Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise again today to highlight the epidemic of rape and sexual assault in the military.

This issue was recently brought up on Fox News by a commentator who ignorantly declared that women who join the military should expect to be raped. Yes, believe it or not, this was what the commentator said. I don't think our women choose to enlist in the military with the expectation that they might get raped.

This morning I'm going to tell you the story of U.S. marine Stephanie Schroeder, who was raped in a public restroom by a fellow marine. He shoved her down, beat her, and forced her on her back. He ripped down her pants and raped her. Then he ejaculated on her inner thigh and spit on her.

Private Schroeder reported the rape to command. Her commander laughed at her and said don't come ``blankin'' to me because you had sex and changed your mind.

Don't come ``blankin'' to me? That's the response that was given to Private

Schroeder. That was her leader. That was her commander saying that to her. Instead of helping her, her commander called her a liar and restricted her from seeking medical help or any type of counseling.

And what's worse is that her commander did nothing illegal. The military judicial system allows commanders complete discretion for handling cases of rape and sexual assault. To the current standard of justice, the commander did absolutely nothing wrong.

This story is one of thousands that happens in the military every year. By the Department of Defense's own statistics, 19,000 men and women are sexually assaulted or raped in the military every year. This is not a secret. Congress and the DOD have worked on this issue for a quarter of a century, but very little has changed.

The issue has been treated like a game of tag. Congress calls a hearing and then, tag, DOD submits a report, then, tag, Congress has a hearing, then DOD has a press conference about a new report. The game goes on and on, but no real changes actually occur.

Well, I have my own game. It's called ``Truth Or Dare.''

First, truth: the women in our military are more likely to be raped or assaulted by colleagues than they are to be killed by the enemy.

Truth: only 13.5 percent of victims report the crime.

Truth: only 8 percent of the cases are actually prosecuted.

Truth: the sole arbiters of reports of assaults in commands who decide which rapists are punished and will go free are, in fact, the commanders.

And now, there's a dare. I dare the Department of Defense to create a better, fairer process for handling rapes and sexual assaults. Instead of continuing a system that punishes victims and sweeps sexual offenses under the rug, I dare the Department of Defense to create an impartial office to review and handle these cases with experts in prosecution and investigation.

So what actually happened to Private Schroeder? Well, she got transferred away from her rapist to a new duty location. Prior to her arrival, her command called and told her new supervisor that she was a ``troublemaker.''

Two weeks after the transfer, her new superior made a pass at her. She refused to have sex with him, and he retaliated by publicly harassing her at work. When she contracted pink eye, he asked her in front of formation if she let a guy ejaculate in her eye.

She reported the harassment to command. Nothing happened. A month later, she awoke to the same supervisor sexually assaulting her. Again, she reported it to her command.

This time the command took action--against Private Schroeder. She was disciplined for having a man in her room. Private Schroeder, the victim of sexual assault, was punished after a sex offender broke into her room and harmed her.

Private Schroeder learned not to report crimes committed against her. So 6 months later, when she was sexually assaulted again by a marine in a truck, she told no one how he attempted to have sex with her, or how, when she refused, he began to masturbate in front of her and locked the doors so she could not leave. He said, Show me your tits; and, Help me masturbate; and, You masturbate for me.

This is outrageous conduct that should not be allowed in our military. For now, victims of rape and sexual assault must follow the chain of command, even if their commanding officer chooses to ignore the problem. We need to overhaul this system.

I've introduced H.R. 3435, the STOP Act, that would take these cases out of the chain of command and create an office in the military that will handle them.

I will continue to tell stories like Private Schroeder's until something changes. Survivors can email me at [email protected] if they would like to speak out.

For more information about this issue and opportunities to advocate for change, please visit ProtectOurDefenders.com.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise quite saddened by the news that the Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure has made a political decision--a fine nonprofit that I have been associated with for years. I've run in the Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure. I've walked in the Race for the Cure. I have been the emcee of a number of events locally that they have held. So I have been a big booster of the Susan G. Komen organization. But not anymore.

Their announcement yesterday that they are no longer going to fund any organization that is being investigated by a Federal, State, or local body means that Planned Parenthood is no longer going to receive $600,000 a year. Now, ironically, yesterday, the Komen organization also announced, and with great concern in a statement, that the dismal rate of breast cancer screening with women who do not have insurance is something like 38.2 percent.

Last year, the Planned Parenthood organization was responsible for over 700,000--700,000--breast cancer screenings for women who are poor, for women who don't have insurance, for women who seek to get the health care they get through Planned Parenthood. So over the last 5 years, there have been 4 million breast cancer screenings by Planned Parenthood. Komen has funded about 170,000 of them through Planned Parenthood.

