Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise in solidarity with labor unions that, throughout history, have fought the greed of their bosses and corporations in order to have a better life.

I rise in solidarity with workers in the Marathon Petroleum plant in Minnesota who are striking for safer working conditions and with the workers at the Minneapolis Institute of Art, Walker Art Center, and many more workplaces that have recently unionized in my district.

I rise in solidarity with the 5,800 mostly Black workers in Alabama who are currently fighting one of the most predatory corporations in the world, Amazon, to form a union.

Labor unions have been the driving force for all positive change for workers in modern history. As a former union member myself, I can attest to the power that workers wield when they exercise their right to organize. That is why we need the PRO Act and why we must pass it this week and pressure the Senate to do the same.

The PRO Act puts power back where it belongs, in the hands of workers.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from National Nurses United.

National Nurses United,

Washington, DC, March 8, 2021.

Dear Representative, The House of Representatives is

scheduled to vote on H.R. 842, the Protecting the Right to

Organize (PRO) Act this week. On behalf of the 170,000 nurses

represented by National Nurses United, the largest union of

registered nurses in the United States, we strongly urge you

to vote YES on the PRO Act, which would implement critical

improvements to current labor law in order to protect the

right for workers to organize collectively and form a union.

A union gives workers the ability to act together to

advocate for safe working conditions, to improve their wages

and benefits, and to protect their workplace rights through

collective bargaining and concerted activity. For registered

nurses, union advocacy and representation allow us to focus

on what we do best: caring for our patients. Across the

country, nurses have been subject to intimidation and

retaliation from their employers because of their efforts to

unionize. The PRO Act would provide critical protections for

nurses who want to organize collectively.

The dire need for this legislation has been made all the

more clear during this pandemic as nurses have been forced to

struggle

together for the most basic safety protections at their

hospitals and clinics. The formation of a union in the

hospital not only offers protections to nurses and other

health care workers, but just as importantly, it leads to

health and safety protections that improve patient care. For

example, union organizing has led to improvements in

infectious disease protocols, staffing levels, workplace

violence prevention programs, and safe patient handling

programs, all of which directly improve patient care.

Attacks on unions and the right to unionize have hurt

efforts to protect patient care in the hospital, and to

improve the lives of working families outside the hospital.

While the latest Gallup poll shows support for unions at its

highest point since 2003, with 65% of Americans approving of

labor unions, these attacks on unions and the right to

organize have continued unabated. The PRO Act would provide

the legislative reform needed to protect American workers.

The PRO Act would have a direct impact on registered nurses

and all other workers by making the following improvements to

current labor law:

Prevent employers from interfering in union elections,

including prohibiting employers from holding captive audience

meetings;

Facilitate first contracts by requiring mediation and

arbitration to settle disputes;

Strengthen support for workers who suffer retaliation and

require the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to

immediately seek an injunction to reinstate employees while

their cases are pending;

Prevent employers from forcing employees to waive their

right to collective or class-action litigation;

Close loopholes in the federal labor law that allows

employers to deny pay, benefits, or workers' rights to

employees;

Put an end to the misclassification of employees as

supervisors or independent contractors;

Enhance the right to support boycotts, strikes, and other

acts of solidarity.

This legislation is of high priority for registered nurses

across the country, and we hope you will join with us in

supporting it by voting yes. If you have any questions,

please do not hesitate to contact our Lead Legislative

Advocate.

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, like so many in my community of Minneapolis, are still traumatized. I watched horrified for 8 minutes and 46 seconds as George Floyd's life was

taken from him, another innocent Black man murdered by the police in our community.

Time and time again, we have witnessed the people who are sworn to protect our communities abuse their power. My city is not an outlier, but, rather, an example of the inequalities our country has struggled with for centuries. Brutality against unarmed Black men and women is not a new phenomenon.

Today, we find ourselves at a crossroad. Will we have the moral courage to pursue justice and secure meaningful change? Or will we succumb to this moment?

