusted advisor to the world's most prominent leaders. With his passing on December 7, 2011, we look to Mr. Ofield Dukes' political legacy and the outstanding quality of his life's work.

Born in Rutledge, Alabama, Mr. Dukes graduated with a degree in journalism from Wayne State University after having been a journalist while serving in the United States Army during the Korean War. He soon made a name for himself as an award-winning writer for the Michigan Chronicle and, in 1964, Mr. Dukes was hired as Deputy Director of Information for President Lyndon Johnson's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity. Within two years, he had become communications adviser to Vice President Hubert Humphrey. In 1969, Dukes founded Ofield Dukes and Associates (ODA), one of the most enduring and successful public relations firms in the country, specializing in minority, African-American, African, and political affairs. ODA elevated the profiles of artists, business people, students, Civil Rights heroes, Members of Congress and Presidents, alike.

During an era still marred by the scourge of racism and segregation, Mr. Dukes utilized brilliant public relations strategies to galvanize support for the Civil Rights movement and to get out the vote in the African-American community after the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Moreover, without his tireless work, the CBC would not be ``the conscience of the Congress'' it is today. He was the organizer of the first CBC dinner, and a CBC Foundation Board member for 14 years. His vast political experience and guidance helped expand the CBC from its original 13 Members of Congress in 1971 to 43 Members today.

Mr. Dukes also orchestrated the 1981 national march on Washington, D.C. to make the birth date of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. a national holiday.

Furthermore, Mr. Dukes brought the wealth of his experience to the classroom, spending over twenty years as a professor at Howard University and nearly a decade at American University. It was there that he instilled young minds with the powerful public relations tools necessary to create new generations of social justice. Renowned for his professionalism, teaching prowess and strong sense of loyalty, Ofield Dukes encouraged hundreds of African-American students to enter the field of public relations. He was a gatekeeper for African-American reporters needing access to the White House for every Democratic administration since the 1960s, a founding member of the Black Public Relations Society of Washington, D.C., and the first African American to receive the Public Relations Society of America's Gold Anvil, the industry's highest honor.

For over four decades, Ofield Dukes' career and influence spanned CBC milestones ranging from their boycott of President Nixon's State of the Union address to demand White House recognition in 1971 to his articles celebrating the CBC's 40th anniversary in 2011, under the historic leadership of President Barack Obama. He was a friend to the CBC every step of the way, and the Congressional Black Caucus could not have asked for better guidance and company.

Therefore, the Congressional Black Caucus salutes and honors the life of this outstanding man, while mourning the loss of an incredible partner in the pursuit of justice and equality. The great Ofield Dukes and his masterful contributions to the success of progressive and talented leaders throughout the world have helped to change the course of history. His legacy and light will forever live on, and he will be deeply missed.

Mr. Speaker, as the founder of the Congressional Out of Poverty Caucus, I rise today to continue talking about the tide of poverty sweeping across this country.

Americans who are struggling to find work cannot wait. Americans whose homes are underwater cannot wait, and the nearly 50 million Americans who are living in poverty cannot wait.

We must act, and we must act now to extend vital unemployment benefits and the temporary payroll tax reduction while our economy continues to recover. We should be coming together now to enact bold programs and policies that provide equal opportunity and equal access for every single American, no matter their race, no matter their employment status, and no matter their humble beginnings. Instead, Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, this Tea Party-led Congress continues to do nothing but distract from the real issues and waste the American people's time.

The Republican caucus failed to pass a single jobs bill last year, and by the looks of this week's calendar, it looks like they might be committed to doing more of the same. This Nation cannot afford any more of this do-nothing Tea Party Republican House. Instead of passing a jobs bill, Republicans in the House today are attacking American families in need.

This bill that's coming up today, H.R. 3567, is really a distasteful and misleading bill that tries to make it seem to like every low-income family is somehow criminal. Nothing could be further from the truth. Very few people want to qualify for welfare. They don't want to be distressed enough to meet these qualifications. This is the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Act which is being attacked today. That's what it's called today. Actually, it's called TANF.

TANF recipients are struggling through the most difficult time of their lives, and they want nothing more than a good job to support their families. This bill that's coming up again today is really a sad attempt to re-create the Ronald Reagan era about the Cadillac-driving welfare queen. It wasn't true then nor is it true today. TANF benefits did not pay for Cadillacs to fund lavish lifestyles.

Mr. Speaker, as a single young mother who once relied on food stamps and public assistance during a very difficult period, I'm really appalled to see Republican politicians attack these families just because they are facing hard times and need a helping hand. TANF benefits keep children in homes and in schools. They keep American families from suffering abject poverty.

What we should be doing is helping these families by creating jobs, by removing these obstacles and barriers, and we should be helping them to reignite the American Dream, not insulting them, which is what this bill does. This Congress should be working together to create more opportunity for the long-term unemployed and the millions of Americans suffering in poverty.

We should at least extend unemployment benefits for the chronically unemployed who have hit the 99-week limit, can't apply anymore because they are ineligible, and we should be voting, for example, for the bill, which Congressman Scott of Virginia and myself have written to help those looking for a job and who can't find a job. We have to remember now that there is only one job for every four individuals looking for a job.

But, unfortunately, instead of working together to make economic justice a reality for every American, this Republican Tea Party will waste another year without a jobs bill, without extending any help to the millions of Americans in need, and without helping American retirees.

So we should be putting our Nation before our party. Americans can't wait and neither should this Congress.