So what does this mean? Well, I guess it means that Susan G. Komen has decided to become a 501(c)(4), because no longer do they want to be providing nonprofits. They want to become a political advocacy group.

Last time I checked, we were all presumed innocent until proven guilty and we looked to investigations in the Federal judicial branch; we looked to investigations by the U.S. Attorney or the district attorney. Far be it from us to rely on the House of Representatives holding a hearing as being emblematic of justice, because oftentimes it's a political sandbox.

Now, this ostensible investigation is one that has been called on by Mr. Stearns, who is the subcommittee chair of Energy and Commerce on Oversight. The hearing has never been held. So why would Susan G. Komen take the remarkable step of saying they are no longer going to fund Planned Parenthood?

I suppose when we review NIH and bring them under some investigation that they will stop funding NIH to the tune of a million dollars, or I suppose that when we have a pharmaceutical company that we bring to the Hill to ask them questions about a particular activity that they will stop accepting sponsor money from that particular pharmaceutical company.

All of you across this country that feel that Susan G. Komen should stick to what it knows, and that is breast cancer research, breast cancer screening, and support and promote those activities by organizations that do the research and do the screening, I ask you to call them at 1-877-465-6636 and tell them that you want them to stick to what they know.

Let's not make this a race to the political bottom.

I thank my friend from the Northern Mariana Islands for yielding.

I rise today in support of this legislation, the Buffalo Soldiers in the National Parks Study Act, which will allow the Department of the Interior to study the role of Buffalo Soldiers and how they defended our first national parks. This is a key step in preserving the legacy of the Army's first African American infantry and cavalry units and the contributions they made to our Nation.

This bill will evaluate the feasibility of a National Historic Trail along the Buffalo Soldiers' route from their historic military post at the San Francisco Presidio to Yosemite and Sequoia National Parks. The study would also identify properties that could be listed in the National Register of Historic Places or designations as National Historic Landmarks.

For several years, Buffalo Soldier regiments traveled 320 miles along this route to patrol the parklands for loggers and poachers, build new trails, and escort visitors. The Buffalo Soldiers were among our very first park rangers, a challenging task these troops took on with pride after serving bravely in the Civil War.

Because of the color of their skin, the Buffalo Soldiers were all too often marginalized instead of respected for their service to our Nation, both on and off the battlefield. However, during their time protecting the parks, they not only confronted racism and discrimination, they overcame it. They

became respected neighbors and friends to people living in the park regions, and they made real inroads toward racial progress that were extraordinary for their day.

Although they were assigned to watch over government property for only a relatively short time, the Buffalo Soldiers helped lay the groundwork for some of our greatest wilderness to be preserved forever.

I'm proud that the Buffalo Soldiers traveled through my district on their way to the parks, and I believe this bill will help shine a light on the history they made in the great State of California and in many places across the country.

All Americans from all walks of life would benefit from learning about this often overlooked chapter in our history. The Buffalo Soldiers' story is ultimately about the triumph not just of African American troops over prejudice and injustice, but about the movement of our Nation toward a more tolerant and courageous society.

I thank my colleagues for supporting this bill.

Madam Speaker, I rise again today to highlight the epidemic of rape and sexual assault in the military. This is the 14th time that I will stand on this floor to tell the story of yet another victim. Each has proudly served their country, each was violently attacked, and each was subjected to a system of justice that protects the perpetrators and punishes the victims.

Make no mistake, the United States military is the finest in the world. But even the Department of Defense recognizes that there is a deep-rooted problem of military sexual trauma that must be addressed. DOD estimates that there are some 19,000 soldiers who are sexually assaulted or raped each year in the military. It's a staggering figure. Sexual assault in the military is a cancer that is undermining readiness, unit cohesion and morale, and fixing this broken system will strengthen our military, not weaken it, as some have argued.

Today, I want to tell the story of Specialist Andrea Neutzling. Originally from a small town on the banks of the Ohio River, Specialist Neutzling served in the Army from 2000 to 2004 and then served in the Army Reserves from August 2004 until April 2010. She has served her country in Korea and twice deployed to Iraq.

In 2002, while serving in Korea, Specialist Neutzling was sexually assaulted by an intoxicated colleague outside the latrine. She decided to report the assault to her command, and her assailant was sentenced-- sentenced to 5 days of base restriction. That was it.