Mr. Speaker, this is not about one Member. This is about who we are as a body and what we are as a democracy. This is about whether it is acceptable to cheer on and encourage an insurrection against our basic democratic processes. This is about whether it is okay to demand Members swear in on a Bible of a religion they do not practice. This is about whether it is okay to hold an assault rifle next to Members' heads in a campaign ad and incite death threats against them. This is about whether it is okay to encourage the murder of the Speaker of the House.

As a survivor of civil conflict and civil war, I know political violence and political rhetoric does not go away on its own. This is about whether or not we will continue to be a peaceful and functioning democracy.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time.

Let us not mince words about what happened last week. It was a violent attempt to interrupt our democratic process. It was a targeted blow at the most essential process that makes us a democracy. It was directly and specifically incited by the President of the United States.

For years, we have been asked to turn a blind eye to the criminality, corruption, and blatant disregard to the rule of law by the tyrant President we have in the White House. We, as a nation, can no longer look away.

The President not only incited an insurrection against our government but has, in word and deed, led a rebellion.

We cannot simply move past this or turn the page. For us to be able to survive as a functioning democracy, there has to be accountability.

We must impeach and remove this President from office immediately so that he cannot be a threat to our democracy.

I stand ready to fulfill my oath of office. I challenge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to do the same.

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chairwoman, my amendment mandates reporting on the foreign governments with whom we share access to the Terrorist Screening Database. The database is shared with more than 60 foreign governments, including countries with appalling human rights records, such as Saudi Arabia and China.

An FBI official has acknowledged in sworn testimony that it has never stopped sharing watch-list information with a foreign government because of that government's human rights abuses. Many of the people who are included in the database have never been charged with a crime, and, yet, we share sensitive information about them with the same government that murdered Jamal Khashoggi.

I have also received credible reports that there have been Uighurs added to the database at the request of the Chinese Government. I ask the Chair to think about that.

There is universal outrage in Washington about the treatment of the Uighur population in China. What are we talking about?

Let's be clear. These are the precursors to genocide. And while it is happening, while Members of both sides of the aisle and the Secretary of State are condemning what is happening, we are allowing the Chinese Government to add Uighurs to the Terrorist Screening Database. We are allowing them to track Uighurs in the United States.

This is probably the most appalling aspect of our sharing this information with governments that violate human rights, but it is not the only appalling aspect. One thing we know for sure in almost two decades that we have been fighting the war on terror, is that dictators have been more than happy to call whoever opposes them a terrorist.

The Saudis, whose family has direct, proven, and clear financial links to al-Qaida, are given access to this database. The Saudis, who have rounded up human rights activists, tortured them, mass executed them, and claiming they are terrorists, get to add people on this list. It is entirely possible that they get to add American citizens to this list.

This isn't compatible with a free society. It isn't compatible with our essential concepts of civil liberties. It is important to note that the evidentiary standard for being placed in the database is very low. The government only needs reasonable suspicion that someone is involved in terrorism, which is not even enough to charge someone with a crime.

It is also significant that individuals added to this database are not informed of their placements and have suffered preventable harms as a result.

So my amendment asks some basic questions, questions that we as Members of Congress have not only a right to, but a responsibility to ask.

I ask my colleagues to support this amendment. If they are concerned about civil liberties, they should be concerned about this. If they are concerned about human rights abroad, they should be concerned about this. And no matter how they feel about the database itself, this amendment asks that we need answers in order to make informed decisions about our national security policy.

Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff), the chairman.

Madam Chair, I am thankful to the chairman and ranking member for their support, and with that, I yield back the balance of my time

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, my amendment mandates reporting on the financial costs and national security benefits of the Department of Defense's operations overseas. This includes the cost of operating, improving, and maintaining military infrastructures both on our permanent bases and installations and at short-term contingency locations.

In order for Congress to properly conduct its oversight and appropriation rules, we need to have a transparent explanation of how much each of these operations cost. We also need a transparent justification for how each of these operations contribute to keeping Americans safe.

