Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, as a former chemistry teacher, I understand how challenging fostering a positive learning environment can be. While technology can be a resource, it can also cause irreparable harm if not used properly.

Our community in Malvern, Pennsylvania, experienced a gross abuse of technology when teachers at the Great Valley Middle School were targeted by eighth grade students who set up fake TikTok accounts impersonating them and posting offensive and very hurtful content.

This wasn't a prank. It was a blatant misuse of social media, violating basic rules of human decency. It is inappropriate, regardless of a child's age, or whether the school is public, charter, or private.

These teachers are questioning why they continue in a profession where they can be so casually targeted, and I don't blame them. This incident highlights the misuse of technology and how it disturbs the classroom and stunts the growth of empathy.

We must confront this crisis in schools and our homes as well. Each of us has a responsibility to foster civility and decency. Our teachers deserve and expect our support. Anything less is unacceptable.

Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 280.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to address the House and to revise and extend my remarks.

First, I thank Chair Rogers and Representatives Smith and Bacon for the opportunity to work on this really important piece of legislation, which is the National Defense Authorization Act.

Unlike any other piece of legislation that we have passed in Congress, we have passed this bill every single year

for over six decades. It is a testament to our enduring commitment to our brave men and women in uniform, and it is proof that Republicans and Democrats can indeed continue to find common ground and provide for our collective defense.

Since I arrived in 2019 in Congress, I have had the privilege of serving on the Armed Services Committee, which oversees this defense bill, and it is truly one of the highlights of my career to serve on such a bipartisan committee. This idea of bipartisanship, putting country before party, is not new to me. It is indeed how I was raised.

As the daughter and granddaughter of naval aviators, it is not an exaggeration to say that my very earliest memories are on a military base. I was born at Patuxent River Naval Air Station just a few hours from here. When it was my turn to fulfill our commitment to our Nation, I served in the Air Force, but that, of course, did not come without challenges.

Now, as a member of the Armed Services Committee, I have shared not only my own challenges and those of my family who have been in uniform, but also those of my mother and my grandmother and countless other Pennsylvanians and Americans I have been able to talk to along the way. Sharing these stories helps make our military the greatest on Earth and make it even stronger.

For nearly a year, I have now had the privilege of serving as ranking member on our Military Quality of Life Panel alongside my very dear friend, Republican colleague Representative Don Bacon from Nebraska. From inadequate pay to substandard housing conditions and to long wait times for essential services, it is very clear that we have enormous work to do to ensure that our military families have the support and resources that they need to thrive. That is why we proposed 31 different recommendations, and I will highlight just a few of them.

First and foremost, pay. We want pay that is competitive with our civilian economy, including a significant additional pay raise for junior enlisted, E-1 through E-4.

Second, housing. Our recommendation is to reverse the 5 percent reduction in BAH that was passed nearly a decade ago. BAH would now cover 100 percent of the calculated rate for military housing.

In a similar vein, third, we recommended funding facility budget requests at 100 percent of the maintenance and modernization requirements so that we are able to fully fund them.

Next and finally, childcare. The bill that we passed out of committee would cover childcare expenses for those who worked in our childcare development centers for their first child at a minimum. This would get more staff on the books, more open and available childcare slots, and reduce wait times.

Finally, on healthcare. Servicemembers won't need referrals any longer for physical therapy, for nutrition, for women's health, for audiology, for optometry, and podiatry specialties.

Next, spousal employment. We will be supporting military spouses by expanding childcare access for them from 90 to 100 days while they are able to look for a job, and we are permanently expanding our partnership with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

We have the greatest military in the world because of the people that wear the uniform and the families that support them, so we must take care of them. At the very least, we owe our military community a bill that is free from political drama and theater.

Unfortunately, we here on the floor are now seeing some very upsetting amendments being offered to a very bipartisan bill and potentially adding to this bill many poison pills, poison pills that will make it difficult for even me to vote for the final passage of the bill, even though there is so much goodness in it.

Here are just a few ideas of what we will be voting on today:

Banning Pride flags in workplaces and public areas in the Department of Defense.

This one is particularly absurd: Banning content related to certain animals that change their sex, like clown fish, and a range of education materials.

Thirdly, prohibiting the Secretary of Defense from paying or reimbursing expenses related to reproductive care, such as abortion services.

Fourth, eliminating any DEI, or diversity, equity, and inclusion, within the military and laying off everyone who is in those offices.