In August of 2005, Specialist Neutzling was deployed to Iraq, and again one of her fellow soldiers sexually assaulted her. But after learning what ``justice'' meant for a previous perpetrator and not wanting to be seen as a troublemaker, she decided not to report the sexual assault to command. Instead, she simply slept on a cot, her rifle pointed toward the door for days. Several months later, she was deployed again to Iraq. After being in the country for 2 weeks, Specialist Neutzling was brutally raped and physically assaulted by two soldiers. The two soldiers were from a unit that was scheduled to depart Iraq, and their unit was being replaced by Specialist Neutzling's unit. The soldiers were drunk when they raped her and threatened to beat her if she struggled. Specialist Neutzling suffered serious bodily injuries from the rape.

Again learning what ``justice'' meant from her previous perpetrator, Specialist Neutzling decided not to report the rape to command. She didn't say a word about her rape for a week until another woman in her unit informed her that her perpetrators were showing a video of the rape and bragging about it. After learning this, Specialist Neutzling reported the rapes to her command.

So what happened this time? Her command told Specialist Neutzling that they did not believe that she had been raped because she ``didn't act like a rape victim'' and ``did not struggle enough.'' Her unit commander also told her that he decided not to disclose Specialist Neutzling's allegations of rape to the investigative services because he didn't want the men separated from their unit. If the men were charged, they would have to stay in Iraq or would have to go to Kuwait.

Additionally, Specialist Neutzling's command unilaterally downgraded her complaint of rape to sexual harassment. Her assailants were scheduled to leave in 2 weeks, and they left on time facing no charges.

In the current military chain of command structure, the commander did nothing wrong. Commanders can issue virtually any punishment, or in this case, no punishment at all. Command has complete authority and discretion over how a degrading and violent assault or rape under their command is handled. They are the judge and jury.

We need to end this unjust and horrific pattern, and we need to end it now. That's why I have introduced H.R. 3435, the STOP Act, because it's time. It's time to stop this horrific culture in the military.

I thank the gentleman from Washington State for yielding me time.

Fifteen months ago, in my district, a gas pipeline exploded and killed eight of my constituents. Thirty-eight homes were destroyed, many more were severely damaged, and many were victims that sat in burn centers for months; and I visited them. It was a horrific scene. It destroyed that community in so many respects; and yet like a phoenix, it has risen above it. This bill is really very personal to me because I lived with those experiences with all of those constituents.

There are a couple of things that must be said today. The chairwoman of the NTSB, the National Transportation Safety Board, said in their final report: Our investigation revealed that for years, the operator exploited weaknesses in a lax system of oversight. We also identified regulators that placed a blind trust in the companies that they were charged with overseeing to the detriment of public safety.

As a result of their report, they made 30 safety recommendations, many of them identified as urgent, to address issues in recordkeeping, information sharing, and pipeline testing. The NTSB report said it highlighted the fact that the problem has been under-regulation, not over-regulation, of the pipeline industry. For too long the pipeline operators have essentially written the rules for their industry.

Well, this bill takes a very important step forward in improving pipeline safety regulation , and I endorse it; but there is more that must be done. And ironically, now in California, because of this horrific accident, the residents in California will have better safeguards than any other State in this country because of actions taken by the State legislature and the California Public Utilities Commission that will require, moving forward, that automatic and remote shutoff valves be placed in high-consequence areas and in seismic areas, not just on new pipeline and not just on new pipeline that they find economically feasible to place these automatic and remote shutoff valves. This is a key component that was not included in the legislation.

And I must tell you, when you saw that ball of fire raging for 90 minutes, an hour and a half, before they were able to turn off the gas, that is something that has to be addressed on a national basis. It's been addressed now in California; and I urge us, as we move forward, to address it on a national level, as well.

The NTSB also recommended requiring all pipelines be configured to allow for inline inspection tools called ``smart pigs.'' I didn't know what a smart pig was before this happened, but I do now. They are also recommending requiring that older pipeline, in particular, be subject to smart pigging. This is critical to make sure that they have not endured corrosion, that they have not been spiked and the like.

So moving forward I hope that we will take the steps necessary not just to support this measure and to have it signed into law but to make it clear that our work is still not done.

I rise again today for the 13th time to talk about a stain on the American people, a stain on the American Government. I'm talking about military assault and rape. I'm talking about the 19,000 soldiers each year who are victims of sexual assault or rape in the military. Those are figures by the Department of Defense. Yet only 13 percent will report because they know that if they do report, they will be summarily removed from service. In fact, 90 percent of them are involuntarily honorably discharged from the military after they report a rape.

So what are we doing about it? Well, I have good news this morning to report. A few weeks ago, not far from here, a nonprofit organization, Protect Our Defenders, was born. It was launched to give voices to survivors of sexual assault in our military. More than 6,000 Americans have signed survivor Terry Odum's petition, whose story I've told here on the floor.

