Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor one of my longtime staffers, Matthew Ceja. Matt's career in my office spanned over five and a half years, a time in which I have had the honor of watching him grow into each new role.

A proud, born-and-raised Inland Empire native, Matt joined my office at the very beginning of his career on the Hill as an intern. From there he grew into every role from staff assistant to legislative assistant, tackling each new position with great aptitude and enthusiasm.

As a staffer, Matt has been unfailingly dependable. His work on energy and environment issues for the office addressed some of my constituency's most immediate concerns, and his passion for the Inland Empire is always at the core of his work. Matt's commitment to progressive values inflected his approach to each of his portfolio issues, and I am grateful for his depth and breadth when working with me to craft policy.

What makes Matt truly a standout as both a staffer and a coworker is that he possesses qualities that are impossible to teach: his kindness, his generosity, and natural inclination towards mentorship. To every younger staffer that has come to my office after him, Matt has been a source of advice and encouragement. He is everyone's first friend and biggest cheerleader, and he has played a major role in creating the kind of warm, welcoming, and inclusive environment in my office that any Member of Congress would be lucky to have.

Although he will be leaving my office, I am glad that he will not yet be departing the Hill and wish him the best of luck in his new role. The Inland Empire is lucky to have an advocate like him in our corner.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding and I certainly share his commitment and I share your pride. I know you stand for justice. I know you stand for the cause of all folks who have been marginalized. I know of your commitment to our servicemembers during World War II.

Mr. Speaker, I thank a member of my staff on the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs for his valued service to veterans, this Congress, and our country.

Miguel Salazar joined our committee as our communications director in 2019 as Democrats took back the House, and he was an integral part of the committee's efforts to deliver meaningful change for our Nation's veterans.

When my Honoring our PACT Act was signed into law last year, Miguel worked tirelessly with our communications team to ensure that the 3.5 million newly eligible veterans became aware of the benefits they were entitled to.

As a commissioned officer in the Marine Corps Reserve, Miguel has embodied the very best of public service. He has been a true leader and an invaluable member of my staff. The work of my committee and this legislative body have been made better by Miguel's contributions. He will be deeply missed.

Mr. Speaker, I was trying to remember the gentleman's cause, which was the merchant mariners during World War II.

I was at an event with Senator McConnell which commemorated the service of these merchant mariners who played such a critical role serving our Nation during World War II. They weren't in uniform, but they died at tremendous numbers.

I share Mr. Green's concern that we need to do something for these surviving merchant mariners before they all die. They served our country in an incredible way.

Mr. Chairman, I claim time to speak in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment perpetuates false arguments that allowing transgender girls to participate on school sports teams will undermine the well-being of cisgender girls.

Again, my friends across the aisle are conflating and confusing the issue here. They want to talk about the struggles and the challenges we have with determining fair competition in elite sports, but what we are talking about here is a bill, the underlying bill, which would completely ban participation of all transgender kids across our country.

As I said, the example in Utah, 75,000 high school students competing in high school sports, four transgender kids, one competing as a female. This seems wholly, wholly, disproportionate to the so-called problem. What is disproportionate is this proposal to completely ban transgender students from sports.

Now, I want to say something here. The other side does not even want to acknowledge that transgender kids exist; that transgender people exist.

Nevertheless, the legislation and this amendment target transgender kids, and they do it in a very, very insidious way. They will say, oh, transgender doesn't appear in this bill. But let's not kid ourselves that the very intent is to harm and stigmatize, isolate, make them pariahs, and this is simply wrong.

Look, I am not a scientist. I was an English teacher most of my time before I got into Congress. I do know the harm that comes with this insidious use of language, by not even granting the dignity of existing, not even granting the dignity of the existence of trans kids and trans people. That is what the other side is doing.

It is going to be harmful. How is it harmful? This mere debate has traumatized trans kids and their families across the country. Eighty- five percent of transgender and nonbinary youth say that the debates around anti-trans bills have negatively impacted their mental health.