Finally, prohibiting all assistance to Ukraine, which, of course, would be a gift to Russia, China, Iran, and all of our adversaries. These are just some of the very nonserious efforts that we are seeing here on the floor. It is enormously frustrating to see these being added to this bill, which was such a bipartisan bill, voted out of committee 57-1.

Regardless of which amendments are passed, these are attacks against women, against the LGBTQ community, against diversity initiatives, and more. They will have a chilling effect on military recruitment and retention at a time when we are facing historic challenges to fill our all-volunteer ranks.

We, the Congress, need to knock this off. I proudly served in uniform, as did generations of my family before me, and I will do everything in my power to send a truly bipartisan bill to the President for signature. I very much look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues in the House and Senate to do just that.

Mr. Chair, I rise with the strongest possible opposition to this amendment prohibiting assistance to Ukraine. This represents the most extreme and shortsighted position of some of the Members of the House of Representatives, particularly Republicans, with respect to global security. Too many have tried to stop or strip funding from Ukraine whenever they literally have the chance to, and here is yet another example.

This amendment, like others that were considered and failed last year and this year, is misguided and against the will of the American people. Thus, it is against the will of the legislative body. Indeed, in April we overwhelmingly voted to support Ukraine, 311-112-1, not even close, which further proves the very unseriousness and waste of time of this amendment.

What some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle fail to recognize and to appreciate is that not only does the American public support Ukraine, but that supporting Ukraine actually, indeed, helps the American public by avoiding further instability in Europe just miles from NATO. It, indeed, deters war. This amendment would irreversibly hurt our posture on the world stage. I urge Members to oppose it.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding time.

Mr. Chairman, it truly saddens me to be here yet again having the same conversation we had last year, yet again standing before this Chamber as a woman, yet again a woman who has actually served and actually worn a uniform and actually was a mother in uniform. Here I am yet again defending our servicewomen's and -men's rights to seek the medical care that they need when they are serving our country.

I am sick and tired of Members who have never served telling servicemembers, the same servicemembers that they are proud to publicly express their purported support for, that they don't deserve the financial or otherwise freedom to seek the medical care that they and their family members deserve and need when they need it.

To those who have served in uniform, and most of them are men who are here on this floor, and still don't wish to afford servicemembers the ability to seek reproductive care, I am enormously disappointed with them, as well.

We all know how difficult military life is. If a woman in uniform or member of a family who is in uniform says it is not the right time, perhaps, to start a family, or she has a medical reason or otherwise, it is her----

Mr. Chair, it is her decision alone on what to do here. That is why I introduced the MARCH for Servicemembers Act, which would, in

fact, expand access to abortion services at military treatment facilities.

We should be supporting our family servicemembers, not hindering them.

Mr. Chair, I strongly urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment and the overall bill if it passes.

Mr. Chair, I rise in fervent opposition to this amendment.

Just literally days after 100 of our colleagues returned from the beaches of Normandy, we are standing here debating the very purpose and existence of the alliance that made sure that we had the opportunity to observe the 80th anniversary.

Perhaps more importantly, that observation was to remember the power of alliances and the consequences of our inaction and of our isolationism.

Mr. Chair, this amendment is unserious. This will not be passed, nor will it likely be signed into law because it would catastrophically undermine and ruin our Nation's leadership on the world's stage.

Rather than spend our time on amendments that will weaken our national and global security, we must rather focus on improving NATO relationships, the very same relationships, by the way, that are helping us put Putin's illegal invasion of Ukraine to bed.

I urge my colleagues forcefully to oppose this amendment.

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment that would remove unnecessary and partisan language from the legislation that is under consideration, the Police Our Border Act.

Let me read what my amendment says because it is only two lines.

Page 2, strike line 17 and all that follows through line 19 and redesignate succeeding provisions accordingly.

Strike the term ``Biden'' each place such term appears.

Let me tell you what lines 17 through 19 say. ``The southwest border crisis created by the Biden administration has made every State a border State.''

Before I continue on, I thank Ranking Member Nadler for his leadership on this issue on the Judiciary Committee.

The reason I read that amendment and the lines that it refers to is that it is really important that the American people know that the situation at our border requires our action. I agree. We agree. The vast majority of Congress agrees. However, if you listen to this Chamber, and many of you all have lately, you would think that this is not a bipartisan issue. Unfortunately, this is intentional.

I want to let the American people in on a poorly kept secret: Too often bills are written to be intentionally inflammatory to divide Republicans and Democrats. My amendment seeks to bring us together, back to the middle ground that we all share because real, substantive, and durable action will need the support of both of our parties.