Terry's petition demands Congress take the reporting of sexual assault and rape outside the normal chain of command. I imagine many of my colleagues have received emails and tweets or Facebook messages from their constituents about this issue. This is a movement, and we must address it. Our troops protect us, and we must protect them. Both Republicans and Democrats should be able to agree that we need to fix this system.

Today, I'm going to tell you the story of Petty Officer Amber De Roche. Petty Officer De Roche served in the Navy from December 2000, to December 2005. In August of 2001, Petty Officer De Roche was raped by two shipmates in a hotel while on port of call in Thailand. One assailant ripped off Petty Officer De Roche's clothes and held her down while the other assailant raped her. The assailants repeatedly took turns holding her down while the other would rape her. After they had their way with her, one of the rapists threw her in the shower in an attempt to wash off the evidence. They then kicked her out of the room and onto the unfamiliar streets of Thailand.

The following day, Petty Officer De Roche, with the help of a friend, went to get a medical exam. Petty Officer De Roche was bruised and injured to such a degree during the assault that the physician had to stop the exam and began to cry.

Petty Officer De Roche decided to report her horrific experience to her command. What was her reward? She became the target of severe harassment, was imprisoned in the medical ward, and denied food. I know this sounds unbelievable, but this is going on in our military.

When Petty Officer De Roche was released from the medical ward, her command refused to let her leave the ship and forced her to be on call 24 hours a day without receiving any counseling to help her cope with having been raped. Petty Officer De Roche sought out the ship's chaplain and told him she was suicidal as a result of the rapes and her subsequent mistreatment. Petty Officer De Roche was finally permitted to leave her ship and serve out

the remainder of her duty on another ship.

As if the horrifying assault and subsequent mistreatment of Petty Officer De Roche is not heartbreaking enough, her predators didn't get the punishment they deserved. In fact, something very different. Instead of court-martialing the predators, her command decided to handle the rapes with so-called nonjudicial punishments. The punishment required the rapists to admit their crimes--so they admitted them. They got 6 months docked pay and a reduced rank for only one of the rapists. Both of the rapists were permitted to remain on active duty. When command informed Petty Officer De Roche of the outcome, they also advised her to ``accept the situation'' and refrain from speaking out against the lack of punishment or accountability.

Petty Officer De Roche's story, like many others, highlights a system that is unimaginable to so many of us and a system that is so clearly broken. In the military, a base commander has complete authority and discretion over how a degrading and violent assault under his command is handled. The commander can issue virtually any punishment for any reason. If they don't want a black mark on their record or their friends were accused or if they simply don't know the correct way of dealing with a case, they can issue just a simple slap on the wrist.

My bill, H.R. 3435, the Sexual Assault Training Oversight and Prevention Act, the STOP Act, takes this issue and puts it in the hands of others who can handle it appropriately.

I thank Ms. Tsongas and the ranking member, Mr. Smith, for bringing this motion. Thank you, Madam Speaker, for the opportunity to say a few words here.

This is a cancer that is eating up our military. For 25 years, we have debated and discussed and reported on it, and yet the numbers are staggering. By DOD's own estimates, 19,000 men and women in the military each and every year are sexually assaulted or raped. Only 13 percent actually report these sexual assaults and rapes, and 90 percent of them are involuntarily honorably discharged.

There is a message in the military: Shut up, take an aspirin, go to bed, sleep it off. These very modest elements are really very important, but if we're really going to deal with this issue, if we're truly going to say that you are no longer going to be more likely to be a victim of violence in the military by a fellow officer than by the enemy, if we're really going to be able to change that construct, then we're going to have take the reporting of these crimes away from the chain of command and put it in a separate office where we will have experts, both military and civilian, that will be able to prosecute these cases and actually investigate them.

Right now there's a huge conflict of interest. I spoke on the floor this morning about Petty Officer De Roche who was raped by two officers in Thailand when they were on port of call. She was raped twice by each of these men. She then went to report it and was told to leave it alone. She was then put in a medical hold for 24 hours, for days. And then what happened, she was eventually allowed to leave the ship and be put in another service setting.

But do you know what happened to those two assailants, both of whom admitted that they had raped her?

One of them had 6 months of reduction in pay; one of them got demoted, one of them did not; but neither of them served any time for having admitted that they had raped her. They got what was called nonjudicial punishment.

What a joke that in this country we give a unit commander the authority to be judge and jury and then not even have these individuals who commit

these violent crimes have to pay anything. It doesn't go on a record; there is no sexual assault database. That's the way we've been running the military, and that must stop.

Will the gentleman yield?