We hear a constant drumbeat from the other side of the aisle on the need for fiscal responsibility when it comes to our domestic spending, but when it comes time to fund the Pentagon, no amount is too much, and no project is too expensive, even though we spend more on the military than the next 10 countries combined.

When we talk about fiscal responsibility and wasteful spending, the Pentagon must not be above reproach. We have to ask what is actually necessary for our national security and what is part of an outrageously bloated budget

that lines the pockets of defense contractors.

So this amendment is an important step in accountability for the Pentagon spending. It is necessary for the department that cannot pass an audit. The American people deserve to know what their tax dollars are being spent on and not take it on blind faith that every dollar that is given to the Pentagon is a dollar that is protecting their safety.

It is especially true for our overseas operations. We send our men and women in uniform abroad and they are separated from their families not just to win in wars but to man the bases we maintain in places like Germany, Japan, and Honduras. We need to be asking them to do that for a reason. This is why my amendment requires the Pentagon to justify national security benefits of overseas operations.

So I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this amendment and making sure that we have an accountability in how we spend our taxpayer dollars.

Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Madam Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith), the distinguished chair.

Madam Chair, I agree with my colleague: It is our responsibility to have oversight. That is simply what this amendment does. It makes sure that we have an understanding of what our money is being spent on and the benefits that that money will get us.

We have to have a clear understanding of what the purposes are of the over 800 different military bases we have around the world and how much money it is costing us to continue to operate them. That is simply what we are asking for. That is what the American people want to know, and that is the kind of responsibility we shouldn't abdicate.

So I want to make sure that we have a report that clearly lays out the kind of money that is being spent and the kind of benefits that we are getting for it.

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

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

Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to H.R. 3055.

My amendment addresses the misguided use of solitary confinement within our Nation's prison systems and the harmful impact it has on incarcerated populations.

Solitary confinement is torture. For people with mental health issues, landing in solitary not only produces behaviors that yield more time in solitary, but it can also extend prison sentences, sometimes drastically. For these already vulnerable people, solitary confinement generates a cycle of punishment that for some can literally be endless.

In many prisons in this country, the de facto penalty for even minor prison rules violations, including those obviously caused by psychological distress or disability, has become solitary confinement. The isolation of solitary almost inevitably causes a measurable deterioration in mental health, which in turn leads to more behavioral issues punished with more solitary confinement.

Oftentimes, someone who was only supposed to spend a couple of years in prison ends up spending the rest of their life there, or they end up returning because they have been so damaged by solitary confinement that they can't adjust to life outside of prison.

This vicious cycle of violence must end. Individuals with underlying psychological disabilities are already overrepresented in prisons and jails, and this inhumane, inexcusable punishment is only perpetuating those problems. That is why we must put an end to solitary confinement once and for all.

I believe that, together, we can reform this cycle.

Mr. Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano).

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

Mr. Chair, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 310.

Amendment No. 65 Offered by Ms. Porter

Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak out against the horrifying human rights abuses that our administration fails to confront.

There are more than 1.3 million Rohingya refugees who have fled the genocide in Burma. About half a million were driven out by a deliberate, coordinated campaign by the Burmese state to destroy Rohingya villages.

According to Human Rights Watch, refugees who arrived in Bangladesh in 2018 reported continued abuses by Burmese security forces, including killings, arson, enforced disappearances, extortion, severe restrictions on movement, and lack of food and healthcare.

They also reported sexual violence and abduction of women and girls in villages and at checkpoints along the route to Bangladesh. Returnees to Myanmar faced arrest and torture by authorities.

There are more than 128,000 Rohingya still in detention camps, where they have been confined since 2012.

At its peak, Rohingya refugee resettlement in the United States was 2,573 refugees in fiscal year 2015. That number has dropped to just 207 in fiscal year 2019.