According to a 2022 survey, nearly one in five transgender and nonbinary youth attempted suicide in the past year, and 45 percent of LGBTQ youth seriously considered attempting suicide in the past year. These statistics are real. They represent real vulnerable kids. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and to oppose the underlying bill.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from South Carolina for a colloquy to answer some questions.

I know the gentlewoman to be open-minded about LGB people, but I wonder if she has ever sat down and met with any of her transgender constituents.

Reclaiming my time. So the gentlewoman does recognize that transgender kids and transgender people exist.

Reclaiming my time. So it is curious to me that the gentlewoman has not included even the word ``transgender.'' She uses the word ``biological male,'' and the study that she has put forward studies the harm done to cisgender girls by having them compete with biological males. It does not even provide the guidance to the studiers to study what may happen with cisgender girls and the competition with transgender girls. So the results of this study are not going to even determine what the challenges may be.

Look, the mere fact that the author of this amendment is asking to study this shows that there is no evidence that there is any harm here.

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, again, the assertion that the underlying bill is about protecting women and girls couldn't be farther from the truth. We know that in States that have inclusive policies toward trans girls and women in sports, that the overall participation of girls and women is greater.

Those States that have enacted bans on transgender participation have seen a decrease in overall participation. Why might that be?

Well, we know that in Utah, that some parents of cisgender girls who have seen their girls lose in competition have questioned whether or not the winner is actually a girl because of nonconformance to perceived notions of femininity. Authorities in that State have actually subjected the winner, the girl who was a winner, to an examination of documents dating back to her kindergarten days in order for her to prove that she was indeed a female.

Think about the chilling effect that this has had on other women and girls

from participating in sports. The teenage years are a difficult time enough but think about what this ban has imposed.

Let me tell you, Republicans are not satisfied with just banning transgender girls from competition in athletics. What this amendment will do is to accomplish full exclusion of transgender people, not only from athletic programs, but from any other auxiliary programming that a student would want to participate with their teams.

Not only are they interested in assuring that transgender girls and women can't enjoy the benefits of the athletic aspects of team sports, but they also want to make sure that trans students who, statistically speaking, already face intense marginalization in school environments are deprived of the opportunity to make friends, to be included, and just have fun.

No wonder more than half of transgender kids have thought about suicide or have attempted it.

This amendment is the example that represents the whole. The nature of this amendment is what is at the heart of this bill. It is not about competition. It is about participation.

I wish that they would stop using examples of difficulties in elite competitions as a justification to harm transgender kids all across this Nation and exclude them not only from sports but also exclude them from sports banquets or special study halls that may be associated with athletes.

This is an insidious amendment. It is an insidious bill. It is contrary to our values as Americans.

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

Mr. Chair, I would just say let's allow, at the very elite level, organizations like the International Olympic Committee and the NCAA to make determinations of what constitutes fairness, not impose the Federal Government where it is not necessary. Transgender athletes have been welcomed into participation for 20 years now and only recently has it become a major issue in our country.

Mr. Chair, where have the Republicans' concerns about government overreach gone? Where have the concerns about allowing States and voluntary associations to solve problems before the Federal Government is brought to bear gone?

Certainly, we should not be using one or two examples at the elite sports level to affect the participation of transgender girls and women all across our country in high schools and colleges.

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

Mr. Chair, I would say that organizations like the NCAA and the International Olympic Committee can resolve these issues about fairness in competition, but we should not neglect the greater value of participation, connecting to others in society and welcoming everybody into the community. This bill and this amendment do not do that, and they put our transgender kids in harm's way.

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

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

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

Mr. Chairman, I speak in opposition to H.R. 734, the politics over participation act.

We can all agree on the need to address the challenges facing our education system, issues like gun violence, academic achievement gaps, and the lack of mental health support for our students. These are serious challenges that demand serious action.

Unfortunately, my Republican colleagues have used their first 100 days in the majority to pursue a radical education agenda that prioritizes political points over students' safety and success.

Today, we are considering another piece of this extreme agenda, one that again targets transgender kids.

School sports activities offer fundamental life lessons--such as leadership, self-confidence, and teamwork--that every child should be able to enjoy. As Members of Congress, our responsibility is to ensure that student athletics are, above all, fair and safe.

H.R. 734 does the exact opposite. It makes school sports less fair by singling out and banning transgender women and girls as young as kindergarten from participating on school sports teams with their friends. We know transgender students already face widespread bullying and discrimination. Adding to their pain by targeting their participation in school sports is both wrong and dangerous.

Furthermore, contrary to my Republican colleagues' claims, H.R. 734 actually makes school sports less safe for women and girls. To enforce its ban on transgender student athletes, the bill would require all girls as young as their preteens to ``prove their gender.''

For example, under Utah's blanket ban on transgender student participation in school sports, parents of the second- and third-place finishers in a State-level girls' competition complained to the Utah High School Activities Association that they suspected the winner of the event was trans. Following the complaint, the school was forced to investigate the student by combing through her records going back to kindergarten. She was, in fact, not transgender.

The association has received other complaints about supposed trans competitors, sometimes with the reasoning being simply that a girl doesn't look feminine enough.

Simply put, H.R. 734 does not protect women and girls. It only makes school sports less safe and less fair.

There are schools, States, and sports associations that have been allowing transgender people to play equitably and consistent with their gender identity with no issues for decades.

This bill doesn't address the most elite level of athletes. Yet, even at the most elite level, organizations like the International Olympic Committee have frameworks for transgender inclusion in sports. They reject the type of categorical blanket ban Republicans are pushing for kids as young as kindergartners in schools.

Congress has no business targeting transgender women and girls and imposing a nationwide ban on their participation in school sports. We need to refocus on our job in Congress to address the most pressing issues facing students and parents and ensure that every child in America can reach their full potential.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 734, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Bonamici).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Jayapal).

Mr. Chairman, while girls' participation in sports have increased 1,000 percent since Title IX, the participation numbers still have not reached that of boys 50 years ago.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Stevens).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Pocan), the chair of the Equality Caucus.

Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time remains on each side?

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Jacobs).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Robert Garcia).

Mr. Chairman, I include in the Record the following letters from PFLAG, a consortium of women and girls' rights organizations and 40 professional athletes all in opposition to H.R. 734.

I remind my colleagues on the other side that trans people do exist. To deny their existence is to also deny their humanity, and this is a terrible thing.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Frost).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Stansbury).

Mr. Chair, I include in the Record an article from the Advocate titled ``Judge Blocks Utah Trans Sports Ban, While Probe of Athlete Emerges,'' from August 2022.

[From the Advocate, Aug. 19, 2022]

Judge Blocks Utah Trans Sports Ban, While Probe of Athlete Emerges

(By Trudy Ring)

A judge in Utah has blocked enforcement of the state's

transgender sports ban, days after news emerged that parents

of cisgender female athletes had filed a complaint about an

alleged trans competitor who turned out not to be.

Judge Keith A. Kelly in the Third District Court of Utah,

located in Salt Lake County, issued a preliminary injunction

Friday against the state's blanket ban on trans girls in

girls' school sports, meaning it can't be enforced while a

lawsuit against it proceeds. The ban is only one section of

the law passed as House Bill 11. He left the rest of the law

intact, including the requirement for trans girls to go

before a commission to determine their eligibility to compete

in girls' sports.

``Thus, the effect of this preliminary injunction will not

mean that transgender girls will automatically be eligible to

compete on their school's girls' teams,'' Kelly wrote.

``Rather, it will allow them to compete only upon the

commission's determination that their being able to compete

is fair under all of the circumstances.''

Utah lawmakers overrode Gov. Spencer Cox's veto to pass the

legislation in March.

The injunction comes shortly after another development

regarding the law. The parents of the second- and third-place

finishers in a state-level girls' sports event complained to

the Utah High School Activities Association that they

suspected the winner of the event was trans, David Spatafore,

legislative representative for the association, told the Utah

Legislature's Education Interim Committee Wednesday, the

Deseret News reports. The UHSAA had the student's school

investigate, looking over her records all the way back to

kindergarten, and it turned out that she was not trans. He

didn't identify the student, the school, or the sport, citing

privacy considerations.

He said the association has received other complaints about

supposed trans competitors, sometimes with people saying a

girl simply ``doesn't look feminine enough.''

Opponents of the law said this shows major problems with

it. ``We warned about this being a possibility, that everyone

would accuse everyone who is successful of being

transgender,'' Sue Robbins, a member of the Transgender

Advisory Council of Equality Utah, told The Salt Lake

Tribune. ``It becomes about judging women's bodies. And no

body is safe.''

At his monthly press conference Thursday, Gov. Cox called

this investigation a disturbing development. ``My goodness,

we're living in this world where we've become sore losers,

and we're looking for any reason why our kid lost,'' he said,

according to the Tribune. ``I have a real problem with that

story. . . . I just wish we could be a little more thoughtful

in life and a little less critical of other people.''

Meanwhile, the parents who filed suit against the law

welcomed Friday's injunction. ``My husband and I are very

relieved by this decision,'' Debbie Roe, a parent plaintiff

in the lawsuit, Roe v. UHSAA, said in a press release. ``We

are grateful the court understood how much harm this law has

caused, which has been a huge source of stress and trauma for

our child. Our daughter just wants the same chance as other

kids to make friends and play on the team she loves. Today's

ruling gives her the opportunity to do that.''

``This is a win not only for my child but for all girls in

this state,'' added Jean Noe, another parent plaintiff.

``This law is based on stereotypes and misconceptions that

are harmful to all girls. I am grateful the court has put

this dangerous law on pause and that, at least for the

moment, all Utah children can know that they are valued and

supported.''

``We are very pleased by the court's decision,'' said

Justice Christine Durham, former chief justice of the Utah

Supreme Court and senior of counsel at Wilson Sonsini, one of

the lawyers representing the parents. ``Thus far, every court

to rule on a similar ban has barred it from taking effect,

due in part to the serious harms caused by excluding an

entire group of students from such an important school

activity. We read today's decision as recognizing that the

law is not only discriminatory but puts Utah children at

needless risk of lifelong harm. We look forward to moving

forward with the case and securing a permanent decision

blocking the law from taking effect.''

In addition to Wilson Sonsini, the parents are represented

by the American Civil Liberties Union of Utah and the

National Center for Lesbian Rights.

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Kamlager-Dove)

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Landsman).

Mr. Chair, I include in the Record letters from the Human Rights Campaign and the Athletes' Advisory Council.

Human Rights Campaign,

April 14, 2023.

Dear Representative: On behalf of the Human Rights

Campaign's more than three million members and supporters

nationwide, I write to express our strong opposition to H.R.

734--the misnamed Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act

of 2023 which seeks to implement a discriminatory ban on

transgender girls participating in girls' sports nationwide.

As the nation's largest civil rights organization working to

achieve lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer

equality, we are deeply concerned about the negative impact

this legislation would have on young people already facing

significant challenges due to stigma and discrimination.

Athletics are an experience everyone deserves equal access

to. School sports provide important development opportunities

that teach young people about teamwork, perseverance,

leadership, discipline, and exercise, and help them build

friendships and community. All kids--including transgender

girls and intersex children who would also be restricted from

participating in school sports by this bill--should have the

same opportunities to participate in activities that embody

our shared ideals as Americans.

We know that allowing transgender and intersex youth to

play sports in school does not disadvantage anyone else.

States, school districts, and athletic associations around

the country have allowed transgender and intersex young

people to participate in school sports consistent with their

gender identity for decades--all without issue. Indeed,

despite hundreds, if not thousands, of transgender women and

girls participating in sports over time, only a handful of

transgender athletes in high school or college have had any

notable success. This is because transgender and intersex

students do not seek to participate in sports consistent with

their gender identity to gain an unfair advantage--they do it

for the same reasons other young people play sports in

school: to challenge themselves, improve their fitness, be

part of a team, and have fun.

Banning transgender and intersex kids from playing sports

in school would do nothing to address ongoing, well-

documented threats to girls' and women's sports, including a

lack of equal resources, pay inequality, and sexual

harassment. Advocates for women and girls in sports like the

National Women's Law Center, the Women's Sports Foundation,

Women Leaders in College Sports, and American Association of

University Women all support policies allowing transgender

people to play sports consistent with their gender identity.