I did not say that the military was corrupt. What I did say was that the way----

Will the gentleman yield?

What I would say to the gentleman from California is this: that the Congress of the United States has, for almost a quarter of a century now, been looking at this issue. We have not done a good job----

Will the gentleman yield?

I thank the gentlelady from Massachusetts for yielding me the time.

I would just like to say to the gentleman from California and to my colleagues on the Armed Services Committee, I am very grateful that this language is in the motion to instruct the conferees.

My only point is that until we create an independent office to handle these cases, we continue to place the unit commanders and the base commanders in a conflict of interest. What happens when the unit commander is, in fact, the assailant? That means that the rape victim has to go to her rapist and seek to have help and to report that rape to her unit commander.

What we need to do is create an independent authority that will have the expertise, which a unit commander is not going to have, regarding sexual assault and rape and have investigators who have, again, the expertise to look at these cases so that the unit commanders and the base commanders are not flummoxed by the various issues surrounding this very, very serious subject.

I thank the author of this resolution for giving us all the opportunity to recognize Gabe Zimmerman and to honor his memory and to extend to his family, Ross Zimmerman, Emily Nottingham and Ben Zimmerman, our gratitude for giving their son and their brother in service to this country.

We have said it already: Gabe Zimmerman, a young man, a passionate, idealistic, 30-year-old man, engaged to be married to his beloved Kelly, lost his life in gunfire while assisting his Congresswoman, Gabby Giffords.

In the routine course of affairs in this House, our staff Members often sacrifice their peace of mind in service to the needs of our constituents. In many of our hectic moments, they sacrifice their family time and the events with children that create a lifetime of memories.

Gabe Zimmerman loved his community and his Nation that he served, and it is just appropriate that we take the time today to recognize him and to affix a plaque in his honor.

I rise again today to draw attention to the epidemic in our military of rape and sexual assault. Nineteen thousand women and men each year are raped or sexually assaulted in the military. Shockingly, almost one-third of female veterans of all generations say they have been sexually assaulted or raped while in the military, and more than 70 percent say they experienced sexual harassment while serving.

In 2008 the Department of Veterans Affairs reported a total of 48,106 female veterans and 43,693 male veterans screened positively for military sexual trauma.

The prosecution rate of sexual assault is alarmingly low. Only 8 percent of sexual assailants were referred to courts-martial or military court compared with 40 percent of similar offenders in the civilian system. This travesty is not being addressed, and I will continue to speak out on this floor until it is. Survivors can email me at [email protected] if they would like to speak out.

Today, I would like to tell the story of one of the 8 percent that were prosecuted, the story of Colonel Michael Robertson, who commanded Fort Bliss' 31st Combat Support Hospital at Camp Dwyer, a military base and airfield in the Helmand River Valley in Afghanistan.

Last week, Colonel Robertson was convicted by a military judge of 14 charges, including having pornography on his government computer, sexually harassing three women, and assaulting five women. Eight women that served under his command testified at great cost to their careers and their privacy.

Colonel Robertson routinely touched them without permission on their breasts, thighs, and buttocks, and encouraged them to look at pornography on his computer. Some testified the harassment occurred daily. Sadly, the military careers of these eight women who bravely did the right thing are almost assuredly destroyed.

A major who filed a claim against Robertson said, ``I don't know if my career was in jeopardy for doing the right thing. Who in the corps who supported you is going to trust you in the future?''

Despite repeated warnings, Colonel Robertson also emailed pornography to friends and female subordinates. A lieutenant colonel who was the chief nurse under Robertson's command said his command split the staff and created a toxic environment.

What makes the defense's answer to all of these actions? That all of these jokes and the touchings were attempts to boost morale. How much more outrageous must the excuses become before we do something about it?

So what is the punishment for someone in the military convicted of 14 counts of assaulting and harassing his subordinates who he was assigned to protect? Is he sent to prison for being a predator? Is he stripped of his standing the military? Oh, no. Colonel Robertson was ordered to pay a $30,000 fine over 3 months and spend 3 months in prison. Colonel Robertson will retire from the Army when he finishes his sentence. His conviction won't affect his Army retirement or his Federal health insurance, and he will not be required to register as a sex offender.

It doesn't take a military expert or a psychologist to figure out that sexual assault and harassment hurts not only the individual victim but undermines unit cohesion, morale, and overall effectiveness.

The absolute failure to address this behavior is hurting our military. Like Colonel Robertson, the majority of assailants are older and of higher rank than their victims. They abuse not only their authority but also the trust of those they are responsible for protecting.

The current military structure serves as a safe haven for sexual predators. They either are never brought to justice at all, or they receive a sentence like Colonel Robertson's that doesn't come close to matching their crime.