We know our police and law enforcement need and deserve support. We know our border needs and deserves to be addressed. We know that fentanyl is an issue requiring our attention, but bipartisan action is what is required and what is demanded by us of our bosses. Our bosses are the electorate.

We in Congress must do a better job than to just be simple partisan hacks, political reporting with no chance of ever making it to or past the President's desk. The American people, our bosses, deserve better, which is why this amendment, my amendment, plainly just asks for data on the facts and the facts alone.

A report like the one in the bill that is proposed with my proposed changes is important not only for our law enforcement but also for the American people, as well. It will allow us to take a step toward understanding things such as the estimated dollar amount of all the resources that would be devoted to addressing the situation at the border and the extent to which such resources are not available to law enforcement agencies. It would help us understand the exposure to and possible injury as a result of the fentanyl crisis on our law enforcement. With this data, we can finally address these issues.

As is demonstrated by the way that this legislation was written, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are likely to falsely claim that President Biden is boasting of an open border, but this ignores the fact that under numerous administrations, both Democrat and Republican, the situation at our border has worsened. In fact, this issue is not just about Republican or Democratic administrations, it is also about the Congresses that have not addressed this issue, either.

Record migration to our border, coupled with a woefully inadequate and overwhelming processing system here in the U.S., has caused existing challenges to get progressively worse over time. We know that our law enforcement agencies have faced many new challenges as a result.

This is a serious issue which we must address with serious legislation. I believe if my amendment passes that many of my colleagues on this side of the aisle will find it in their ability to be able to vote for the underlying bill. I would encourage those on the other side of the aisle to find it within their heart to see not everything as a partisan issue.

I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to reject the deeply cynical and deeply political option in the current text and to instead vote ``yes'' on my amendment that will enable the underlying bill to move forward in a bipartisan fashion.

Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to how much time I have remaining.

Mr. Chair, it is rebuttals and comments like these that I find, frankly, deeply distressful. They are nothing but finger- pointing, and really the genuine politicization of this body and this government. My colleagues are self-defeating in their efforts to try to put the words into this piece of legislation that requires us to assign one single point of blame when there clearly is quite a lot to go around, and it has gone around for a very long time.

By politicizing this issue in this way, it is self-defeating because we have no ability to actually pass this piece of legislation, and so in and of itself this becomes a self-defeating effort.

I believe if my colleagues truly wanted the information that this bill purports to want, if they truly wanted to understand what is causing the border issues and what could be done to be helpful, then they would work with us as Democrats to make that, indeed, happen. We would then be able to pass this bill in the House, and as is the custom with our Constitution and with ``Schoolhouse Rock,'' send it to the Senate and send it to the President's desk for signature. Here we have no opportunity to have this happen.

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

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in strong support of the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act, which would reauthorize FISA 702.

We live in a dangerous world, and section 702 is crucial to keeping Americans safe. This is a tool that our intelligence agencies rely upon all day to counter all kinds of threats to our homeland from U.S. nonpersons. Again, U.S. nonpersons.

Whether uncovering Chinese spies or foiling terrorist plots or intercepting cyberattacks, this authority is essential to our national security. This tool can even allow our intelligence community to counter drug cartels as they attempt to bring deadly fentanyl to our shores, but it would be enhanced by an amendment that Mr. Crenshaw and I are proposing, the Enhancing Intelligence Collection on Foreign Drug Traffickers Act.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment when we vote later this morning.

However, not all of the amendments today would strengthen this bill. In fact, I am strongly opposed to the amendment offered by Mr. Biggs, and I am obligated to point out the dangers of passing this extreme amendment.

Intelligence professionals who rely on this tool, 702, keep us safe and have been crystal clear. This amendment would make it nearly impossible to access information essential to protect our homeland security.

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I urge a ``yes'' vote on the overall bill to reauthorize FISA, and a ``no'' vote on the Biggs amendment.

Mr. Chair, today, I also rise in support of this important amendment that will help our intelligence community, strengthen our southern border, and save American lives.

This amendment will fully enlist our country's intelligence agencies in the fight against foreign drug traffickers. Foreign-made fentanyl is killing tens of thousands of Americans every year. It is critical that we start treating this danger as the very serious national threat that it is.

My legislation, which is called the Enhancing Intelligence Collection on Foreign Drug Traffickers Act, is now the bipartisan amendment that is led by myself and Mr. Crenshaw. This would allow our intelligence community to counter drug cartels as they attempt to bring deadly fentanyl to our shores.