We are supporting Rohingya refugees through funding programs in refugee camps, but we must do more and help them resettle here in the United States.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak out against the horrifying crimes against humanity that China is currently committing against the Uighur population.

About a million Uighur Muslims have been detained in so-called reeducation camps in China. Reports from the camps are scarce, but they indicate that physical and psychological torture is taking place.

These are the precursors to genocide. We have the power to act.

According to reports in The Atlantic, 22 Uighur Muslims with no known anti-American sentiments were detained at Guantanamo in late 2001 and kept there for 12 years at the urging of the Chinese Government.

There are also known cases of Uighurs on the suspected terrorist watch list in the United States, and it is entirely possible they were added, unfairly, by the Chinese Government.

Reporting in The Wall Street Journal indicates that U.S. companies, including Coca-Cola, the Gap, and Kraft Heinz, are materially benefiting from the Uighur detention, and this must be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to defy the horrifying attacks happening against women's reproductive rights all across this country.

Religious fundamentalists are currently trying to manipulate the State laws in order to impose their beliefs on an entire society, all with complete disregard for voices and the rights of American women.

The recent efforts like those in Alabama and Georgia are only the latest in a long history of efforts to criminalize women for simply existing and to punish us when we don't conform to their attempts to control us. And a new proposal in Texas would go as far as to threaten women who obtain an abortion with capital punishment.

If that were being proposed by any other country, we would be calling it a dangerous violation of human rights. But because it is happening here with the support of the ultraconservative religious right, we call it religious freedom. It is simply unthinkable.

But this anti-choice movement isn't only unjust, it is dangerous because history has proven that when abortion is criminalized, the number of abortions do not simply go down. The number of deaths and injuries to women increase.

Let's just be honest. For the religious right, this isn't simply about their care or concern for life. If they cared about or were concerned about children, then they would be concerned about the children who are being detained and those who are dying in camps across our borders or the children who are languishing in hunger and facing homelessness.

This isn't about religious morality or conviction, because we have seen time and time again those who talk about their faith and want to push policies because of their faith are the ones who simply are caught with the hypocrisy of not living it out in their personal lives.

I just remember recently, not too long ago, a Republican Congressman who had to retire, Tim Murphy, because he asked his mistress to abort their baby while pushing for a ban on abortion. Or I remember the anti- LGBT rights Republican, Larry Craig, who was found soliciting sex in a bathroom in a Minneapolis airport.

I am frustrated every single time I hear people speaking about their faith and pushing that on to other people, because we know those so- called religious politicians, when it comes to their life and their choices, they want to talk about freedom, but when it comes to other people's lives and other people's choices, then they want to talk about religion.

I feel that we must point out how ironic it is that women now are facing these challenges to their freedom in the week that we are marking the 100th anniversary of the 19th Amendment.

How can it be that an entire century has passed, and we are still forced to fight for our rights as women, as human beings, and as Americans?

This should outrage every single person. It certainly outrages me, and we can no longer stand for it.

So today I ask every woman in this country no matter her age, her race, or her political affiliation to stand with me--to stand with us-- to stand up and tell those who challenge our voice, our place, and our right to decide for ourselves to not be silent, to speak up and to reclaim their right to choose.

Madam Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 185; YEA Roll Call No. 186; YEA Roll Call No. 187; and YEA Roll Call No. 188.

Reading from Volume II, page 157: The ``investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian- interference and obstruction investigations. The incidents were often carried out through one-on-one meetings in which the President sought to use his official power outside of usual channels. These actions ranged from efforts to remove the special counsel and to reverse the effect of the attorney general's recusal; to the attempted use of official power to limit the scope of the investigation; to direct and indirect contacts with witnesses with the potential to influence their testimony. Viewing the acts collectively can help to illuminate their significance.'' Volume II, page 157.

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

Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to H.R. 9, the Climate Action Now Act.

My amendment includes findings recognizing the importance of the Paris climate agreement's task force addressing the impact of climate change on displacement and the global refugee crisis.