That's why this week I'll be introducing a bill that would fundamentally change how sexual assaults are handled in the military. My bill will take the prosecution, the reporting, the oversight, the investigation, and the victim care of sexual assaults out of the hands of the normal chain of command and place the jurisdiction in the hands of an impartial office staffed by experts, both military and civilian.

I've become painfully aware that if DOD continues to address this issue at its current pace, the epidemic of military assault will never end.

Mr. Speaker, I rise again today with a heavy heart to talk about sexual assault and rape in the military, an epidemic in this country that must be addressed.

As I've said before, the Department of Defense, by its own statistics, has stated that 19,000 servicemembers, women and men, every year are raped by fellow soldiers. I will continue to share these stories until something changes. Survivors can email me at [email protected] if they want to speak out.

Each of these soldiers was raped by another soldier, and each was subjected to a system of justice that protects the perpetrators and punishes the victims. The story I will tell today is the story of Corporal Sarah Albertson. This gets to the rot at the root of the justice system in the military, and that is: a commander, one person, has complete and total discretion in deciding how and if sexual assault and rape are dealt with.

Corporal Albertson served in the Marine Corps from 2003 to 2008. On August 27, 2006, Corporal Albertson was raped by a fellow marine, a man who outranked her. That's right, he outranked her and raped her.

Right after the rape, Corporal Albertson went to her commander to inform him of what had happened. Instead of detaining her alleged assailant, calling in criminal investigators, or sending Corporal Albertson to the hospital to preserve the evidence that would corroborate her story, he told Corporal Albertson that because she had consumed some alcohol, if she reported the rape, she would be charged with inappropriate barracks conduct. She was then told not to discuss her rape with anyone and was also ordered to ``respect'' her rapist and follow his orders because he outranked her. It soon became clear to Corporal Albertson that others knew about what had happened, and her other superiors, acting with the open support of her commander, ostracized and harassed her.

Corporal Albertson sought counseling. The military counselor that Corporal Albertson went to, in no uncertain terms, advised her commander that she should not be forced to interact with her rapist and that Corporal Albertson was suffering from panic attacks due to these interactions. Her commander ignored the professional advice and forced her to interact with her rapist for another 2 years. And when she had panic attacks, she was punished.

This same commander also refused Corporal Albertson's request to change housing. Instead, he forced her to live one floor below her rapist for 2 years. The commander also required her to disclose medications she had been prescribed to counter the trauma. Now, Corporal Albertson never filled those prescriptions; but, nonetheless, by having to disclose those prescriptions, she lost her security clearance.

But what happened to her rapist? Not a thing. In fact, I venture to say he has been promoted, not just once, probably twice, maybe three times. I have become painfully aware that at the rate DOD is working to address this issue, the epidemic of military sexual assault will never end.

Mr. Speaker, this is a national travesty. Congress, the administration, the Department of Defense, all of us, all of us should be ashamed of what is going on in the military.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today, as I have risen nine times before, to speak about the unspeakable--rape in the military. Nineteen thousand soldiers each year, women and men, are raped in the military. And what is Congress doing about it? What is the Department of Defense doing about it? Not much.

This is the 10th time I'm standing on this floor to share a story of a victim. Each of these soldiers proudly served their country, each was raped, and each was subjected to a system of justice that protects the perpetrator, not the victim. This is a problem we can fix; we just have to want to.

I will continue to share these stories until something changes. Survivors can email me at [email protected] if they would like to speak up.

Today, I want to share the story of Sergeant Myla Haider. Sergeant Haider served in the Army from 1994 to 1999, and again from November 2000 to October 2005. When Sergeant Haider entered the Army, she planned on being a career servicemember; but in 2002, Sergeant Haider was raped while she was working with the CID, the Criminal Investigative Division. Ironically, it is the CID that is charged with investigating crimes, including rape and sexual assault, in the military.

On this occasion, after socializing with a group of CID colleagues, the rapist, a senior agent in CID, isolated Sergeant Haider from the group and raped her. Sergeant Haider, like the overwhelming majority of servicemembers raped in the military, did not report the crime. She didn't report the rape because she had witnessed firsthand the negative attitude that the CID had towards rape victims and didn't believe she would be able to obtain justice if she had reported being raped.

She did, however, confide in two friends, both other division agents at CID. They both promised her that they would not report the rape because they agreed with her assessment that reporting the rape would not lead to justice.

Two years later, in November 2004, Sergeant Haider was contacted by a CID agent who had learned from one of Sergeant Haider's friends that she had been raped 2 years earlier by a senior CID agent. The CID agent informed her that the assailant was being investigated for raping several other women and indecently assaulting others. A serial rapist in the military.