Today, the intelligence community can only leverage section 702 against counternarcotics targets under one of the existing certifications, none of which are focused currently on drug trafficking.

This amendment would close that gap, without expanding domestic law enforcement's abilities to police drug dealers, in order to keep fentanyl from ever reaching the United States.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to pass this legislation, to pass the counternarcotics amendment led by myself and Mr. Crenshaw, and to reject any amendment that would put our national security at risk.

Madam Speaker, I am really proud to say, in large part, thanks to the leadership of President Joe Biden, that when the U.S. has been called upon to help our allies, we have answered that call.

When I was standing with President Zelenskyy years ago, we warned him of the pending attack that was coming his way. We shared intelligence with him. Frankly, it was intelligence that he didn't believe. We shared that intelligence with the world as well, and we clearly demonstrated the clear and present threat that was coming his way.

When Ukraine then called us for help in the immediate aftermath of Russia's illegal attack on Ukraine, we, the United States, answered. When the Ukrainian people held off Putin's advance and called, again, for additional resources to sustain their defenses, we, the United States, again, answered.

When Ukraine's military offensive took back the Black Sea and asked, again, for more advanced weaponry for their battle-tested troops, we, the United States, answered.

Yet now, when the Russian military is retreating in some regions and on the brink of doing so in many more areas as well, we are not answering Ukraine's repeated attempts and calls for help again. When Ukraine is now literally running out of bullets, we are not answering their call for help.

This is why my pride in our leadership and in the United States has become overcome with anger because, yet again, this Chamber is about to recess without having provided aid to Ukraine.

Yesterday, in the House Armed Services Committee, I heard one of my Republican colleagues say not once, not twice, but three times that Putin is, indeed, a war criminal.

I am quoting him here: As we see the attacks from war criminal Putin on the democracy of Ukraine, we are so concerned by the efforts of war criminal Putin and their allies of Iran and China.

The question was: What is your assessment of China and Iran helping war criminal Putin?

Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleague. Putin is a war criminal, which is exactly why we must be providing aid to Ukraine.

The inaction of Congress, and specifically this House, this body, and specifically Speaker of the House, Mr. Johnson, to support Ukraine is putting the United States and the world in peril.

My dad was born in Lviv, which was then Poland and now Ukraine. He was born in 1942. His father, my grandfather, was murdered during the Holocaust along with nearly every member of his immediate family. We know what happens when the United States does not lead but rather turns a blind eye and turns inward.

My family tree is bare and hollowed out and is a stark reminder of what happens when we allow tyrants to invade other nations and to wage merciless and illegal wars. My family is not alone. Millions of lives were lost because of the United States' reticence to engage in 1939.

I would also like to remind my colleagues that this is not a handout. First, many of these munitions are developed by Americans, supporting U.S. businesses. Second, we are giving Ukraine our aging weaponry and purchasing new and more advanced technologies for our troops. Finally, we are supporting Ukraine and supporting our American way of life without a single loss of Americans.

Not a single American servicemember has been deployed to Ukraine, but there are American servicemembers in nearby NATO countries who will be in harm's way should Putin continue his illegal and expressed desire to put NATO on the warpath.

Americans should not need a history lesson about what happens to our way of life when Europe falls to the chaos of war, but, clearly, some of my colleagues do.

So what on Earth are we doing here?

We are called to D.C. for vote after vote on bill after bill that stand no chance of passing in the Senate when we should be using this valuable time doing our job and passing Ukraine aid.

If Ukraine aid were brought up today for a vote, it would pass. It would pass the House, supported by scores and scores of Republicans and Democrats alike, like the ones who have called Putin a war criminal. It also has already passed the Senate, and President Biden would sign it into law tomorrow.

I love this country. I have served this country in uniform. It is the greatest honor of my lifetime to serve my country and my community in Congress. It is because of this love for the same country that took my father and my grandmother as Holocaust refugees that I stand here today and express my deep and profound anger at the positively undemocratic way in which Speaker Johnson is withholding our vote on Ukraine.

The deja vu of giving these remarks is literally nauseating. I am apoplectic. It is 1939 again, and this is not an exaggeration. It is about our standing as a nation. It is about a lasting peace in a democratic world order.

In 24 hours this House will adjourn yet again, and if Democrats held the gavel, there would be no further delay. I will say that again: If Democrats held the gavel, then Ukraine would have the support they needed.

I do not want to be right. I really don't want Ukraine to fall. I just want to be able to vote on Ukraine and defeat Putin. I demand a vote.