The United States is responsible for nearly a third of the excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere today and, thus, bears more responsibility for the climate crisis than any other country. But the climate crisis is a major contributing factor of yet another devastating crisis we are facing today: the global refugee crisis.

In 2017, more than 60 percent of the internal displacements in the world was a result not of conflict but of natural disasters. Since 2008, an average of 24 million people has been displaced by catastrophic weather disasters each year.

Within three of the most vulnerable regions of the world--sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, and Latin America--143 million people could be displaced by climate change impacts by 2050.

We do not need to look that far from home to know this. At least 400,000 residents of New Orleans were displaced by Hurricane Katrina for at least a few days, and many were displaced permanently. A disproportionate number of them were Black Americans.

We saw it happen last year in Puerto Rico when 3,000 people died because of Hurricane Maria and our current administration failed to help them recover.

At a time when climate change is making droughts and famines worse, making conflicts fiercer and repression more brutal, our country is resettling historically low numbers of refugees. The United States should be offering protection and support to climate change refugees. Instead, we have capped the number of refugees that we resettle to only 30,000 people next year.

Citizens of some of the countries that have been hit hardest by climate change, including Yemen, Iran, and Somalia, are currently subject to an arbitrary and racist Muslim ban. We cannot be willing to turn our backs on those suffering because of the effects of global catastrophes.

We have to acknowledge that this tragedy is not going to go away any time soon. As food security, drinking water, and energy supplies become scarcer, more and more families are going to be forced to leave their homes.

Countries that are responsible for perpetuating the climate crisis, like the United States, should rise as leaders in offering protection and refuge for displaced communities. It is our duty, as one of the richest countries in the world, to support the Paris Agreement and its task force on the impact of climate change on displacement and the global refugee crisis.

Mr. Chairman, I ask for support for this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about the student debt crisis that is holding back our students, our families, and our economy.

Last year, American's collective student loan debt surpassed $1.5 trillion. The shackles of debt keep former students and their families from seeing the economic prosperity promised to them by their education.

More than 40 million Americans now have student debt, and the amount of debt that the average student carries is rising. Student loan balances have more than doubled real terms since 2005. Average real student loan debt per capita for individuals between the ages of 24 to 32 has risen from $5,000 in 2005 to $10,000 in 2014.

It is driving down home ownership rates, especially for young people. One study found that a $1,000 increase in student loan debt causes a 1- to-2 percent drop in home ownership rates for borrowers in their late twenties and early thirties, threatening to undermine the long-term financial stability of an entire generation.

Young adults who graduate college with a student debt now have negative net worth with a median net worth of $1,900, down from $9,000 in 2013.

Student loan debt does not only impact young people. The number of people over 60 with student loan debt has quadrupled in the last four decades. Parents are increasingly jeopardizing their retirement to pay off loans they took out to pay for their kids' education.

The source of student debt does not affect all Americans equally. Students

of color face a higher risk of defaulting on their student loans and struggle to find jobs to pay off these loans due to discrimination in hiring practices.

First generation and immigrant college students face much higher default rates, and women own two-thirds of the $1.4 trillion total of student debt.

The burden of this debt will be intensified postgraduation by the gender gap. It is time we started treating student debt like the national crisis it is. We need urgent action to address it. That is why I support debt free and tuition-free college and will be introducing a bill to cancel all student debt.

Our Debt-Free College Act would make debt-free college a reality for students within 5 years. We can ensure that students graduate debt free and are not at a competitive disadvantage as a result of the burden of student loan debt.

Making public 2-year and 4-year colleges free and accessible to all is essential in investing in an equitable future. It would also provide an enormous middle class stimulus that would boost economic growth, increase home purchases, and fuel a new wave of small business formation.

Student debt is not the result of bad choices or behaviors. It is the result of a system that tells the students to get an education, go to college in order to have a stable life, but then does not provide the resources so that they can afford that education.

But I believe together we can reform that system.