In 2005, Sergeant Haider testified at her rapist's court-martial. However, the agents that Sergeant Haider had confided in testified for the rapist. Sergeant Haider later learned from the agents that they had been threatened by command if they didn't testify on behalf of the accused. So, in order to preserve their careers at CID, they followed orders.

In describing her decision to speak out, she said this: I knew my career was over because our soldiers cannot report a rape in the military and expect to have a successful military career.

You see, only 13 percent of those that are raped in the military actually report it. And of those 13 percent, 90 percent of them are involuntarily honorably discharged from the military. So I have become painfully aware that at the rate the Department of Defense is working to address this issue, the epidemic of military sexual assault will never end.

It is long past time for Congress to act. The real question is: When will we start protecting those that defend us?

I thank my colleague, and thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Al Green) for hosting this Special Order on domestic violence, and I thank Congressman Poe for his participation as well.

Imagine you were beaten at the hands of your boyfriend or husband, maybe in front of your child. Imagine that before you were able to call the police, your attacker fled. But he doesn't get far before the police catch him and throw him in jail. But days later he is set free, not on bail but with a clean record. And he's angry. More so because he first beat you, and now he wants to get revenge because you caused him to be arrested. No, this isn't a scene from a horror movie. It is, instead, a dose of reality from Topeka, Kansas, where the city council voted earlier this month to repeal the city law against misdemeanor domestic battery.

The council claimed that budget woes required this act of public policy cowardice. By repealing this law, Topeka sent a clear message to the women: your safety is not a priority; we will not protect you if you are victimized; we will not hold your spouse, former spouse, boyfriend, or live-in accountable if they assault you. You are on your own.

And this happened in a city where a domestic violence murder occurs every 10 days; a domestic violence incident occurs every 22 minutes; and a person is--or I should say was--charged with domestic violence every 41 minutes. But no more in Topeka, Kansas.

These are tough times for local and State governments. Everyone is being asked to do more with less. Difficult choices must be made. But let me say this without hesitation: the choices made during difficult times reflect who we are as Americans, who we are as human beings, and our mutual respect for the law. The Topeka decision is another example of how women in this country are becoming second-class citizens, or chattel, or even less.

We shun our global neighbors who allow violence to openly occur without repercussions. Today, as we recognize Domestic Violence Awareness Month and the more than 1 million victims who are terrorized every year, I urge each and every State and locality in our great country to take a stand against what just occurred in Topeka, Kansas. Shame on Topeka, Kansas. Shame on them for not recognizing one of the most grievous acts that occurs in a local community. Domestic violence is one of the most reported incidents and one of the ones that police, frankly, are the more concerned about going out to because more often than not there is violence associated with it.

For the sake of the nearly 16 million children who are exposed to domestic violence each year, and the women who are abused every 9 seconds, we must recommit ourselves to supporting domestic violence victims.

Speaking of tough times, domestic violence shelters know a thing or two about pinching pennies. Three-quarters of the shelters nationally report losing money from government sources since the recession. And as their belts are tightened, the demands for their services have only increased. For the third straight year, 80 percent of shelters nationwide are reporting an increase in domestic violence cases.

I was always struck when I was in the State legislature that there were three times as many animal shelters as there were battered women shelters. It says volumes about where our priorities are in this country.

Three out of four shelters attributed the rise in violence to financial issues. Almost half said that those issues included job loss, and 42 percent cited the loss of a house or car. More than half of the shelters also reported that domestic abuse is more violent than it was before the financial crash. Studies shows that abuse is three times as likely to occur when a couple experiences financial strain. Take note: A 5-year study reveals that when a man experienced two or more periods of unemployment, he was almost three times as likely to abuse his female partner.

The irony with Topeka's decision is that domestic violence is expensive to the communities where it is more prevalent, and I'm not talking about the cost of prosecutions. I'm talking about the $8 billion to $10 billion in lost productivity, medical bills, and other costs. In fact, between one-quarter to one-half of domestic violence victims report that they lost a job at least in part due to domestic violence. And if we do not prevent these crimes and penalize those who commit them, we will

pay tenfold in the years to come. Studies show that 60 percent of the nearly 16 million children who witness domestic abuse every year mimic it later in their lives.

We have our work cut out for us, but one thing that defines our country is the notion that anyone who abuses another human being, woman or man, will be brought to justice. When Topeka, Kansas, decriminalized domestic violence earlier this month, we took a huge and unacceptable step backwards. In honor of the victims who have lost their lives to domestic violence and those who live in fear every day, let us recommit ourselves today to their safety.