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today to urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan and straightforward amendment to help pass the backlog of permits that have slowed down the development of infrastructure and energy projects across this country.

As the co-chair of the bipartisan Climate Solutions Caucus, I am very excited to be able to offer this amendment alongside my Republican co- chair, Andrew Garbarino, and caucus members David Valadao and Mike Lawler.

Our caucus has heard from businesses, experts, and agency officials that have all expressed the very same message: Permitting in our country takes too long, and our Nation's climate and infrastructure goals are being diminished as a result.

Ensuring timely review processes is also critical as our Nation hopes to maximize the potential of recent historic legislation, including the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. In other words, slow permitting means slower progress for our economy.

In issuing permits, the Federal Government does their due diligence to ensure that these projects will not cause undue harm to our communities, waters, and environment. That said, under no circumstances should issues with agency staffing hamstring the permitting of projects, costing us good-paying jobs, time, and money for our businesses.

Unfortunately, the EPA faces a significant backlog. At the end of fiscal year 2023, the Agency's backlog of general permits under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System impacted 600 facilities nationwide. Further, in 2018, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers cited that the average time to complete a standard individual permit is 329 days.

Every day that a permit is not issued, time, jobs, and the potential vitality of an entire project may be lost. The EPA and the Army Corps have a responsibility to meet their regulatory permitting deadlines so that we can get shovels in the ground and projects online and on time.

That is why I offered this very straightforward and bipartisan amendment that will help us to better understand how staffing shortfalls are impacting permitting timelines. This amendment does two major things. It requires the EPA and the Army Corps to issue a report on the staffing needs that they have to process and issue permits under the Clean Water Act based on data over the last 5 years. The amendment also requires the agencies to cite the impact that funding for additional full-time employees might have on processing timelines.

This will allow Congress to be able to take any requisite action to be able to support the hardworking public servants who process these applications and who help reduce that backlog moving forward.

Mr. Chair, I urge all of my colleagues, both Democrats and Republicans alike, to support my bipartisan amendment. I thank those who have already supported this amendment, and I especially thank Ranking Member Larsen for his leadership and support.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I very much appreciate the bipartisan nature with which this amendment has been accepted and received. I urge my colleagues to vote ``aye'' on this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, I rise today to urge my colleagues to support my very straightforward amendment to protect small businesses and community banks in the wake of financial crisis, and I thank Ranking Member Waters for the opportunity to lead on this issue.

I want to take this Chamber back 1 year ago to the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank that sent our financial system into disarray. In 48 hours' time, one of the largest U.S. banks failed, impacting customers, investors, businesses, and stockholders across our Nation.

Silicon Valley Bank's failure subsequently led to the collapse of Signature and Silvergate Banks in rapid succession as well, making this crisis one of the most significant banking failures in United States history.

After moments like these, it is important that Congress and key agencies like the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission fully understand the scope and impacts to our economy. Transparency and accountability are essential to instill confidence in our capital markets and to prevent another crisis from tanking our economy in the same way.

In conducting the analysis, we must not only examine and understand the impact of the broader macroeconomy, but we must also make a concerted effort to understand the effects on small businesses and community banks that drive our Main Streets.

According to Federal Reserve data, deposits at smaller community banks dropped by $120 billion in the week following the collapse. This is especially troubling when we consider that smaller banks hold approximately 36 percent of our business loans, according to the FDIC.

In other words, community banks took a hit in the immediate aftermath of the failure, which is especially concerning considering the high number of Main Street businessowners that utilize them.

Our Federal Government has a responsibility to gather data on exactly how this crisis impacted our mom-and-pop shops and the community banks that they depend on for crucial lines of capital. We must ensure that we learn from and take action to prevent the missteps and events of the past as well.

That is why I am offering this very straightforward and very commonsense amendment to ensure that the SEC's Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation study the effects of the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank on community banks and small business lending alike.

The Advocate, whose job it is to advance the interests of small businesses and their investors, would then be required, under this amendment, to provide Congress and the SEC with a report of its findings and recommendations.

One month after the Silicon Valley Bank's collapse, I had a chance to meet with a group of local Pennsylvania bank leaders, including Customers Bank, Presence Bank, and First Resource Bank, located in my district. Each one of these banks was deeply concerned about their ability to serve the small businesses that drive the economy, create and sustain jobs, and fund the American Dream.

I specifically recall the CEO of Customers Bank, located in the Sixth Congressional District, sharing the account of the fear that small businesses had when this happened. They were concerned that they would not be able to meet payroll and other obligations.

