Floor Statements

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge support for my bipartisan amendment, which will require the VA to notify transitioning servicemembers of the services for which they are personally eligible.

Notification must include information about mental healthcare, community care under the MISSION Act, and care related to military sexual trauma.

Troubling reports have found that many transitioning veterans are not aware of the health benefits available to them through the VA. A recent Department of Defense Office of the Inspector General report found that the DOD has failed to provide proper mental health screening and care for transitioning veterans; in part, because so many veterans do not understand what care is available to them.

The transition away from active service can be a tumultuous time during which many new veterans face mental health issues. Left unaddressed, these issues can be debilitating and deadly.

My father served as a psychiatrist in the Air Force during the Vietnam era. He witnessed firsthand the need for proper and timely mental healthcare among veterans. But mental health resources at the VA can only be helpful to those who know of their existence.

We owe a debt of gratitude to our veterans, and they deserve gold- standard and seamless access to the benefits that they have earned.

My amendment will help new veterans understand and access the care to which they are entitled.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Congresswoman Gonzalez-Colon, Congressman Bowman, and Congresswoman Moore for joining me in offering this amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his support.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Takano), the chairman of Veterans' Affairs Committee.

Madam Speaker, this amendment will help new veterans understand the specific benefits that they have and that they have earned through their service. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of my amendment, the bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I thank my esteemed colleague, Congressman Perlmutter, for yielding.

Madam Speaker, the bills included in this rule serve as an expression of gratitude for all veterans, regardless of their official service status.

My State of North Carolina alone has nearly 12,000 National Guard members, each of whom deserves to be recognized

for their sacrifice on behalf of our Nation.

Reservists and National Guard members take on challenging, admirable, and oftentimes lifesaving work, especially throughout the COVID-19 crisis. We owe it to these exceptional Americans to provide gold- standard education benefits, medical care, and mental health support.

A critical inflection point in all veterans' lives is their transition to civilian life. We know that during this period, veterans disproportionately face mental health crises. That is why in partnership with Congresswoman Gonzalez-Colon, Congressman Bowman, Congresswoman Moore, I have offered an amendment to H.R. 1836 that takes proactive steps to offer support.

Our amendment requires the VA to provide new veterans with information on the medical services they can access, including the mental health care and military sexual trauma resources to which they are entitled.

My father served as a psychiatrist in the Air Force during the Vietnam era, a particularly challenging time for our veterans. He witnessed firsthand the need for mental health care among this population.

In addition, one of the issues--military sexual trauma, leaving veterans with scars, both physical and psychological--is affected by this legislation. I have introduced other legislation on this issue and I am committed to helping veterans who have experienced this trauma access support.

Veterans can't benefit from VA services unless they know about them. Unfortunately, many veterans lack information of the full range of resources available. Our amendment will raise awareness among transitioning veterans about VA services and the care they deserve.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, the rule, and the underlying bill.

Madam Speaker, I rise in honor of my constituent Leslie Williams. Leslie recently achieved a wonderful milestone in her career in real estate by being named the 2022 President of the Raleigh Association of Realtors.

Leslie has been a resident of North Carolina for 20 years, and has over 30 years of sales, marketing, customer service, and management experience. She also has a Masters degree in Business Administration and has attained several real estate certifications throughout her career.

In addition to her professional achievements, Leslie is dedicated to volunteering, mentorship, and ensuring homeownership for all. I am so proud to represent a constituent who is committed to supporting these important efforts in our community, and I look forward to hearing more about her work in the future and collaborate to improve our community.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to discuss an important lifeline to so many North Carolina families, the child tax credit.

In North Carolina alone, millions of families have benefited from the child tax credit. The first monthly payment lifted 3 million children out of poverty and significantly reduced childhood hunger. No family should have to worry about whether they can afford their next meal.

The child tax credit also helps pay for childcare, helps pay for school supplies, helps when the car breaks down, and helps families living paycheck to paycheck.

Recently, I heard from a mother in North Carolina who told me that the child tax credit takes away a layer of stress that is inherent in trying to return to the workforce and financially plan for a new setting.

In just a few weeks, these monthly payments are set to expire unless Build Back Better is passed. We cannot fail the next generation. We must pass this transformative legislation in the Senate and have the President sign it.

Madam Speaker, I rise today as a proud cosponsor of the Protecting Our Democracy Act, which ensures that our government remains of, by, and for the people.

I also rise in support of my amendment, which would establish a task force within the Department of Justice to investigate and prosecute, in collaboration with State and local governments, threats to election officials.

Poll workers in my home State of North Carolina and their families have been subjected to harassment, violent threats, and intimidation, all exacerbated by baseless conspiracies like stop the steal.

We suffered critical shortages of poll workers during the 2020 elections, and over one-quarter of counties in North Carolina had understaffed polling sites. Threats to election officials are threats to our democracy and must be stopped.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support poll workers, the democratic process, my amendment, and the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Courthouse Ethics and Transparency Act. This commonsense, bipartisan, bicameral legislation would serve to fill a transparency void that plagues our current Federal judicial system as recently exposed in a Wall Street Journal series of reports.

According to these reports, 131 Federal judges broke the law by hearing cases where they had a financial interest. From 2010 to 2018, these judges failed to recuse themselves from 685 lawsuits involving firms in which they or their families held stock, and today the number could be much higher.

This failure has real-world repercussions for the American public and American families.

Take, for example, Jacob and Jeanetta Springer. They were foreclosed upon in 2018 after Jeanetta's ailing father missed one mortgage payment 3 months before his passing.

Upon inheriting the property, the Springers sought to challenge the foreclosure in Federal court, believing they were behind on fewer payments than the bank had claimed. The case was dismissed on the recommendation of the magistrate judge and again on appeal. But the Springers were soon notified by the court that their judge had purchased the bank's stock before issuing the ruling.

As a result, their case was reopened and assigned to a different judge. In frustration, Jacob Springer asked: ``How was I supposed to know the judge owned the stock?''

The Springer family's experience demonstrates the importance of ensuring both justice and the appearance of justice in our courtrooms. The impression of impropriety threatens the trust litigants place in judges to be impartial and disinterested arbiters of justice and the very institutional legitimacy of our judiciary.

The Springer family's experience was not the first time a litigant has had their faith in the promise of blind justice shaken by the lack of transparency in our judiciary. But today, we can move toward making it the last by passing the Courthouse Ethics and Transparency Act.

This bill will make Federal judges more accountable, transparent, and ethical, and restore confidence in our Federal courts. The legislation will ensure Federal judges face the same financial transaction disclosure requirements as members of the legislative and executive branches, eliminating an unwarranted transparency gap.

It also requires the online publication of judges' financial disclosures on a publicly accessible database. This online database will add another layer of protection from potential conflicts.

Litigants like the Springer family would be able to identify conflicts sooner instead of solely relying on the ineffective recusal processes that currently are in place. This bill does so without compromising the safety of Federal judges or their families because it incorporates existing confidentiality rules that enable judges to redact sensitive information. The database will simply streamline access to information already legally required to be available to the public.

I want to thank Judiciary Committee Chairman Nadler, Subcommittee Chairman Johnson, cosponsor and Subcommittee Ranking Member Issa, and Representative Chip Roy for working with me to introduce this crucial legislation. We must restore trust in the American promise of free and fair administration of justice in our courtrooms.

For this reason, I urge my colleagues to support this bill to increase transparency and accountability in our courtrooms.

Madam Speaker, I thank Congressman Cartwright for yielding and for his leadership.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to discuss the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act that will bring America's aging infrastructure into the 21st century.

I was honored to join Madam Speaker and our other colleagues at the White House as the President signed this historic legislation into law.

In Congress, I am extremely proud to represent Wake County, North Carolina, one of the fastest growing counties in the United States. We are a powerful economic engine for our State and for our region, but, sadly, our infrastructure has not grown with our community. We need seamless transportation networks to connect Wake County to the rest of the Nation--modern infrastructure that can help us bring the innovation that happens in the Research Triangle to the country and to the world.

This historic legislation will help us, our people, get to work and school and products from our groundbreaking companies get to markets across America and around the globe.

In North Carolina, there are about 1,500 bridges and more than 3,000 highways in poor condition. This bill will devote $110 billion to upgrade roads and bridges and finance other major transportation projects.

Over the next 20 years, North Carolina's drinking water infrastructure will require billions in additional funding.

This bill provides funds to replace lead pipes in the country and help ensure that all of our children can enjoy clean drinking water. It will also address the toxic threat of PFAS contamination.

This bill modernizes our Nation's electric grid to protect against storm damage and unlock the full potential of clean energy. It also creates jobs in the clean energy manufacturing sector, a sector where our State is positioned to lead the Nation.

In addition, it expands broadband connectivity in underserved communities, helping to ensure that all of our

students and businesses can access dependable, affordable internet.

The jobs created by this infrastructure package are jobs that cannot be outsourced. This package will boost all of our workers, from the folks who pave the roads to the scientists and engineers who are designing 21st century transportation networks, more efficient water and sewer systems, and cutting edge electrical grids.

Thanks to this package, engineering graduates from schools like North Carolina State and graduates from Wake Tech, Shaw, and St. Augustine's--all in my district--will help build the bridges in our communities that one day many years from now they will proudly show their grandchildren.

We are delivering on the President's promise to pass legislation that improves the lives of ordinary people and creates good-paying jobs.

This bill is a testament to what we can achieve when we give bipartisanship a chance, when we set our differences aside and commit to the hard work of finding common ground.

This is good for North Carolina and great for the country.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss the urgent need to pass the Build Back Better agenda, a transformational package that will help individuals and working families across North Carolina.

This bold legislation will bring down the high costs that have held families back for decades by making childcare, home care, education, healthcare, and housing more affordable. This is a package for the people--all the people--and it spans generations, providing support to infants, students, working adults, and older Americans.

Right now, the average annual cost for a child in North Carolina to attend a childcare center is nearly $9,000. The average North Carolina family with two young children spends more than 20 percent of their annual income on childcare. That is unacceptable. For kids to thrive and for parents to excel in the workplace, we need quality, affordable childcare.

I have a constituent from Cary, North Carolina, named Katy, she works at a nonprofit and has a 1-year-old child. She told me this:

Becoming a mom has opened my eyes to how broken our

Nation's childcare system is.

We felt lucky to find a spot for my child at a high-quality

childcare program, but the cost was shocking. We pay more

than $800 a month for my son's care.

At the same time, the director and teachers at my son's

program likely don't make a living wage.

They're doing one of the most important jobs in the world,

helping raise the next generation. Why aren't they

compensated fairly?

Childcare providers shouldn't have to work second jobs on

the weekends to feed their families, but many do.

At the same time, parents can't shoulder the burden.

In fact, the extremely high cost of childcare is a major

factor for my family as we decide to have a second child.

Katy's story is so common. If we claim to value our children and our families, we need to stop turning a blind eye to the exploding costs of childcare. We can do better.

That is why the Build Back Better Act will provide universal pre-K for all 3- and 4-year-olds and limit childcare costs for working families to no more than 7 percent of their income.

Mr. Speaker, we also need to do more for our seniors and their loved ones. Every American should be able to look forward to a comfortable, secure retirement. Our seniors should not have to worry about financially burdening their children and their grandchildren.

In my family, my father-in-law wanted to stay in the home he loved, and he did until he was 98 years old. We found

it very difficult to find him home care. I continue to hear stories from seniors in my district who have had to give up their homes simply to stay in a nursing home.

Again, we can do better. That is why the Build Back Better Act will provide a historic investment in home care in order to help the more than 800,000 people on State Medicaid waiting lists.

Mr. Speaker, when we pass this bill, more of our people will stop struggling to make ends meet and start experiencing true financial security.

When we pass this bill, more of our children and our seniors will receive the care they deserve. And, most importantly, when we pass this bill we will be one giant step closer to an America where everyone has the chance to pursue the American Dream and the means to support their families.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the history and the legacy of the Oberlin Village community.

Founded in 1866, Oberlin Village is one of the last surviving antebellum settlements founded by free Black people in North Carolina.

After Reconstruction, the community became a welcoming refuge for newly freed former slaves from the nearby Cameron plantation.

It became much more than a town. The thriving municipality was home to rows of single-family houses, two churches, and a public school. It became a symbol of land ownership for freedmen.

The local post office, now located in a building owned by the Oberlin Baptist Church, is still named after the plantation rather than this historic community. I urge the Postal Service to change the name to reflect the post office's new location and to commemorate the Oberlin Village community and its legacy.

Madam Speaker, I have an amendment at the desk.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise today to urge support for my amendment. My amendment to the PUMP for Nursing Mothers Act would help ensure women have sufficient notice of the new protections afforded to them in this bill.

By ensuring that eligible people are provided with sufficient informational resources, more women will be able to exercise their rights and the likelihood of employer defection will be reduced.

In many places in this country, including my home State of North Carolina, it is easier to take a smoke break than for a mother to take a pump break. This is simply unacceptable.

By passing the PUMP for Nursing Mothers Act, we can end this discrimination against breastfeeding workers and guarantee that no mother will have to choose between earning a living and feeding her child.

But a law is only as effective as its enforcement, and we have unfortunately witnessed countless occasions where businesses have failed to inform workers of their rights. Just in this last year, the Department of Labor investigated six businesses in North Carolina for violations of breastfeeding rights under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

My amendment would provide the necessary information to ensure these workplace violations do not continue. We owe it to our nursing mothers, their families, and our local communities to be vigilant about overseeing the implementation of this law.

This is a gender equality issue, a labor rights issue, and an economic justice issue that demands our attention.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record letters from the director of La Leche and the National WIC Association.

Written Statement of Diane Thompson, Director of La Leche League Alliance for Breastfeeding Education Before the United States House of

Representatives--September 24, 2021

Dear Speaker Pelosi, Minority Leader McCarthy, Members of

the U.S. House of Representatives: La Leche League Alliance

for Breastfeeding Education submits this letter to the U.S.

House of Representatives in full support of the Providing

Urgent Maternal Protections (PUMP) for Nursing Mothers Act

(H.R. 3110).

La Leche League Alliance for Breastfeeding Education (LLL

Alliance) is a division of La Leche League International in

the United States. While we receive our 501(c)(3) tax-exempt

status as a charitable organization through our association

with LLLI, we are a separately incorporated entity.

Representing over 1000 Leaders spread across 43 states, LLL

Alliance provides resources and support for La Leche League

Leaders and Area Administrators, as well as information and

support for parents.

La Leche League believes that breastfeeding, with its many

important physical and psychological advantages, is best for

baby and mother and is the ideal way to initiate good parent-

child relationships.

Breastfeeding is crucial to the health of both mothers and

babies. It provides protections and health benefits for far

longer than the duration of the breastfeeding relationship.

Why would the USA not want to encourage and support the

feeding of human milk? Some of the advantages include for

mothers: lower risk of breast cancer, lower risk of ovarian

cancer, lower risk of rheumatoid arthritis and lupus, and

less endometriosis. For children: fewer instances of

allergies, eczema, and asthma, fewer childhood cancers,

including leukemia and lymphomas, lower risk of type I and II

diabetes, fewer instances of Crohn's disease and colitis. See

the CDC, American Academy of Pediatrics and the World Health

Organization.

We have Leaders and parents that are supported who are

denied the opportunity to pump at work because of the types

of jobs they have. Especially affected are teachers in the K-

12 system and nurses who are not currently covered. This can

have several effects. Mastitis caused by not pumping--these

leads to lost days at work and possibly the cessation of

breastfeeding. It is disappointing that those individuals who

do so much caretaking can be deprived of caretaking for their

own children.

Why would the PUMP act be helpful? Among other reasons it

would close the coverage gap. The bill would protect nearly 9

million employees excluded from the 2010 Break Time law by

extending the law's protections to cover salaried employees

as well as other categories of employees currently exempted

from protections.

It would provide employers clarity on when pumping time

must be paid and when it may be unpaid. The bill leaves in

place existing law protecting many salaried workers from

having their pay docked and clarifies that any time spent

pumping while the employee is also working, a common

occurrence for many employees, must be counted as hours

worked.

This is not a partisan issue--parents of any party benefit.

La Leche League Alliance for Breastfeeding Education urges

all members of Congress to vote in support because as stated

above it closes gaps in the current law. Individuals should

not have to choose between going to the bathroom or pumping.

Thank you for your consideration.

Diane Thompson,

Director, La Leche League Alliance for Breastfeeding

Education.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney).

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in support of my amendment and the bill. Both are essential for our working mothers, for

our families, and for the health of the next generation.

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

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 667 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

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

Mr. Speaker, this afternoon, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 667, providing for consideration of three measures.

First, H.R. 3755, the Women's Health Protection Act, under a closed rule. The rule self-executes a manager's amendment from Chairman Pallone, provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and provides one motion to recommit.

The rule also provides for the consideration of H.R. 4350, the National Defense Authorization Act, under a structured rule. The rule self-executes a manager's amendment from Chairman Smith, provides 1 hour of debate on the bill equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Armed Services, and provides one motion to recommit. The rule makes in order 476 amendments, provides en bloc authority, and provides one motion to recommit.

The rule further provides for consideration of H.R. 5305, the Extending Government Funding and Delivering Emergency Assistance Act, under a closed rule. The rule provides 1 hour of debate on the bill equally divided and controlled by the chair and the ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations, and provides one motion to recommit.

The rule provides the majority leader or his designee the ability to en bloc requested roll call votes on certain suspension bills through September 24. Requested roll call votes on certain suspension bills may be postponed through October 1.

Finally, the rule extends recess instructions, suspension authority, and same day authority to October 27 and provides that the ordering of the yeas and nays on the motion that the House suspend the rules and pass S. 2382 is vacated.

Mr. Speaker, I stand in support of the three bills in this rule, H.R. 4350, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022; H.R. 5305, the continuing resolution; and H.R. 3755, the Women's Health Protection Act.

I want to start by recognizing the contributions of the North Carolinians and all American servicemembers who served in Afghanistan over the past 20 years. Your sacrifices will never be forgotten.

It is in honor of these American heroes that I am proud to support the Fiscal Year 2022 National Defense Authorization Act. This bill invests in our servicemembers and their families and ensures that the United States is ready to confront future threats to our Nation.

This NDAA provides our men and women in uniform with a 2.7 percent pay increase; makes critical changes to how the military addresses sexual assault; and improves TRICARE coverage and benefits, including by removing cost sharing for contraceptive coverage.

I am grateful that three of my amendments were made in order. Two of these amendments aim to support military women and families by requiring reports on access to menstrual products and accommodations and on potential TRICARE coverage of preconception and prenatal genetic carrier screening tests.

My other amendment expands the definition of PFAS to better align with the current science. This change will help keep our servicemembers and all Americans safe from toxic chemicals.

In addition to supporting our military personnel, this legislation supports American innovation through a 32 percent increase in defense- wide research, development, testing, and evaluation. It also ensures that our HBCUs and other minority institutions are more able to contribute to DOD research and development.

Finally, this bill continues our commitment to supporting our Afghan allies by authorizing $500 million for the Department of Defense to support the relocation of at-risk Afghans.

The continuing resolution included in this rule also supports efforts to evacuate our allies from Afghanistan. Afghans arriving to the U.S. or awaiting processing overseas need medical care, food, housing, and other assistance. This funding will ensure the government agencies involved in the resettlement process have the capacity necessary to help our Afghan allies build new lives in safety in the United States.

In addition, the continuing resolution ensures that our government remains funded, raises the debt ceiling, and provides relief to areas devastated by Hurricane Ida and other natural disasters.

Democrat or Republican, we are all Americans. We all benefit when our democracy and economy are healthy, and we all suffer when our country is in crisis.

Every Member in this body was elected to represent our fellow Americans. It would be a dishonor to the trust they bestowed upon us if we let the government shut down or allow the country to default on the full faith and credit of the United States.

This CR will provide much-needed relief to communities devastated by recent hurricanes and other disasters like the California wildfires.

Thousands of homes have been destroyed, and many Americans still have limited access to fresh water and electricity. Additional delays in relief could be the difference between life and death.

Lastly, this rule includes the Women's Health Protection Act, which safeguards reproductive freedom for people across this country.

Roe v. Wade has been the law of the land for nearly 50 years. With this bill, the House is stepping in following the Supreme Court's failure to uphold decades of American jurisprudence.

This bill affirms what our Constitution and international human rights bodies have long upheld: that access to reproductive care is central to health and equality. A woman living in Texas should have the same access to care as a woman living in California.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a Military.com article entitled ``Defense Bills Would Provide New Food Allowance for Low- Income Military Families.''

[From Military.com, July 27, 2021]

Defense Bills Would Provide New Food Allowance for Low-Income Military

Families

(By Patricia Kime)

A House panel is weighing a $770 billion defense policy

bill that includes a provision to give lower-income military

families a basic needs allowance--a stipend that advocacy

groups say would relieve stress and ``food insecurity'' among

U.S. troops.