These groups oppose efforts to exclude transgender students

like this bill, which

would promote baseless fears and misinformation rather than

solve any real problems.

We urge you to vote no on H.R. 734, as well as vote against

any anti-LGBTQ+ amendments. We will consider these key votes.

Sincerely,

Kelley Robinson,

President.

Mr. Chair, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green).

Mr. Chair, may I inquire of the time remaining.

Mr. Chair, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Ms. Pressley).

Mr. Chair, I include in the Record letters from the ACLU, the Leadership Conference of Civil and Human Rights, and GLSEN, all in opposition to H.R. 734.

American Civil Liberties Union,

Washington, DC, April 14, 2023.

Dear Representative: The American Civil Liberties Union

strongly urges you to oppose H.R. 734, the Protection of

Women and Girls in Sports Act. This discriminatory and

unconstitutional legislation would make it illegal for

schools receiving federal funding to allow transgender girls

and women to play on sports teams for girls and women, in

violation of the Constitution's guarantee of equal

protection. In addition, under Title IX, all girls, including

those who are transgender, should be able to participate

fully and equally in athletics, in accordance with who they

are. This will be the first vote in congressional history to

specifically single out transgender people for

discrimination. Because of the importance of this vote, the

ACLU will be scoring it.

Across the country, state legislatures have advanced

legislation to ban transgender children from participating in

sports, particularly transgender girls. These legislators--

like the proponents of this legislation--have argued that

passing these bans is necessary to protect sports for girls

and women. There are a multitude of barriers facing female

student athletes--from continued funding inequities to pay

disparities among coaches and staff to harassment and abuse.

The participation of their transgender peers, who frequently

number in the single digits in states that have enacted bans

identical to this one, is simply not one of those barriers.

Legislators supporting these bans are cynically using

transgender people as political pawns under the guise of

``protecting women's sports,'' yet leading advocates for

women's sports, including the Women's Sports Foundation,

Women Leaders in College Sports, the Tucker Center for

Research on Girls & Women in Sport, National Women's Law

Center, and hundreds of athletes in women's sports and other

women's rights groups have consistently voiced their strong

support for inclusion of transgender girls and women in

women's sports.

These organizations rightly recognize that transgender

girls and women participate in sports for the same reasons as

their peers who are not transgender: to be part of a team,

learn sportsmanship, and challenge themselves. The experience

of 12-year-old Becky PepperJackson from West Virginia is

reflective of so many other transgender youth across the

country. These are Becky's own words:

A long time before I or my parents understood what the word

``transgender'' meant--as far back as I can remember--I knew

that I am a girl. I'm 12 years old and in the 7th grade now,

and I'm lucky that my friends at school all accept me for who

I am: a girl who loves math and science, anything pink, and

playing video games with my friends. And I'm a runner. Most

of my family runs. I run with my two big brothers and my mom,

and sometimes my aunt joins us too.

After I ran with my school's cross-country team in the

spring of 2022, my coach encouraged me to try out for some of

the field events. I made the team for shotput and discus, and

I love both. It was so much fun to cheer on my teammates at

the meets, and they would cheer me on when I competed in my

events. I kept up with cross-country too. The past two years

on my middle school's girls' cross-country and track-and-

field teams have been the best of my life. My teammates and I

have the best time during practices and at cross-country and

track-

and-field meets. They support me even when I am not the

fastest or best on the team. I don't want to stop doing the

thing that I love and that is part of who I am. Sports are

everything to me and my cross-country and track-and-field

teams have become my second family over the last two years. I

have many more years of cross-country and track-and-field

left, and I just want the opportunity to participate in

school sports like any other girl.

H.R. 734 does nothing to address the real barriers facing

female student athletes. Instead, it targets a small, already

vulnerable group of people for further discrimination. The

ACLU strongly urges all Members to vote NO on H.R. 734.

Sincerely,

Christopher Anders,

Federal Policy Director.