This conversation, and outreach from many other concerned businesses in my community, is why I am putting forward this amendment. At the end of the day, these are jobs and livelihoods that are at stake.

I want to also be clear and address a falsehood. This amendment does not attempt to imply that the SEC regulates banks. This amendment clearly speaks to the responsibilities of the Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation to advance the interests of small businesses and their investors. It will allow Congress to take the requisite action to protect small businesses and community banks ahead of future financial crises and help them be more secure and more resilient.

Once again, I urge my colleagues, both Democrat and Republican, to support my straightforward and very commonsense amendment to protect our Main Streets and to ensure accountability and transparency in our financial system.

Madam Chair, I yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters), and I thank her for her continued leadership.

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Madam Chair, I thank Representative Tlaib for yielding to me.

I rise today in opposition to H.R. 2799, the Expanding Access to Capital Act of 2023, because it would remove critical safeguards against fraud and abuse in our financial markets at the expense of everyday Americans.

This bill represents a set of policies that would deregulate Wall Street and further enrich the wealthiest of our communities, all while reducing investor confidence and protections for retirees and for mom- and-pop investors.

We already see the practices of private equity funds making single family homes unaffordable and an increasing number of rural hospitals inaccessible. The last thing we need to do is to make the situation worse.

It is for this reason, at the appropriate time, that I will offer a motion to recommit this bill back to committee. If the House rules permitted, I would have offered the motion with an important amendment to this bill. Instead of enabling bad actors, my amendment would protect the privacy of women utilizing in vitro fertilization by prohibiting the Securities and Exchange Commission from requiring a business that provides IVF treatments from disclosing any personal identity information on the individual who is receiving the treatment, the medical or support personnel who are providing that treatment, or the clients of such businesses.

In the Dobbs decision, we saw the Supreme Court tear away our constitutional right to privacy. All Americans, regardless of where they live, should be able to access the assisted reproductive technologies that they need to start or grow their families, including IVF, without the fear that their personal information will be shared. Our medical providers deserve to be able to do their jobs and to help patients make their best decisions for their circumstances without fear of retribution.

Madam Chair, I include the text of my amendment in the Record. I hope that my colleagues will join me in voting for the motion to recommit.

Ms. Houlahan moves to recommit the bill H.R. 2799 to the

Committee on Financial Services with instructions to report

the same back to the House forthwith with the following

amendment:

After section 1, insert the following:

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a resident of my community, Clifford DeBaptiste, who will be celebrating his 100th birthday this May.

Clifford has served our community for over 70 years, first in the Army, where he reached the rank of sergeant major, and then as a business and civic leader in our community.

After serving in uniform, Clifford moved to West Chester with his wife, Inez, and his daughters, Lillian, Inez, and Celeste, where he attended our West Chester University and the first degree-granting HBCU, our Lincoln University.

He and Inez opened several funeral homes, becoming active members of the local business community. During this time, he also served 13 terms as the chairman of the Pennsylvania State Board of Funeral Directors.

In 1994, he made history as the very first Black mayor of our West Chester. His work revitalized West Chester's downtown and led to incredible growth for local businesses, with the number of restaurants in the borough rising from 15 to 57 during his term.

Since his retirement, he has remained very active in our local community. We are so grateful for his contributions and for those of his daughter, Lillian, who followed in his footsteps and is now the current mayor of West Chester. I wish a happy early birthday to Clifford.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Escobar for not only yielding her time but also for welcoming me and many others to her community just a few days ago.

Last week, I had the opportunity to visit our southern border by way of El Paso. This was my second time to the border. Very similar to the op-ed that I published in Newsweek earlier today, I share a little bit of my reaction to this very important and eye-opening congressional delegation that I was able to participate in.

If you are a Pennsylvanian like I am, you know that we just observed Groundhog Day, and Punxsutawney Phil didn't see his shadow, so we can all expect an early spring. At our country's southwest border, it feels like every day is Groundhog Day. Like so many Americans, I am a combination of angry and frustrated and heartbroken by what continues to happen there day after day and year after year and decade after decade.

We know that our immigration policies have to align with the shared values of our country. We are a country that was built primarily by immigrants, and we must welcome new arrivals compassionately while also protecting and securing our safety and our economy.

My community is, indeed, thousands of miles away from the southern border, in the suburbs of Philadelphia. We face unique challenges every day regarding immigration, but what is not unique about my community, indeed about every community, is that we have felt the impact in some way of our fractured and broken immigration system.

My visit to the southern border last week was not my first. Previously, I had the opportunity to go to Brownsville, Texas, and these trips have taught me that our system is broken but, indeed, can be repaired.

I have seen the efforts firsthand of important changes that Congress here has made and implemented since my first visit. Gone are the dehumanizing cages and the literal smell of humanity. In their place is a clean and dignified environment, centered on the health and the well- being of the migrants and of the incredibly dedicated Americans who work on behalf of our country. There is still clearly an enormous amount of work that needs to be done to secure our border, with enhanced processes, more staffing, and better systems, but the difference is palpable.

Most significantly, though, what has not been improved is the volume of migrants and the fact that there is still no other path than this desperate one for people who seek a better life in this vibrant and healthy economy. We don't need more of the same expensive Band-Aids but, rather, we need real reform, with more legal pathways to come here and to participate in our Nation's next 250 years.

I am committed to bipartisanship and to securing our border, and I am asking the very same of Congress. Specifically, I am asking the very same of our Speaker. The message that I share today is this: Our Republican leadership in Congress needs to commit to bringing bipartisan immigration reform bills like Veronica Escobar's bipartisan Dignity Act to the floor for a vote and now.

As an example, here is what the Dignity Act would do:

Number one, it would provide more money for CBP and border infrastructure to prevent illegal immigration.

Number two, it would require employers to verify the immigration status of workers and to ensure that they are here lawfully.

Number three, it would provide a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers, who are the children of immigrants who came here when they were very young.

Number four, it would establish a path to permanent residency status for eligible individuals without lawful immigration status who meet various requirements, including paying into a fund to provide training for U.S. workers.

Let us pause and think about what I have just shared--policies that the vast, vast majority of Americans agree on. If we, as a Congress, are not passing legislation that the vast, vast majority of Americans agree on, I truly believe, as my colleague Representative Elissa Slotkin mentioned, we are derelict in our duties.

Efforts like the Senate bipartisan bill that was just introduced yesterday must also be considered and be voted on. While I am still reading through the details of the 370-page bill, I am encouraged by the very summary that I have seen. While the path forward on immigration reform will likely not be straightforward, this much is true: We must reach a compromise with real solutions to this complex conversation and issue right now.

Again, I am calling on Speaker Johnson to change his deeply cynical position that ``now is not the time'' for immigration reform. I couldn't disagree more. Most people in most communities across America couldn't disagree more.

No solution will be perfect, but we cannot let that keep us from making progress for both the American people and for those who seek refuge here.

Not too long ago it was, indeed, my own family seeking shelter. My father and my grandmother survived the Holocaust. They left war-torn Poland after World War II and sought a better way of life here in the United States. I saw my young dad and grandmother in the eyes of frightened, desperate, and hopeful migrants that I was able to meet last week.

One small family unit in particular struck me. He was a young man of probably no more than 20 years old with his beautiful, curly-headed toddler, who reminded me of my youngest child. He told me about traffickers taking pictures of his son to intimidate and extort the father into conformance with their threats and demands. We can do better.

A lot has changed since my own father and grandmother took a ship across the Atlantic Ocean to New York City, and our immigration laws must also change as well.

I honor the souls, both migrant and American, whose lives collide with each other every day at our borders, and I again urge Republican leadership to bring a bipartisan border bill to the House floor. We must seek the hope of fresh opportunities. The shadows that burden us must all be lifted. That is possible, but only if we here in Congress understand that this Nation depends on us to act and to act now.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage all of my colleagues to support the bipartisan immigration reform.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Senior Master Sergeant Jess Roper, who has served as my Department of Defense fellow this past year.

Jess has served in the Air Force for 18 years, primarily as a Korean linguist, and has been stationed across the country and around the world, from California to South Korea, from Hawaii to Iraq.

Jess' contributions to my office are countless. She staffed me through my work on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, she has overseen the introduction of legislation on cybersecurity and mental health, and she has delivered on priorities for the Servicewomen and Women Veterans Caucus, as well.

Jess' dedication to public service is something we should all aspire to, but she is also so much more than that.

To date, she has completed 72 marathons, including one in Antarctica. She holds two master's degrees and is also recently a first-time homeowner. She is an amazing woman.

While my team and I are very sad to see her go, we are so thrilled that she was assigned to us, and she will always be ours.

I wish her nothing but the absolute best as she moves forward in her career.

Jess, aim high, and God speed.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to vote for my bipartisan and very much commonsense legislation, the Small Business Contracting Transparency Act, that will help level the playing field for underrepresented entrepreneurs across the country.