I thank you again, Mr. Green.

I thank the gentlelady from Wisconsin.

Madam Speaker, I think this bill goes to the farthest extreme in trying to take women down not just a peg but take them in shackles to some cave somewhere. Twenty-five years ago, this body passed EMTALA, a bill that basically said anyone that shows up at an emergency room would access health care, no questions asked. Now, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to amend that law and basically say, Oh, except for a woman who is in need of an abortion, or except for a woman who's bleeding to death who happens to be pregnant, or except for a woman who is miscarrying.

Basically, what this bill would do is say that any hospital could decline to provide services to one class of people in this country. And that one class of people is pregnant women.

Let me tell you something. My story is pretty well known now. I was pregnant. I was miscarrying. I was bleeding. If I had to go from one hospital to the next trying to find one emergency room that would take me in, who knows if I would even be here today.

What my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are attempting to do is misogynist. It is absolutely misogynist.

The time has come for us to stop taking up this issue over and over again this year and do something that the American people really care about. They want jobs. They want to be able to hold on to their homes. They want some mortgage relief. And what do we do? We stand here on the floor and create yet another opportunity for women to be cast in shackles.

I thank the gentlelady for yielding.

I find it actually somewhat humorous to think that the argument on the other side of the aisle is that this is dilatory when, in fact, the entire bill is dilatory when you look at what is really facing this country right now.

This bill makes it very clear that any hospital that does not want to provide emergency room services to a woman who is miscarrying and needs an abortion would no longer have to do it. Let's make that very clear.

Let me read one little example from the American Journal of Public Health:

A woman with a condition that prevented her blood from clotting was in the process of miscarrying at a Catholic-owned hospital. According to her doctor, she was dying before his eyes. In fact, her eyes were filling with blood. But even though her life was in danger and the fetus had no chance of survival, the hospital wouldn't let the doctor treat her by terminating the pregnancy until the fetal heartbeat ceased.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise, once again, to talk about the epidemic of rape in the military. This is the ninth time that I have stood on the floor of this House to speak about the unspeakable. Each of these military members have served proudly for their country. Each of them has been raped, and each has been revictimized by a system of justice that protects perpetrators and punishes victims. I will continue to share these stories until something changes. Survivors can email me at [email protected] if they would like to speak out.

Today, I want to tell you about Sergeant Rebekah Havrilla. She served in the Army from 2004 to 2008. Her job was as an explosive ordnance disposal technician. In other words, she was responsible for disposing of IEDs before they went off. So she took on one of the toughest jobs in the military. Yet during basic training, she heard her commanders repeatedly equate being female with being weak or incompetent. They used words to describe women that cannot be repeated on this floor.

Commanders required Sergeant Havrilla and her colleagues to attend classes regarding prevention of sexual assault and harassment once a year. Commanders made a mockery of these classes. As the instructor would describe prohibited conduct, one or more of the soldiers would begin engaging in that conduct. One soldier went as far as to strip completely naked and get on the table during a break in the middle of class. His punishment was to serve as Equal Opportunity representative and lead the next sexual assault harassment training. ``Disgusting'' is too benign a word to describe this conduct.

Sergeant Havrilla deployed to Afghanistan in 2006. Her supervisor sexually harassed her. He began to slap her bottom whenever he passed by. He belittled and mocked her. On one occasion, he told her exactly what he wanted to do to her in graphic detail. Nothing was done in response.

It was another colleague, one from the canine unit, that raped her. He even photographed the rape, and some of the pictures ended up on a pornographic Web site. Imagine a system of justice in such shambles that an assailant would actually take pictures of the crime and put them on the Internet. Sergeant Havrilla reported her rape under the military's restricted reporting policy.

In February of 2009, she reported for 4 weeks of active duty training. While there, she ran into her rapist and went into shock. She immediately sought the assistance of the military chaplain. The chaplain told her that it must have been God's will for her to be raped and recommended that she attend church more frequently. God's will? This is the support system for victims of rape and sexual assault in the military? Sergeant Havrilla now suffers from posttraumatic stress disorder and chronic depression.

In describing her decision to speak out, she said this: ``Leadership needs to be held accountable and women need to be able to work without the fear of being assaulted by their own colleagues. This is one of the hardest things I've ever done, and I want to thank the other women who have stepped forward as well. It's never easy to put yourself out there.''

Sergeant Havrilla is right. It's time for leadership to be held accountable--leadership in the Pentagon, leadership at the White House, and leadership here in Congress.

Offered By: Ms. Speier

Amendment No. 21: Strike all after the enacting clause and

insert the following: