Floor Statements

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, after speaking with the committee, I plan to withdraw my amendment, but I want to take a moment to speak on the underlying issue because I think it is very important.

Madam Chair, my amendment would prohibit the Department from engaging in rulemaking to allow the use of voice communication devices in flight, in other words, cell phones.

When the Federal Communications Commission first floated the idea of allowing cell phone usage on airplanes, the response from the American people was so clear you could hear a pin drop, something that would not be possible if you were surrounded by people chatting on their phones on an airplane. Polling has consistently shown 2-1 opposition to allowing passengers to make voice calls in flight.

In February of this past year, I, along with my colleagues on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, voted unanimously to approve H.R. 3676, which was introduced by Chairman Shuster, that has the same goal of the amendment I put forward today.

At a time when we document every moment of our lives over Twitter and Facebook and Instagram, the last thing the traveling public needs is to sit next to someone having a loud, one-sided conversation on a cross- country flight.

Now, this isn't just a matter of comfort and good manners; it is also a matter of safety. For our flight attendants who are charged with the safety and security of travelers in-flight, cell phone use will exacerbate potential conflict among passengers and will create distractions from crew instructions both prior to takeoff and during flights, so it would be dangerous for all on board.

I thank the chairman and the ranking member for this opportunity to speak on this important issue, and I hope that although this amendment doesn't move forward, H.R. 3676 will receive floor consideration in due time.

I yield to the gentleman from Iowa.

Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.

Mr. Speaker, the Nevada delegation comes before you with a heavy heart this evening in the wake of yesterday's tragic events in Las Vegas.

On a beautiful Sunday afternoon, two individuals who had recently moved to southern Nevada and participated in the Cliven Bundy resistance walked into a neighborhood pizza parlor. Carrying swastikas and the Gadsden flag and spouting antigovernment rhetoric, they shot and killed two police officers having lunch. They then killed an innocent bystander shopping at a nearby department store.

The officers, Alyn Beck and Igor Soldo, were both veterans of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, with a combined 21 years on the force. Officer Beck leaves behind a wife and three children, and Officer Soldo leaves behind a wife and a baby.

Joseph Robert Wilcox, 31, also of Las Vegas, was shopping when the two killers entered the department store and lost his life attempting to intervene.

Tonight, we ask you to join us in honoring the lives of these three victims of senseless violence, in mourning their family's devastating loss, in praying for all who have suffered as a result of these horrible events, and in commending Metro for its effective action and steadfast commitment to protecting our community even under the worst of circumstances.

I ask that the Members join us in a moment of silence.

Mr. Speaker, as a Member of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, I am honored to join with my colleagues from that committee to mark the 70th anniversary of D-day.

Nevada's heroes have played a critical role in our country's armed services throughout history, from the Air Force pilots that have been deployed from Nellis Air Force Base to our National Guard's 1st Squadron, 221st Cavalry Unit that has served in Iraq and Afghanistan. For generations, our democracy has been defended by those who have given so much.

Next week marks the 70th anniversary of the invasion of Normandy. At no other time in history has an amphibious assault occurred on that scale. On June 6, 1944, 156,000 Allied troops landed on the beaches of Normandy knowing that they may not survive, and many didn't. They were bombarded by bullets and shells and bombs, but without hesitation they marched on. In that one day, the United States lost 6,603 brave soldiers.

Nevada Senator Howard Cannon was one of the American heroes who risked his life on that fateful day. He piloted the chief troop-carrier airplane, leading 44 others from Exeter, England, across the English Channel to France. In the middle of a hot June night, at 11:50 p.m. on June 5, he took off, the plane departed, the Stoy Hora, carrying paratroopers who jumped into France just a little while later.

A few days after that, on June 17, Senator Cannon was shot down over the Netherlands and survived 42 days behind enemy lines. He is one of the heroes whose story is told in the book and movie ``A Bridge Too Far.''

I am fortunate that I was able to serve as Senator Cannon's faculty intern here in 1982. Every day in my district office, I have the unique privilege of sitting behind Senator Cannon's desk. It is a constant reminder of the many different forms that heroism takes. From the foot soldier at Normandy struggling against the waves to gain the beach to the switch operator back in the United States ensuring that the communications went through; from the admirals to the privates; from the artillerymen to the spies, there were many heroes who showed up on that day that changed history.

These brave men and women have been called ``the Greatest Generation'' by Tom Brokaw for a reason. Like many of you, I have family members who fought in World War II: an uncle, a father-in-law, two of my husband's uncles. Their valor and courage stand as an example to all of us as we continue to battle injustice today.

So, to all of those who risked their lives on those beaches in Normandy and beyond and to the families of those who perished on those foreign shores, fighting for democracy and freedom, I say a heartfelt thank you, and our grateful Nation owes you a debt that it can never repay.

Mr. Chair, I rise today to speak in favor of the amendment offered by my colleague Congressman Delaney.

This amendment would increase funding for Pay for Success programs within the Department of Justice to reduce recidivism and improve reentry services for individuals returning to their communities after incarceration. It shifts funds from the federal prison system to support these programs because if we can reduce recidivism, we will reduce the number of people in our criminal justice system.

The Pay for Success model allows the government to use limited resources wisely. We can invest in innovative social programs intended to improve lives while only paying for those that actually make a difference.

The United States releases 700,000 prisoners every year. Most of these individuals struggle to find a job or a place to stay. Within three years, two-thirds of them are back in prison. We need to do more to help them turn their lives around and stop this vicious cycle, but we also need to ensure that our efforts are effective. This amendment will help us do both.

Mr. Chair, for the District of Columbia and 22 States, including Nevada, with laws in place allowing the legal use of some form of marijuana for medical purposes, this commonsense amendment simply ensures that patients do not have to live in fear when following the laws of their States and the recommendations of their doctors. Physicians in those States will not be prosecuted for prescribing the substance, and local businesses will not be shut down for dispensing the same.

I urge you vote in favor.

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

I rise in support of my legislation, H.R. 2527, the National Guard Military Sexual Trauma Parity Act.

Mr. Speaker, I want to first thank Mr. Benishek, the chairman of the Health Subcommittee; Ms. Brownley, the ranking member of the Health Subcommittee; and especially Chairman Miller and Ranking Member Michaud for working with me on this very important issue.

The bill before you is bipartisan legislation which addresses an unacceptable gap in the current law that effectively leaves some victims of military sexual assault without the support and treatment they need.

Members of the National Guard and other reserve components of our armed services have fought bravely for our country, many completing multiple tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan. Since the attacks on September 11, more than 50,000 guardsmen and guardswomen have been called to service, both at home and abroad.

We recognize the value of the National Guard and other reserve components, and thank them for their service. Unfortunately, some, like members of the other Armed Forces, are victimized by sexual assault while on Active Duty. If that happens, they are provided all the VA resources and services they need to recover and heal, both physically and emotionally.

Such benefits, however, are not offered to members of the National Guard and other reserve components who experience sexual assault while on inactive training missions. Members of the Guard are required to participate in training missions one weekend a month and 2 weeks a year, but benefits and services, such as counseling and Medicare, do not extend to victims sexually assaulted during these mandatory training missions. This omission is simply unacceptable and leaves so many who have served our country without any assistance or support during a devastating time.

The National Guard Military Sexual Trauma Parity Act would fix this problem and clarify that all victims of sexual trauma in the National Guard or other reserve components have access to the care they need, whether they are on Active Duty or on a required training mission.

We must make it a priority to change the culture of the military and put an end to acts of sexual trauma within our armed services. Until we do, however, we must be sure that we provide all victims the treatment they need and deserve.

I am proud that many veterans service organizations support this important legislation to ensure that all Guard members who are ``always ready, always there'' to protect our country receive the same support in return from their government.

So, Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would just conclude my remarks and urge all my colleagues to support this legislation and, again, thank the chairman for working with me to bring it to the floor. We want to send it to the Senate and urge them to pass it quickly and on to the President for his signature.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a constituent from Nevada's First Congressional District, Robert Isham. A young Mr. Isham enlisted in the United States Navy on November 4, 1942, in Seattle, Washington. He then attended Basic Training in San Diego, California. Following his graduation from the Naval Air Technical Training Center in Norman, Oklahoma, where he was trained to be an Aviation Machinist Mate, he was transferred to the Virginia Naval Air Station in Norfolk, Virginia.

On September 17, 1943, Mr. !sham was seriously injured in an explosion and fire at the Virginia Naval Air Station when a 300 pound depth charge exploded, setting off a chain reaction of 23 more charges. Thirty-three aircraft and at least 15 buildings across the base were destroyed. Many were killed and a number of individuals, including Mr. Isham, were badly hurt.

Following a three month stay at Norfolk Naval Hospital in Portsmouth, Virginia, Mr. !sham bravely returned to duty and was transferred to Quonset Point Naval Air Station in Rhode Island, where he taught courses on aircraft structures. Following a year in Rhode Island, Mr. Isham was transferred to Corvallis, Oregon, and became a Plane Captain on a F4U Corsair fighter aircraft.

Mr. Isham was discharged from the United States Navy on December 10, 1945. He was only rated as 10% disabled as a result of shrapnel wounds sustained during the tragic explosion in Norfolk, Virginia. He was awarded the Good Conduct Medal, the American Area Campaign Medal, and the World War II Victory Medal.

Recently, my office in Las Vegas worked with Robert and the Department of Veterans Affairs to increase his disability rating to 100%, ensuring he receives the benefits he deserved.

Mr. Speaker, as we approach Memorial Day, we will take time to remember many members of the Greatest Generation who have passed away. Today, I ask the House to pause for a moment of gratitude in honor of my constituent, Mr. Robert ``Bob'' Isham, a member of the Greatest Generation and a decorated American hero.

Mr. Speaker, sex trafficking is a growing problem. According to the Polaris Project, some 27 million people worldwide are victims of sex trafficking, of which 1 million are children. Just last year in Nevada, 107 children were recovered after being victimized by traffickers. And we don't even know how many others wait for our help.

That is why I am pleased to vote today on several bills intended to strengthen the punishments for perpetrators, increase protections for potential victims, and ensure that victims are given the support they need to recover and rebuild their lives.

I am also encouraged that we are coming together to condemn the horrendous kidnapping of the girls in Nigeria, whose only crime was to seek an education.

Sex trafficking is horrific. It must be stopped. It denies the fundamental rights and dignity of its victims. Today, we can take a step in that direction. We can take action to speak for those who have no voice. So I encourage my colleagues to join me with a resounding ``aye'' on this package of bills.

Mr. Speaker, last week, during the VA approps debate, I spoke about Madelynn Taylor, a veteran being denied the right to be interred with her spouse, Jean, in the Idaho State Veterans Cemetery because they are lesbians.

Idaho does not recognize their marriage and is denying the couple the honor and dignity earned through Madelynn's service in the U.S. Navy. Clearly, LGBT veterans continue to face discrimination.

Nearly a year after the landmark decision striking down DOMA, the VA still does not have a clear policy to ensure all veterans and their spouses have access to their earned benefits.

In response to the situation, Idaho resident and 27-year Army veteran, Colonel Barry Johnson, offered Madelynn and Jean his plot at the State cemetery stating:

Madelynn loves her country. She wants her partner by her

side, and she wants to eternally rest among veterans in the

State she made home.

She deserves that. We need more people like the colonel here in Congress, willing to speak up on behalf of all our veterans and their families who deserve to receive the benefits that they have earned.

Mr. Speaker, I rise on National Animal Advocacy Day to announce the introduction of the Animal Emergency Planning Act of 2014. This bill would require entities regulated under the Animal Welfare Act to develop a plan for how they will respond to and recover from emergencies, both natural and manmade, that would most likely occur in their facilities.

Regulated animal breeding facilities, commercial animal dealers, transporters, exhibitors, and research facilities would be required to submit plans to the USDA annually and to train their employees on the contingency plans and procedures.

Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy, as well as other recent disasters, have highlighted the need for planning to minimize the impact of these disasters on animals, which can have devastating effects.

Local first responders, nongovernmental agencies, and private individuals in the past have often ended up shouldering the cost and taking on the responsibility of protecting and caring for these animals. It is only fair and reasonable to require emergency readiness plans from those in these businesses. So please join me in cosponsoring this legislation.

Mr. Chair, I move to strike the last word.

As the ranking member of the Disability Assistance Memorial Affairs Subcommittee of the Veterans' Affairs authorizing committee, I rise today in support of this appropriations bill, and I thank the chairman and the ranking member for the hard work that they put into this bill.

One of the main reasons that I support it is because it furthers our goal of eliminating the VA benefits backlog, which is an issue our committee has worked on daily for the last year and a half. One of my top priorities is ensuring that our Nation's heroes receive all the benefits they have earned in a timely fashion.

While I support this bill, I would like to take just a minute or two to raise an issue that is troubling to me and hope to bring it to the attention of the other Members of the House.

I know many of my colleagues will be deeply saddened to learn that some veterans and their families across the country are being denied the benefits that they earned while serving our Nation. A recent example of this discrimination against some of our Nation's veterans was highlighted in a report by CBS News just last week.

Seventy-four-year-old Madelynn Taylor of Boise, Idaho, proudly served her country in the United States Navy for 6 years. She lost her spouse in 2012 and soon after began the task of making arrangements to ensure that the two of them would be together in death just as they were in life. Being a veteran, Madelynn had the right to be interred at a State or national veterans cemetery. Since the closest national cemetery to Boise was nearly 8 hours away in western Oregon, Madelynn decided to inquire about a joint spot and memorial wall with her and her spouse's ashes to lay in rest together, just as hundreds of other couples have done, at the Idaho State Veterans Cemetery in her hometown of Boise.

The Idaho State Veterans Cemetery was opened a decade ago with 100 percent of the funding for the design, construction, and equipment costs coming from a Federal grant from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs' State Cemetery Grants Program, and the cemetery continues to receive Federal funding for operations.

When Madelynn brought the necessary paperwork, including her discharge papers and marriage certificate, she was told that she and her spouse would not be allowed to be buried together.

Why, you ask, was she denied this right? The answer is that Madelynn is a lesbian. Idaho State law does not recognize the legality of a marriage between Madelynn and her wife, Jean, and therefore is denying the couple the honor and dignity earned through Madelynn's service as a member of the United States Navy.

Madelynn said this of her situation:

I just feel that it's the right place for me. I am a

veteran, so they should let me . . . in fact, they would let

me alone be in that crypt, but I don't want to be alone. I

want Jean with me.

We rightfully elevate our veterans and their families because of their service and sacrifice, yet today some veterans across the country face discrimination by the States and the Federal Government they sought to defend. No veteran or their family should be treated as second-class citizens.

Nearly a year after the landmark Supreme Court decision to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act, which effectively extended Federal benefits to legally married couples, we see the Nation's gay and lesbian veterans face obstacles accessing the benefits that they have earned and rightfully deserve.

While in uniform, our LGBT soldiers have access to the full complement of benefits available to members of the armed services. The second they transition out of the military, they are forced to leave these benefits behind.

I have introduced legislation to end this disservice, and I invite my colleagues to join me in supporting this important effort.

Mr. Chairman, today we debate legislation to fund the critical work of the VA and the earned benefits of our Nation's heroes and their families. My hope is that this body will give equal attention to all our veterans and their families and end the discrimination they experience when seeking benefits, including the right to be buried with their legally married, same-sex spouses.

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

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment by Messrs. Blumenauer, Rohrabacher, and Farr. I am strongly in favor of it.

The people of Nevada voted overwhelmingly to legalize medical marijuana. In the coming months, the first medical marijuana depositories will go online throughout the State. At the same time, we also have a brandnew VA hospital, which will be serving the veterans of my district and all across southern Nevada.

Unfortunately, due to VA's current restrictions, the more than 250,000 veterans who call Nevada home will be unable to receive a prescription for medical marijuana through their VA doctors, and so they will not have the opportunity to take advantage of this available in Nevada medical option.

This is just not fair. I believe that the VA should have the flexibility. It has been said much more eloquently than I can by the sponsors of this amendment; but the VA should have the flexibility to recommend the best medical treatments available to our Nation's veterans, especially if that treatment is approved under the State laws where the veteran lives.

As a Member of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, I regularly speak with both VA doctors and patients about advances in care for our Nation's heroes. Forcing those people--those brave men and women who have sacrificed so much--now to seek outside medical evaluation to access legal medical treatment from doctors who have little or no understanding of the unique challenges that our veterans face is simply bad policy--bad political policy and bad medical policy.

We have already seen the positive results that medical marijuana can have for patients suffering from PTSD and other ailments associated with traumatic experiences, such as combat. More studies are underway-- including by the VA itself--that are anticipated to show these same kinds of results, and we have heard numerous stories firsthand.

I support this. I think it is common sense, it is bipartisan, we should move forward, and I urge my colleagues to join.

At this time, I yield the remainder of my time to Mr. Blumenauer.

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Culberson).

Mr. Speaker, extra, extra, read all about it. The Republicans have released their new agenda for the spring.

Well, let's just take a look at what their legislative priorities are for the months ahead.

Unemployment insurance extension? No.

Equal pay for equal work for women? No.

Increase in the minimum wage? No.

Comprehensive immigration reform? No.

In short, their plan offers no investment in infrastructure and education, no attempt to create jobs, and no proposal to help people achieve the American Dream.

They can claim to be like Thomas Jefferson, but this plan reflects nothing that I have ever read about Thomas Jefferson.

So let's honor and value hard work by setting a real agenda--a new agenda that truly gives everyone a chance at the American Dream.

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my friend, Donna Edwards for organizing tonight's important colloquy and Special Order to talk about the Ryan Republican budget and its unacceptable impact on women.

For the fourth year in a row, Chairman Ryan has proposed an uncompromising budget plan that is out of touch with Nevada's priorities and the country's vision for the future.

Chairman Ryan has used a lot of gimmicks in this budget, but no amount of chicanery can hide what it means for women.

Instead of laying out a plan to strengthen and grow the middle class, Representative Ryan's budget disproportionately harms low-income women and the families they struggle to support. It also undermines the health and economic security of the elderly and the disabled, most of whom are women, as you have just pointed out.

It would repeal the Affordable Care Act and the critical protections and benefits this landmark legislation offers to women. Millions of women and their families would have to pay out of pocket for lifesaving preventive health services such as mammograms and cervical cancer screenings.

Insurance companies would be allowed, once again, to treat being a woman as a preexisting condition. And over 200,000 women in Nevada alone would lose access to affordable health insurance that is provided by the ACA.

The Ryan budget also threatens a laundry list of vital programs that help southern Nevada women and children, such as SNAP, WIC, Head Start, TANF, and Pell grants, just to name a few.

Currently, over 75,000 Nevada women and children rely on WIC, and 358,000 Nevadans depend on SNAP, 154,000 of whom are children. In addition, nearly 5,000 children in Nevada participate in Head Start, and 33,000 Nevada students benefit from Pell grants.

Under the Ryan budget, women could lose access to these critical programs, programs that help them put food on the table and give their children access to the education they need to succeed.

The Ryan budget also eliminates the Brand USA program, which fosters international tourism, an industry that employs many women in service jobs in Nevada and around the country.

Instead of protecting women and children, Representative Ryan and the Republican Party would rather provide the richest one-tenth of 1 percent, those households making more than $3.3 million a year, with a $1.2 million tax cut.

Now, the Federal budget is a blueprint for our Nation's future. It is a statement of our priorities as a Nation, and it should provide a path forward that we can all be proud of.

My constituents in Las Vegas, and our constituents all around the country, deserve better than this rehashed Ryan budget which slashes programs for children, dismantles health care, eliminates the safety net for seniors, and defunds education and needed research and development.

This budget is not a road to prosperity, as Representative Ryan calls it; it is a road to ruin. And as someone said recently, it is like giving the middle finger to the middle class.

Instead, we need a balanced plan that protects women and their families while making investments in our future. Let's work on that kind of budget.

So, again, I want to thank my friends who have come to the floor tonight to point out these problems.

I yield back to the gentlewoman from Maryland (Ms. Edwards).

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to the draconian

budget proposal released by House Republicans yesterday.

In Las Vegas and across the country, Americans have made it clear that our budget should bolster a strong middle class and make serious investments in the next generation.

This Republican proposal, however, shrinks investments in infrastructure and education, cuts funding to research and development, eliminates the safety net for our most vulnerable citizens, and breaks the longtime promise to seniors by, once again, attacking the Medicare guarantee. These cuts undermine our short-term recovery, and they shortchange critical investments that will keep us competitive in the global economy.

In short, Republicans ignore solid American values, instead doubling down on inconsistent assumptions and budget gimmicks that just do not add up. This budget should have been released on Groundhog Day, but I guess that April Fool's Day is just as appropriate.

I say to you: Don't be fooled.

Well, thank you very much, Congressman Blumenauer. You are always welcome to come to my district in Las Vegas. We were very glad to have you there, and you brought your leadership. And I appreciate your wearing your bicycle, because that is one of the things I want to talk about.

A part of infrastructure is safe streets and the ability for our pedestrians and our bicyclists to be safe, as well as through other means of transportation. I certainly respect Congressman DeFazio's leadership on this. And I appreciate hearing some of the creative ideas you have for moving infrastructure forward because it is so important that we fund it, and having this hour to talk about the critical role of government and maintaining and enhancing our infrastructure I think is not only timely, but is critical.

As you heard earlier, the most recent report card from the American Society of Civil Engineers clearly illustrates the dismal condition of our Nation's infrastructure. Now, the good news is we moved up a grade, but the bad news is we went from D to D-plus. So that is not too much to brag about. If that were one of my students, I wouldn't be too proud of that level of accomplishment.

Well, if you look in more detail at the findings of that report, you would find that more than half of the Nation's roads are in poor or mediocre condition. One out of every four bridges is in need of significant repair or can't handle the traffic that relies on it.

We have seen the price of this crumbling infrastructure not just in a loss of jobs but also in a loss of lives. For one out of every three traffic fatalities, the condition of the road was a factor. So we have got to do better than that.

We recently received an update on the fiscal situation of the highway trust fund--the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) was referencing this--and if the projections hold, that trust fund will be insolvent by the end of July. Now, that is at the height of the construction season when we should be moving forward with these infrastructure projects. All of them will come to a standstill across the country, and that immediately threatens 660,000 jobs--direct jobs, not counting the extra industries that rely on that construction as well.

Now, our construction sector was hit very hard already by the great recession, and it continues to see unemployment levels twice the national average. So we simply cannot afford to let this trust fund lapse.

We need to take immediate action to shore it up and remove the insolvency because it not only halts progress, but it injects uncertainty into our State capitals, our city halls, and all of the transit agencies across the country who don't know whether to move forward with projects or not because the money just may not be there.

If you look at the cities, like Las Vegas, you can see how this is especially hard-hitting because infrastructure is at the heart of our local economy. We have world-class hotels and casinos and restaurants and retail, but we rely on infrastructure to bring to us people and goods from around the world, whether it is rail or air or highways. We import everything, from tourists to lobster. We don't make it in there. We have to bring it in. And if you don't have good infrastructure, that system is not going to work.

So as we turn our attention to the next surface transportation authorization, I want us to invest in a number of things, and one of them is existing and future freight corridors. On that list, I hope to see the development of I-11. That interstate has been designated, but we need to move forward with it. It would go from Las Vegas to Phoenix. Eventually, it would connect all points north and south. But right now, Phoenix and Las Vegas are the only two major metropolitan areas in the country that are not connected by an interstate highway.

So this would create new freight corridors. It would relieve the congestion on the narrow road that exists there now. It would save lives. It would increase the connection between the roughly 8 million people who live in that area, and it would foster tourism, which would be a good thing for our economy. So I hope that we can move forward on that because it would be very important for moving freight in the kind of post-Panamax economy.

In addition to this, I am concerned about the safety of the travelling public in the urban areas. And this is where you and I have had many discussions about pedestrians and cyclists.

We have seen marginal improvements in highway safety. That has been going in the right direction. But pedestrian safety has been going in the wrong direction. That has been getting much worse if you look at the statistics. And more and more people are using that kind of transportation, for recreation, to get to work, to go shopping, for exercise. So that population is going to increase, and yet the fatalities have increased as well. In fact, nearly 16 percent of traffic deaths in 2012 were people who were walking or bicycling, and yet less than 1 percent of safety funding goes to infrastructure to protect those travelers.

And that trend is really true in southern Nevada. My district has the most dangerous crossings of any because it is metropolitan Las Vegas. In 2011, there were 23 pedestrian fatalities, but that jumped to 42 in 2012; and last year, 51 men, women, and children lost their lives in pedestrian accidents.

So I hope that as we move forward with infrastructure funding that we provide resources and services to address that issue. And part of that can be encouraging local governments to do planning policies, like the Complete Streets program. I know you are well aware of that, very familiar with it and involved in it. That takes into account the needs of all users when it comes to transportation. There are lots of possible improvements, like bus rapid transit, dedicated transit bike lanes, safer crosswalks. All of those will help users reach their destinations more quickly and more safely.

So as we look at infrastructure, let's remember that it is bridges, it is roads, it is railroads, it is airports, but also, we need to do what we can for those using bicycles and just walking on their own two feet.

I am committed to working on this. It is very important for our country and for our local economies. So count me in, and thank you for your leadership.

Thank you.