The draft of the House's 2022 National Defense

Authorization Act released Tuesday contains a provision

similar to the Senate's proposal that would provide service

members additional money for food and other basics if their

household incomes do not exceed 130% of the federal poverty

level--which in 2021 meant $21,960 for a family of three,

$26,500 for a family of four, and slightly higher for even

larger families.

This is the third time the proposal has been incorporated

into the House defense policy bill; unlike previous years, it

also has been included in the 2022 Senate defense bill,

increasing the likelihood that it will pass later this year.

For an E-4 with several years in the military, a spouse and

two children, the stipend could equate to roughly $250 extra

a month.

Advocates say the provision is needed as junior military

service members face the stresses of supporting families in

areas where spouse employment is low or child-care expenses

make it difficult to pay monthly bills.

``When I got to the [Defense Department], I started talking

about food insecurity, and I really did get a look that said

to me, `We really don't think we have a problem,' '' Patty

Barron, deputy assistant secretary of defense for Military

Community and Family Policy, said at an event on military and

veterans food insecurity Tuesday.

The data is mixed on the extent of food insecurity among

military families. This year, the Defense Department's

Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation found that an

estimated 880 to 4,690 U.S. service members use the

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, a rate of

between .08% and .42% of troops. Civilian usage of SNAP, also

known as food stamps, is 9.6%.

Critics note, however, that the report pulled data from

only two months in 2019, and the data does not include

numbers from 40% of states, including several with large

military populations such as California, Hawaii and Virginia.

``The reason we thought we didn't have a problem is, we

were looking at the low SNAP numbers, and we believe we are

compensating our people well, and if not, they will promote

out of it and get those pay raises to solve the problem,''

Barron added.

``The department is much more aware of the issue now, and

it is one of Secretary [Lloyd] Austin's biggest priorities,''

Barron said during the discussion hosted by the Center For

Strategic and International Studies.

A survey released in May found that nearly 33% of more than

5,600 respondents at an unidentified Army installation were

considered marginally food insecure, meaning they faced food

hardship or had difficulties ensuring that their food budget

stretched through the end of the month.

And according to a report from the organization MAZON: A

Jewish Response to Hunger, one in eight military families

experiences food insecurity compared with one in 10 in the

U.S. civilian population.

``The mental health of our service members is key to their

long-term connection to the military and the well-being of

their families, and given that we find service members'

mental health is associated with food insecurity, addressing

food insecurity may be one way to address [mental health

issues],'' said Matthew Rabbitt, an economist with the USDA

Economic Research Service, during the CSIS event.

The House Armed Services Personnel Subcommittee will

consider its portion of the 2022 National Defense

Authorization Act on Wednesday. The bill is expected to be

debated by the full committee on Sept. 1 and must be

reconciled with the Senate's version before it can become

law.

The proposed legislation provides for a 2.7% pay raise for

military personnel in 2022 and a number of other benefits,

including an increase in parental leave for service members

and designated caregivers as well as foster parents,

expansion of the department's in-home, child-care pilot

program and the establishment of an advisory council to

support the services' Exceptional Family Member Programs.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is unconscionable that members of our armed services and their families are going hungry. I have heard about this in my home State of North Carolina, where there are food banks associated with military bases.

I am grateful that this 2022 NDAA will provide servicemembers additional money for food and other basic needs. No one in America should go hungry, especially those serving our country.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Speier).

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

Mr. Speaker, the fiscal year 2022 NDAA authorizes funding for cybersecurity investments in people, programs, and technology. It directs the executive branch to establish a cyber-threat information collaboration environment which will facilitate the transmission, sharing, and analysis of cyber-threat information, which is so crucial, particularly at this time.

This legislation implements key recommendations of the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence by authorizing funding for key AI-related initiatives, including investments in the workforce, emerging technologies research, and support for our small business contractors.

Additionally, the legislation authorizes funding to support biological threat reduction programs, requires a publicly available report on threats regarding weapons of mass destruction by China and Russia, and directs a report on biosecurity efforts across the Department of Defense, all needed and crucial investments.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 1 minute.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to highlight an amendment that is sponsored by several of our colleagues that will be in the NDAA and that we will hear more about this evening and tomorrow. It deals with PFAS, forever chemicals. We have debated issues about PFAS on this floor, but unfortunately members of our armed services sometimes end up being human guinea pigs for these PFAS.

This amendment will deal with many of these concerns. It directs the Secretary of Defense to provide DOD medical providers with mandatory training with respect to the potential health effects of PFAS. We have seen this in North Carolina, particularly at Fort Bragg.

It requires the EPA to obtain analytical reference standards for PFAS, for the development of protocols and methodologies and enforcement activities.

It clarifies the scope of PFAS data reporting from the 2020 NDAA.

It amends title III, section 318 to clarify that DOD must comply with safe incineration of PFAS as enacted in section 330 of the NDAA of fiscal year 2020.

It requires the report on DOD progress to comply with EPA safe PFAS disposal guidelines, and it requires that this report be submitted one year after enactment of the act, and it includes that they report to the Committee on Armed Services.

It requires the report to include the actions the DOD has taken to comply with that section. It defines the scope of prohibition to ensure that PFAS materials sent to third-parties for disposal are also covered by the provisions.

It expresses the sense of Congress that the Air Force has contaminated real property with PFOS and PFOA chemicals, and it should use existing authority to acquire property and provide relocation assistance.

It requires a report detailing contamination sites and acquisition and relocation status.

It requires a national primary drinking water regulation for PFAS, and clarifies congressional intent by requiring manufacturers to disclose all PFAS discharges over 100 pounds.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to point out some additional benefits of this NDAA in dealing with global challenges.

H.R. 4350 invests in tools to combat the unprecedented challenge of a global pandemic, racial inequities, and a deepening climate emergency.

The NDAA authorizes funding for national defense and prioritizes programs and policies to confront the growing threat of China and Russia.

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

Mr. Speaker, there are additional wonderful amendments dealing with cybersecurity that are in the NDAA.

We will hear again about another cybersecurity training pilot program for the Department of Veterans Affairs for veterans and members of the Armed Forces transitioning from service to civilian life. It creates a registered apprenticeship program at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency focused on cybersecurity and infrastructure security. Both programs will be established in coordination with the Department of Defense.

We know that we do not have enough people in civilian life with this cybersecurity training as we face these threats like we saw in my home State of North Carolina with the Colonial Pipeline.

Having this transition from DOD to civilian life and having supportive apprenticeship programs will go a long way to fighting cybersecurity.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from 101 faith-based religious and civil rights organizations expressing their support for H.R. 3755, the Women's Health Protection Act.

June 16, 2021.

Hon. Dick Durbin,

Chair, Senate Committee on the Judiciary,

Washington, DC.

Hon. Richard Blumenthal,

Chair, Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on The

Constitution, Washington, DC.

Hon. Chuck Grassley,

Ranking Member, Senate Committee on the Judiciary,

Washington, DC.

Hon. Ted Cruz,

Ranking Member, Senate Committee on the Judiciary,

Subcommittee on The Constitution, Washington, DC.

101 Faith-Based, Religious, & Civil Rights Organizations Express

Support for the Women's Health Protection Act

Dear Senators Durbin, Grassley, Blumenthal, Cruz, and

Committee Members: As faith-based, religious, and civil

rights organizations that share a commitment to religious

freedom and the separation of religion and government, we

write to express our strong and unequivocal support for S

1975, the Women's Health Protection Act.

We affirm our nation's founding principle of religious

liberty, which is integrally bound to reproductive freedom.

Religious liberty includes the right to follow one's own

faith or moral code in making critical, personal reproductive

health decisions, without political interference. While we

respect the right of every individual, including our

lawmakers, to hold their own personal and religious beliefs,

our country's Constitution demands that no one impose a

single religious viewpoint on all through civil law or

regulation. The Women's Health Protection Act is essential

legislation that embodies these shared ideals.

The Women's Health Protection Act is urgently needed. The

nearly 500 abortion bans and restrictions enacted since 2011

have severely reduced or eliminated abortion access

in large swaths of the country and fall hardest on those who

already face barriers to accessing health care--including

women; Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC); those

working to make ends meet; members of the LGBTQI+ community;

immigrants; young people; those living in rural communities;

and people with disabilities. The Women's Health Protection

Act is an important bill that would enact protections on the

federal level to safeguard access to high-quality care and to

secure constitutional rights by protecting patients and

providers from political or religious interference.

Rather than face onerous barriers due to their economic

status, employment status, or zip code, this bill would

ensure that each person can make a decision about abortion

led by their own circumstances, faith, or beliefs. It would

also protect the religious liberty of individual health care

providers seeking to administer quality care to their

patients and enable providers to deliver abortion services

free from burdensome restrictions designed to impede access

rather than improve patient health.

We believe in compassion, justice, and dignity for all,

compelling us to speak out for social justice and the right

of every person to access comprehensive, affordable, and

equitable reproductive health care. A compassionate nation

ensures equal access to quality, timely health abortion care

for everyone, an essential factor to social and economic

participation, reproductive and moral autonomy, and the right

to determine our own lives. In contrast, laws that limit the

availability of abortion disrespect human dignity, erode

constitutional rights, exact far-reaching health and economic

consequences, and ignore the moral agency of physicians

seeking to provide compassionate care.

Furthermore, laws that eliminate options for some based on

their geographic location are profoundly unjust, pushing care

out of reach for the most marginalized among us. We cannot

remain idle as state laws transform our country into a map of

``haves and have-nots'' with regard to access to reproductive

health services. We call on Congress to pass Women's Health

Protection Act to protect access to abortion and to help us

build a society where all can participate equally and thrive

in our communities with dignity.

Every day, we support equal, fair, and comprehensive access

to health care and respect for personal decision-making. We

support the Women's Health Protection Act as a means to this

end and urge you and your colleagues to do the same. The

117th Congress must act in solidarity with people and

communities fighting for racial, economic, and reproductive

justice and commit to protecting the right of every person to

make their own decisions about their bodies, free from

discrimination and political interference. It is the right

thing to do.

Please contact Shannon Russell, Legislative Counsel at the

National Council of Jewish Women, with any questions or for

additional information.

Respectfully,

National Council of Jewish Women, Catholics for Choice,

Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, Union for Reform

Judaism, Women of Reform Judaism.

National Organizations

A Critical Mass: Women Celebrating Eucharist; African

American Ministers In Action (AAMIA); ALEPH: Alliance for

Jewish Renewal; Ameinu; American Atheists; American Humanist

Association; American Jewish World Service; Anti-Defamation

League; Avodah; Bend the Arc: Jewish Action; CenterLink:

The Community of LGBT Centers; Central Conference of

American Rabbis; Chicago Women-Church; Clergy Advocacy

Board of Planned Parenthood Federation of America; CORPUS;

Disciples Justice Action Network; Episcopal Women's

Caucus; Freedom From Religion Foundation.

Global Justice Institute (MCC); Habonim Dror North America;

Human Rights Campaign; Interfaith Voices for Reproductive

Justice; Jewish Alliance for Law and Social Action; Jewish

Council for Public Affairs (JCPA); Jewish Women

International; Jews United for Justice; Keshet; Methodist

Federation for Social Action; Metropolitan Community Churches

(MCC); Moving Traditions; Muslim Advocates; Muslims for

Progressive Values; National Center for Lesbian Rights;

National Center for Transgender Equality; National Coalition

of American Nuns (NCAN); National Organization for Women.

Network of Jewish Human Service Agencies; People For the

American Way; Presbyterians Affirming Reproductive Options;

Rabbinical Assembly; Reconstructing Judaism,

Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association; Religious

Institute; Society for Humanistic Judaism; Tivnu: Building

Justice; T'ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights;

Unitarian Universalist Women's Federation; United Church of

Christ, Justice and Witness Ministries; Voices for Progress;

We Testify; Women's Alliance for Theology, Ethics, and Ritual

(WATER); Women's League for Conservative Judaism; Women's

Ordination Conference.

State & Local Organizations

Florida Interfaith Coalition for Reproductive Health and

Justice; Jewish Community Action; Just Texas: Faith Voices

for Reproductive Freedom; Michigan Organization on Adolescent

Sexual Health (MOASH); Michigan Unitarian Universalist Social

Justice Network (MUUSJN); National Council of Jewish Women,

Arizona Section; National Council of Jewish Women, Atlanta

Section; National Council of Jewish Women, Austin Section;

National Council of Jewish Women, Chicago North Shore

Section; National Council of Jewish Women, Cleveland Section;

National Council of Jewish Women, Colorado Section; National

Council of Jewish Women, Essex County Section; National

Council of Jewish Women, Greater Dallas Section; National

Council of Jewish Women, Greater Long Beach & West Orange

County Section; National Council of Jewish Women, Greater New

Orleans Section.

National Council of Jewish Women, Houston Section; National

Council of Jewish Women, Jersey Hills Section; National

Council of Jewish Women, Kansas City Section; National

Council of Jewish Women, Maine Section; National Council of

Jewish Women, Milwaukee Section; National Council of Jewish

Women, Minnesota Section; National Council of Jewish Women,

Nashville Section; National Council of Jewish Women, New York

Section; National Council of Jewish Women, Northern Virginia;

National Council of Jewish Women, Palm Beach Section;

National Council of Jewish Women, Peninsula Section; National

Council of Jewish Women, Pittsburgh Section; National Council

of Jewish Women, Sacramento Section; National Council of

Jewish Women, San Antonio Section; National Council of Jewish

Women, Sarasota-Manatee Section; National Council of Jewish

Women, Southeast Atlantic Section.

National Council of Jewish Women, South Cook Section;

National Council of Jewish Women, St. Louis Section; Nebraska

Religious Council for Reproductive Freedom; New Mexico

Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice; Ohio Religious

Coalition for Reproductive Choice; PA Religious Coalition for

Reproductive Justice; Religious Coalition for Reproductive

Choice of Connecticut, Inc.; Rhode Island Religious Coalition

for Reproductive Freedom; Sister Reach; South Carolina

Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice; Texas Freedom

Network; United Church of Christ Detroit Area Social Justice

Team.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from the National Nurses United, dated September 21 expressing their resounding support for H.R. 3755.

The letter states: ``On behalf of the 175,000 registered nurses represented by the National Nurses United, we write to you today to endorse the Women's Health Protection Act of 2021 sponsored by Representative Chu. We strongly urge you to vote `yes' on this critical piece of legislation when it is brought to the floor of the House of Representatives.''

National Nurses United,

September 21, 2021.

Dear Representative: National Nurses United supports the

right of all women and people who can get pregnant to full

and equal healthcare services, including reproductive and

family planning health services as a fundamental human right.

On behalf of the 175,000 registered nurses represented by

National Nurses United (NNU), we write to you today to

endorse the Women's Health Protection Act of 2021 (HR 3755)

sponsored by Representative Judy Chu. We strongly urge you to

vote yes on this critical piece of legislation when it is

brought to a vote on the floor of the House of

Representatives.

The Women's Health Protection Act (WHPA) establishes a

statutory right for health professionals to provide abortion

care without any medically unnecessary restrictions or

limitations that impede access to abortion. With increasing

attacks on reproductive rights, it is critical that Congress

swiftly takes steps to protect access to abortion and

reproductive health care.

Nurses, the majority of whom are women, play an essential

role in the delivery of reproductive health services for

millions of patients every day, and we have a duty to

advocate for the health and safety of our patients. Without

access to abortion services, patients who are pregnant may be

at risk of illness and death due to pregnancy, or may be at

risk of avoidable complications from unsafe and illegal

abortion practices. Further, access to quality reproductive

healthcare allows people to make decisions for themselves on

whether and when to have children, an essential component of

equality that enables full participation in our society.

Nurses know that unless we bring down the barriers to care,

people will go without the necessary healthcare they deserve.

The decision to have an abortion is a decision that should

be made between a person and their healthcare providers--it

is not a decision that politicians have any right to be

engaged in. Patients have the right to seek abortion care

with the counsel of a trusted healthcare provider, regardless

of where they live, and it is critical that Congress protects

that right.

We urge you to stand with nurses and vote yes on HR 3755 to

protect the right of all people to access abortion care and

reproductive health services.

Sincerely,

Bonnie Castillo, RN,

Executive Director, National Nurses United.

Deborah Burger, RN,

President, National Nurses United.

Zenei Cortez, RN,

President, National Nurses United.

Jean Ross, RN,

President, National Nurses United.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from 20 medical organizations, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American College of Physicians, and the American Medical Women's Association, to name a few, expressing their support for H.R. 3755, the Women's Health Protection Act.

June 14, 2021.

Hon. Richard Blumenthal,

U.S Senate,

Washington, DC.

Hon. Judy Chu,

U.S. House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Senator Blumenthal and Representative Chu: On behalf

of the undersigned medical organizations, representing

physicians dedicated to advancing the health of our patients,

thank you for introducing the Women's Health Protection Act

(S. 1975/H.R. 3755). The purpose of your legislation--to

protect the patient-physician relationship and preserve the

ability of physicians to provide evidence-based care to their

patients----is critically important.

Federal, state, and local lawmakers have long played an

important role in our health care system. The myriad policies

aimed at addressing the ongoing COVID-19 public health

emergency provide a prime example of legislators acting to

improve the health of their constituents. However, physician

leaders have long raised concerns, including in a New England

Journal of Medicine commentary nearly a decade ago, about the

alarming increase in legislators ``overstepping the proper

limits of their role in the health care of Americans to

dictate the nature and content of patients' interactions with

their physicians.'' This overreach has taken many forms,

including creating unnecessary obstacles for patients trying

to access medically appropriate care, forcing physicians to

practice outside the bounds of evidence-based medicine, and

criminalizing physicians for providing compassionate and

evidence-based care. The communities most impacted by these

barriers are those already experiencing grave inequities in

the health care system. The Women's Health Protection Act

would address an area of medicine systematically targeted

with government overregulation--reproductive health care--by

prohibiting these inappropriate restrictions and restoring

the ability of patients to receive comprehensive care free

from legislative intrusion.

Thank you again for sponsoring this important legislation

to prevent legislative interference in the practice of

medicine and protect the patient-physician relationship.

Sincerely,

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists;

American Academy of Family Physicians; American Academy of

Pediatrics; American College of Physicians; American

Gynecological & Obstetrical Society (AGOS); American Medical

Women's Association (AMWA); American Psychiatric Association;

American Society for Reproductive Medicine; Council of

University Chairs of Obstetrics and Gynecology (CUCOG);

Infectious Diseases Society for Obstetrics and Gynecology

(IDSOG).

North American Society for Pediatric and Adolescent

Gynecology; Society of Academic Specialists in General

Obstetrics and Gynecology; Society for Adolescent Health and

Medicine; Society of Family Planning; Society of Gynecologic

Oncology; Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine; Society of OB/

GYN Hospitalists; Society of Reproductive Endocrinology and

Infertility; Western Association of Gynecologic Oncologists

(WAGO); Womxn's Health Collaborative.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from 16 attorneys general expressing their support for H.R. 3755, the Women's Health Protection Act.

State of New York,

Office of the Attorney General,

June 16, 2021.

Hon. Dick Durbin,

Chair, Senate Committee on the Judiciary,

Washington, DC.

Hon. Richard Blumenthal,

Chair, Senate Committee on the Constitution,

Washington, DC.

Hon. Chuck Grassley,

Ranking Member, Senate Committee on the Judiciary,

Washington, DC.

Hon. Ted Cruz,

Ranking Member, Senate Committee on the Judiciary,

Subcommittee on the Constitution, Washington, DC.

Dear Chairs and Ranking Members of the Committee and

Subcommittee: As the Supreme Court has consistently

recognized, ``[t]he ability of women to participate equally

in the economic and social life of the Nation has been

facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive

lives.'' Accordingly, laws that impose an undue burden on a

woman's right to choose to terminate a pregnancy are

unconstitutional. Nonetheless, many states across the country

have enacted laws in the name of promoting women's health

that do not, in fact, advance women's health or safety but

are instead designed to restrict access to abortion services.

These include laws requiring physicians have admitting

privileges at hospitals and setting arbitrary requirements at

women's health clinics for the size of procedure rooms and

corridors. As the Attorneys General of our respective states,

we write in support of the Women's Health Protection Act,

which would protect the constitutional right to abortion by

prohibiting medically unnecessary restrictions that

specifically target abortion providers and undermine the

availability of abortion services.

The Women's Health Protection Act (WHPA) targets onerous

state laws that have been adopted in a concerted strategy to

restrict access to abortion. In Whole Woman's Health v.

Hellerstedt, 136 S. Ct. 2292 (2016), the Supreme Court ruled

that a Texas law that required abortion providers to maintain

admitting privileges at a local hospital failed to advance

women's health and posed an undue burden on women seeking an

abortion. Last year, a coalition of 22 attorneys general

helped to win another victory in June Medical Services v.

Gee, 140 S. Ct. 2103 (2020), in which the Supreme Court held

that a similar law in Louisiana was unconstitutional. Rather

than waiting for medically unnecessary restrictions to

continue to be challenged in the courts--a process that can

often take years--Congress should pass the WHPA to ensure

that such restrictions are not imposed in the first place.

Medically unnecessary restrictions targeting abortion

providers actually disserve women's health and safety and

pose challenges for states that aim to provide a full range

of reproductive health services, including abortion services.

Often, strict requirements imposed on abortion providers

are presented as measures to protect and advance women's

health. Yet evidence shows that these restrictions instead

lead to worse health outcomes for women. One recent study in

Texas found that the maternal mortality rate in the state

doubled between 2010 and 2012, a period in which access to

women's health care services, including abortion services,

had become more difficult to obtain. Women who find

themselves too far from an abortion provider may have to

delay obtaining an abortion, which can. lead to health risks

and add to the cost of the procedure. Alternatively, some

women may resort to ``black market'' or self-induced

abortions, which can be extremely dangerous and lead to

serious injury or even death. And women who are forced to

carry a pregnancy to term after being denied abortion

services are four times more likely to develop potentially

life-threatening health conditions and are substantially more

likely to experience physical violence from abusive partners

or family members. These statistics illustrate the very real

cost to women throughout the United States from burdensome

laws that restrict the availability of safe and legal

abortion care. The widely known negative effects of laws

targeting abortion providers undermines any argument that

such laws are intended to promote women's health.

At the same time, the consequences of these laws are

already evident across the country. Research from 2017 found

that thirty-eight percent of women between the ages of 15 to

44 live in counties without an abortion clinic. Between 2014

and 2017, twenty-five abortion clinics shuttered in the South

and the Midwest. As of June 2019, six states have only a

single abortion clinic remaining. As providers close due to

the impact of medically unnecessary restrictions, women are

likely to be forced to travel farther and make greater

sacrifices to get access to services. Unfortunately, these

burdens often fall disproportionately on lower-income women

who cannot afford to travel, take time off work, or find

childcare in order to get to the nearest provider.

As Attorneys General, we are committed to ensuring that

each state satisfies its constitutional obligation to protect

the right to choose to terminate a pregnancy within its

borders. Among other things, we are deeply concerned about

protecting the constitutional rights of our residents who may

need medical care while present as students, workers, or

visitors in states with drastically restricted abortion

access. In addition, a substantial reduction in the

availability of abortion services in some states can cause

women to seek medical care in other states, thereby straining

their health care systems. Indeed, history shows that many

women will cross state lines, if they have the means to do

so, when abortions are unavailable in the states where they

live. For example, in the nearly three years between New York

State's liberalization of its abortion laws in 1970 and 1973

when the United States Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade ruled

that the right to choose was constitutionally protected,

close to 350,000 women came to New York from other states

where abortions were entirely or largely unavailable.In the

wake of recent abortion restrictions, some states, including

several of our own, have experienced a substantial influx of

out-of-state patients seeking abortions as a result of

reduced access in their home states.

Our states stand ready and willing to provide reproductive

care services to those who need them. However, a significant

and sudden increase in patients seeking abortions, especially

as a consequence of laws that do not advance women's health

and decrease available services, runs the risk of straining

the health care systems of less restrictive states. This in

turn can impair the availability of care and affect the

reproductive

choices of both residents and non-residents alike in those

states. Our states aim to continue providing a wide range of

reproductive health care services, including abortion

services, but our ability to do so could be substantially

burdened by the responsibility of ensuring that all women in

need of abortions are able to safely obtain one. The WHPA

would address this problem by safeguarding access to abortion

services in all states.

We support the passage of the WHPA given how it will help

to restore and facilitate access to abortion services

throughout the United States, upholding this critical

constitutional right. We look forward to working with you and

your committees as you consider this legislation. Please let

us know how we may be of assistance during this process.

Sincerely,

Letitia James, New York Attorney General; Rob Bonta,

California Attorney General; Philip Weiser, Colorado

Attorney General; William Tong, Connecticut Attorney

General; Kathleen Jennings, Delaware Attorney General;

Karl A. Racine, District of Columbia Attorney General;

Kwame Raoul, Illinois Attorney General; Aaron Frey,

Maine Attorney General; Brian E. Frosh, Maryland

Attorney General; Maura Healey, Massachusetts Attorney

General; Aaron Ford, Nevada Attorney General; Hector

Balderas, New Mexico Attorney General; Ellen F.

Rosenblum, Oregon Attorney General; Thomas J. Donovan,

Jr., Vermont Attorney General; Mark R. Herring,

Virginia Attorney General; Bob Ferguson, Washington

State Attorney General.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Following the withdrawal from Afghanistan, we have a solemn duty to provide for our servicemembers and to keep our promise to our Afghan allies. The fiscal year 2022 National Defense Authorization Act will do both.

This NDAA will also invest in our Nation's defense by promoting cutting-edge research and development, much of which happens at our institutions of higher education, such as those in North Carolina's Research Triangle.

We also must pass the continuing resolution in order to support our Afghan allies, provide relief to regions recovering from Hurricane Ida and other natural disasters, suspend the debt limit, and keep our government funded.

Finally, we must pass the Women's Health Protection Act to enable women across the country to access reproductive healthcare, including abortion care.

I want to highlight a discrepancy between the rhetoric and policies of opponents of reproductive freedom, particularly those from States like mine, including Texas. These opponents claim to be pro-life, to be working to protect families and babies, but almost always, these are the same people who oppose Medicaid expansion, universal childcare, and the expansion of the child tax credit.

In the United States today, babies that do not get prenatal care are five times more likely to die than babies that do get prenatal care. Prenatal care is one of the many critical forms of healthcare that Medicaid covers.

Medicaid also provides postpartum care coverage to new mothers, and the American Rescue Plan gave States the option to extend that coverage from 60 days to 12 months. Postpartum care is key to protecting new mothers from a variety of serious conditions that can develop after birth. Similarly, universal childcare and the child tax credit are investments in babies and in families.

Today, in America, supporting children and families means supporting Medicaid expansion, affordable childcare, tax benefits for families-- all of which are included in the Build Back Better Act.

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

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

Madam Speaker, the rule before us provides for consideration of three landmark pieces of legislation. First and foremost, we are here to assume our duty to protect our American democracy. Just this year alone, 18 States have enacted 30 voter suppression laws. In response, the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act would reinvigorate section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, restore geographic preclearance requirements eliminated in the Shelby decision, and take other steps to block discriminatory voting measures before they are implemented.

The history of the fight for voting rights in America is long and painful. But at crucial forks on that difficult path, Members of this body from both parties have set politics aside and done the right thing.

We are meeting here today at another pivotal juncture in the struggle for voting rights, and it is up to us to meet the urgency of the moment, live up to our constitutional responsibilities, and pass this critical legislation.

Madam Speaker, I also rise in support of our $3.5 trillion Build Back Better budget resolution. By taking real action on climate change, expanding the child tax credit, and supporting universal pre-K and free community college, this budget represents an investment in all of our people, especially our children and grandchildren. For the sake of our constituents and our country, let's approve this vital funding.

Madam Speaker, lastly, the rule before us provides for future consideration of the Senate's bipartisan infrastructure package. From expanding broadband to rebuilding roads, bridges, airports, rail, and water systems, this historic bill will help bring America's aging infrastructure into the 21st century and create jobs.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the rule and this legislation.

Madam Speaker, I rise in favor of the rule and to highlight two amendments that I am offering to the minibus.

In my home State of North Carolina, we lead the East Coast in offshore wind energy generation potential, and our manufacturing workforce stands ready to support offshore wind projects up and down the Atlantic coastline.

Unfortunately, former President Trump issued a 10-year moratorium on offshore wind leasing off our coast that is set to take effect in 2022. This ill-conceived moratorium puts our State's ability to develop this resource and capture its economic and environmental benefits at risk.

I am proud to offer an amendment to this bill, which would prohibit the use of funds to implement the offshore wind component of this moratorium while leaving the moratorium on offshore oil and gas leasing in place.

This amendment, and a similar bill I introduced with Congressman Tonko, are essential in order to meet our State and national climate goals.

My second amendment highlights the obstacles faced by pregnant and parenting students. Today, nearly 22 percent of undergraduate students are parents. Pregnant and parenting students face significant barriers in education, from difficulty accessing college, to insufficient childcare, to lack of holistic supports.

As a result, pregnant and parenting students experience disproportionately low graduation rates as well as a median debt that is nearly 2\1/2\ times higher than that of students without children. Pregnant and parenting high school students too frequently find themselves pushed out of school entirely.

My amendment instructs the Institute of Education Sciences to conduct a study on the obstacles pregnant and parenting students face in the pursuit of education and provides recommendations for improving educational outcomes, including graduation rates for these students.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the rule, my amendments, and the underlying bill.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 535 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

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

Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 535, providing for considering of three measures. First, H.R. 2467, the PFAS Action Act, under a structured rule. The rule self-executes a manager's amendment from Chairman Pallone, provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their designees, makes in order 10 amendments, provides en bloc authority, and provides one motion to recommit.

The rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 2668, the Consumer Protection and Recovery Act, under a closed rule. The rule provides for 1

hour of general debate on the bill equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their designees and provides one motion to recommit.

The rule further provides for consideration of H.R. 3985, the ALLIES Act of 2021, under a closed rule. The rule self-executes a manager's amendment from Chairman Nadler, provides for 1 hour of general debate on the bill equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their designees, and provides one motion to recommit.

Finally, the rule provides the majority leader or his designee the ability to en bloc requested roll call votes on suspension bills considered on July 19 and July 20, 2021. This authority lasts through July 22.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the three bills in this rule: H.R. 2467, the PFAS Action Act of 2021; H.R. 2668, the Consumer Protection and Recovery Act; and H.R. 3985, the ALLIES Act of 2021.

H.R. 2467 will require comprehensive regulation of PFAS under our Nation's landmark environmental laws.

PFAS compounds--dangerous, manmade chemicals which do not break down easily and are known as forever chemicals--have contaminated our water, soil, and air for decades. The CDC estimates that nearly every American has been exposed to them, especially our brave firefighters, servicemembers, and their families.

In my home State of North Carolina, we know this issue too well. Chemical companies have polluted the Cape Fear River with PFAS for years. Tests of drinking water systems in my district, including in Raleigh and Cary, have detected PFAS.

This bill would accomplish multiple goals, including directing the EPA to establish standards to protect our drinking water from contamination and authorizing grants to drinking water utilities treating PFAS contamination.

Some utilities are already investing millions of dollars to upgrade their water treatment technology. I was proud to offer a bipartisan amendment with Congressman Rouzer to clarify the requirements for this grant program, helping to ensure that communities that are already investing money to address this problem can still benefit from the funding included in this bill.

H.R. 2467 is a strong step forward to protect the health of our water, air, soil, and our people. I am thrilled that we are bringing this bipartisan legislation to the House floor.

I also rise in support of H.R. 2668. For over 100 years, the FTC has been tasked with protecting consumers from fraud and deception in the marketplace. Until the Supreme Court's recent ruling, the FTC used a provision of the FTC Act to recover and return billions of dollars to victims of fraud. Senior citizens, military families, and immigrants are particularly vulnerable to scammers and deceptive business practices.

H.R. 2668 will ensure that the FTC has the tools it needs to protect hardworking families and small businesses and to make victims of fraud whole.

Lastly, I rise in support of H.R. 3985. I come from a military State, and I am proud to advocate on behalf of all those who have risked their lives to protect our country. As we draw down our forces in Afghanistan, the very least we can do for our Afghan allies--including interpreters, contractors, and security personnel--is to protect them from the Taliban and provide them with the opportunity to rebuild their lives in safety here in the United States.

North Carolina is fortunate to be home to many courageous Afghans who relocated to the United States through the Afghan Special Immigration Visa program, and I know that my community will benefit from allowing more of these heroes to take refuge in our State.

By increasing the Afghan Special Immigration Visa cap and easing requirements for applicants, this bill will ensure that our Nation keeps its promises to those allies who stood shoulder to shoulder with American forces on the battlefield.

Mr. Speaker, it is time to pass all three of these bills, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Dean).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Morelle), another distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers.

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

It is long overdue for Congress to take comprehensive action to address the PFAS contamination of our environment and its health impacts on Americans. I have seen this in North Carolina.

Industry has known of the danger of PFAS contamination for decades, yet we still lack significant Federal protections.

We cannot continue to let these manmade chemicals endanger the health of our people and our planet.

H.R. 2467 will protect Americans and our environment by setting standards for our drinking water, instituting comprehensive PFAS testing requirements, providing grants to utilities that are treating contamination, and so much more.

I also support H.R. 2668 to solidify the FTC's ability to retrieve money for victims of frauds and scams. We cannot allow American consumers and businesses to fall victim to fraud without holding scammers and bad actors financially accountable. This emergency legislation will help make Americans who have fallen victim to fraud whole.

Lastly, I support H.R. 3985 to keep our Nation's promises to our Afghan allies and protect those who helped protect us. We owe it to those who put their lives on the line for our Armed Forces. We also owe it to our servicemembers, who will continue to rely in the future on allied interpreters, contractors, and security personnel in foreign lands.

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

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

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.

I rise today in support of the Inspector General Independence Act. Inspectors general are vital to the integrity, efficiency, and efficacy of our Government. It is crucial that they operate free from political influence.

This critical legislation includes a bipartisan bill I introduced, the Inspector General Access Act, which grants the inspector general of the Department of Justice the authority to investigate misconduct by DOJ attorneys.

The DOJ inspector general is currently the only Federal inspector general without this authority. This is simply unacceptable.

DOJ attorneys wield a tremendous amount of power, including the ability to make life and death decisions. It is crucial that these attorneys are held to the highest level of professionalism, and that their actions and conduct are subject to independent oversight.

For this reason, I wholeheartedly support the Inspector General Independence Act, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.