I thank my Republican colleague, Representative Pete Stauber, for his partnership on this legislation. Furthermore, I thank Chairman Williams and Ranking Member Velazquez for their leadership in advancing this legislation through the Small Business Committee on a unanimous basis. I thank them for me being able to stand on their shoulders on this.

As a former entrepreneur myself, I understand the many challenges that come with running and scaling a business. Every day brings a unique challenge. I regularly hear from businessowners in my own community, in Pennsylvania's Sixth District, who are navigating inflation, supply chain challenges, workforce needs, and so much more.

One way that our Federal Government can help protect entrepreneurs is to address these issues and ultimately succeed. One way they can do that is by providing contracting opportunities for small business owners. For entrepreneurs who are seeking to do business with our Federal Government, I know that every single contract secured or lost can be the difference in keeping Americans on their payroll or losing them, expanding or scaling back their operations, or beating or missing their projections.

That is why the Federal small business contracting programs are so very important. Through these programs, the Federal Government maintains its various statutory goals that ensure equitable participation by small businesses, and importantly, by underrepresented small businesses in Federal contracting.

Across various agencies, the Federal Government aims to provide 5 percent of Federal prime contracts to women-owned small businesses, 3 percent to service-disabled veteran-owned businesses, and 3 percent to the Historically Underutilized Business Zone, otherwise known as HUBZone, small businesses, as well.

While figures like 5 percent or 3 percent may not sound a whole lot like large targets, our Federal Government, unfortunately, struggles regularly to meet them.

Indeed, in fiscal year 2022, the Federal Government failed to reach its target goals for both women-owned businesses and HUBZone small businesses, as well. Even more troubling, the Federal Government has only met the statutory goal of awarding 5 percent of contracts to women-owned businesses twice in the last 23 years.

In addition, the Government Accountability Office, or GAO, has cited deficiencies in the Small Business Administration's oversight of the program.

It is clear that disadvantaged entrepreneurs continue to be underrepresented when it comes to Federal contract funding, and that is hurting the economy, both at a micro level and at a macro or national level. It is well past time that Congress is able to act to ensure that these programs are working as they were designed and intended to do.

That is why I introduced my bill, H.R. 4670, the bipartisan Small Business Contracting Transparency Act. My legislation will increase transparency, oversight, and will increase accountability of the Small Business Administration's Women-Owned, Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned, and HUBZone Small Business Contracting programs.

Notably, this bill requires the SBA to submit to Congress annual reports that benchmark critical data, including: the number of small businesses that are certified, the total dollar amount of contracts awarded to qualifying businesses, and the number of contracts that are incorrectly awarded to ineligible recipients, among other figures, as well.

Simply put, my bill, the Small Business Contracting Transparency Act, will allow Congress and the SBA to improve these Federal contracting programs to ensure that these programs run efficiently and to ultimately benefit disadvantaged entrepreneurs in their pursuit of securing government contracts. In turn, we will strengthen our economy, we will support Main Streets all over in every ZIP Code, and we will grow the middle class.

The time to act is now, especially as the Federal Government works to award additional contracts through this historic implementation of the bipartisan Infrastructure Investments and Jobs Act, the bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act, as well.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my Republican colleague, Representative Pete Stauber, for his partnership in this really important legislation. Once again, I thank Chairman Williams and Ranking Member Velazquez for their leadership in this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote for this Small Business Contracting Transparency Act that will

help level the playing field for entrepreneurs in Pennsylvania, and indeed, across the Nation, as well.

Madam Speaker, as we consider the T-HUD appropriations bill, I stand here to remind this legislative body of the 3 of nearly 3,000 community funding projects that were rejected from this bill in July, including the LGBTQ Center of Reading in my home community.

The very sad reality can be boiled down to this: These organizations were rejected by the GOP-led House simply because they had LGBTQ in their names.

Let's be clear, these services provide lifesaving services like food and shelter for those who have been rejected from their homes because of whom they love. They equip our vulnerable populations with the tools they need for future success--financial literacy, professional resumes, and life skills, among many other things.

Unfortunately, the Republicans who pulled this funding are likely hopeful that the American people will not see this bigoted and targeted approach for what it is, but what we do here today does send a very clear message to our LGBTQ community. It is a message that says that too many of my colleagues in Congress don't want to support these vital community investments simply because of who they serve. We owe it to the American people to do better and to serve everyone.

Madam Speaker, for my daughter Molly, I ask those who are affected by this to not accept this bigotry and discrimination any longer.