Ian S. Thompson,

Senior Legislative Advocate.

Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Ms. Clark), the Democratic whip.

Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 10 seconds to the gentlewoman from Massachusetts.

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

Mr. Chair, I include in the Record a statement by the National Parents Union in opposition to H.R. 734.

National Parents Union.

H.R. 734 bullies kids instead of teaching them to read.

It's time to get focused on what matters to American

families.

The National Parents Union continues to be frustrated with

the lack of focus from House and Education Workforce

Committee Leadership on issues that matter to American

Families. Families across the country want Congress to focus

on ensuring that every child is prepared for their future--

not bullying kids who want to play sports among their peers.

32 percent of our country's 4th graders were proficient

readers according to the National Assessment of Educational

Progress. That means that 7 out of 10 of our current 5th

graders cannot fully engage in their learning because they

cannot read the content.

Our latest national parent poll clearly states parent

priorities and nowhere to be found is anything about members

of their kids sports teams.

90 percent Believe students should have access to high-

quality, well rounded education with resources to support

their individual needs.

90 percent Believe that students should be prepared for

college and/or careers when they graduate.

90 percent Believe students should be protected from any

form of discrimination at school.

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott), the ranking member of the full Committee on Education and the Workforce.

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Vermont (Ms. Balint).

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

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

Mr. Chair, fundamentally, the difference between the two sides is that my friends on the other side of the aisle do not recognize trans people as human beings. They do not even recognize the validity of trans. That is a terrible error, and it is wrong, and it does not grant trans people humanity.

A subsequent corollary to this stance is that they don't believe that trans people are who they are, that somehow it is a choice. I am going to tell you: This debate itself has been traumatizing.

I can remember when I was a teenager when debate in California was occurring over the Briggs Initiative, which would have banned LGBT teachers from teaching. One Republican Governor, Ronald Reagan, at the last minute opposed the initiative, and to me that meant a lot. It means a lot to me that Spencer Cox of Utah recognizes that trans kids exist and that we

should protect them. This bill is horrible. All should stand opposed to it.

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

Mr. Chairman, I include in the Record a Statement of Administration Policy from the administration.

Statement of Administration Policy

h.r. 734--protection of women and girls in sports act of 2023--rep.

steube, R-fl, and 93 cosponsors

The Administration strongly opposes House passage of H.R.

734.

For students nationwide, participating in sports and being

part of a team is an important part of growing up, staying

engaged in school, and learning leadership and life skills.

H.R. 734 would deny access to sports for many families by

establishing an absolute ban on transgender students--even

those as young as elementary schoolers--playing on a team

consistent with their gender identity. Schools, coaches, and

athletic associations around the country are already working

with families to develop participation rules that are fair

and that take into account particular sports, grade levels,

and levels of competition. As a national ban that does not

account for competitiveness or grade level, H.R. 734 targets

people for who they are and therefore is discriminatory.

Politicians should not dictate a one-size-fits-all

requirement that forces coaches to remove kids from their

teams. At a time when transgender youth already face a

nationwide mental health crisis, with half of transgender

youth in a recent survey saying they have seriously

considered suicide, a national law that further stigmatizes

these children is completely unnecessary, hurts families and

students, and would only put students at greater risk.

Discrimination has no place in our nation's schools or on our

playing fields.

Instead of addressing the pressing issues that families and

students face today--such as raising teacher pay, keeping

guns out of schools, addressing the mental health crisis our

youth face, and helping students learn and recover

academically from unprecedented disruptions--Congressional

Republicans have instead chosen to prioritize policies that

discriminate against children.

If the President were presented with H.R. 734, he would

veto it.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in strong opposition to the politics over parents act as a member of the Education and the Workforce Committee, as a member of the LGBTQ community, but above all, as a teacher.

I am an educator and I know how important parental involvement is. All parents, including the parents of LGBTQ kids, have rights. They have rights to send their children to schools where they will be affirmed, protected, and free from harassment, and given the opportunity to thrive. They have a right to be free from bullying and humiliation.

Mr. Chair, I include in the Record a letter from a million MomsRising.

[Mar. 21, 2023]

So-Called `Parents Bill of Rights' Is All Wrong for America's Moms, Families--A Toxic Plan That Will Create More Division, Damage to Our

Kids and Communities

Statement of Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner, Executive Director

and CEO of MomsRising, the online and on-the-ground

organization of more than one million mothers and their

families, on the so-called `Parents Bill of Rights' (H.R. 5)

House Republicans are poised to pass this week:

``The badly misnamed `Parents Bill of Rights' the House GOP

plans to vote on this week is all wrong for America's moms,

kids, families, and educators. It is a recipe for censorship,

bullying and book bans, and for division based on race,

sexual orientation, and gender identity, masquerading as a

bill of rights. If it were to become law, the Parents Bill of

Rights would create more division by pitting educators

against parents. It would do enormous damage to our kids,

schools and communities.

``America's moms want schools to be safe and inclusive and

to value diversity; for parents to be respectful; and for

educators to be able to be honest about their identities and

allowed to teach our country's truths, good and bad, and the

values that got us to where we are today. We want our

children to learn about the history and obstacles faced, and

overcome, by members of our Black, Brown, AAPI, Native

American, immigrant, religious-minority, LGBTQ+, and other

communities. We want our students to be able to access

unbiased health information. We want all our youth,

regardless of income, disability, race, ethnicity, religion,

sexual orientation, and gender identity, to be safe and

included in schools that prepare them to contribute to and

succeed in our society.

``And we want a society that rejects `us vs. them' and puts

in place the caregiving and other supports that will allow

all families to succeed. MomsRising has more than a million

members and we have been working closely with moms in every

state for more than a decade. What this country's moms want

from Congress is affordable child, elder and disability care;

paid family and medical leave; fair pay; health care and

medications we can afford; vastly improved maternal health

care for all of us; the ability to make our own decisions

about if, when and how many children to have; and laws that

will end the scourge of gun violence and keep our children,

streets, schools and communities safe.

``Coming soon, we will release the Moms Rising for Freedom

Agenda with ten key policies lawmakers should support that

moms across the Nation really want, instead of the divisive

and harmful policies in the `Parents Bill of Rights.' That is

how we build a society in which we can all flourish and

thrive.''

In committee, my Republican colleagues have preached about parents' God-given rights. I will tell you now that children have a God-given right not to be physically or emotionally harmed.

As a teacher, I know of instances where children were outed by staff, and as a consequence those children faced severe punishment at home. One student was viciously beaten by his father and transferred out of a district after his family was informed that he was caught being physically affectionate with another boy.

Imagine the situation in which educators are placed when government requires them to out their student to an unsupportive family. I will tell you what happens to those kids:

73 percent of LGBTQ youth report anxiety.

58 percent of them report depression.

40 percent of homeless youth are LGBTQ, and

46 percent, nearly half of them, have seriously considered suicide.

Good teachers care about their kids. Good teachers know that a relationship with parents is important. But when a home is not safe for LGBTQ kids, school becomes their safe place, and teachers need to be their cheerleaders, not their first bullies.

This bill forces good teachers to do bad things. It alienates students from their parents. It outs kids. It forces kids back into the closet. It is a fundamental invasion of privacy that puts children in danger.

In the first 3 months that this Congress has been in session, this is what

Republicans have chosen to spend our time and taxpayer dollars on. The so-called Parents Bill of Rights Act is the exact type of Big Government overreach my colleagues across the aisle proclaim they are against, and puts the cost of their pursuit of political gain on the backs of students and teachers.

This is worse than simply bad legislation. It is a concerted attack on children, parents, and teachers.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the bill.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to thank a member of my staff on the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs for his invaluable service to our Nation's veterans, this Congress, and our country.

Daniel Santa Cruz joined our committee in 2020 as our digital director. From the outset, he demonstrated an outstanding technical ability and tremendous creative vision. He proved instrumental in helping the committee meet the new digital demands of the COVID-19 pandemic; developed, produced, and directed thousands of hours of compelling video content; created graphical representations of our work for social media platforms; and captured powerful images of committee members hard at work for America's veterans across the world and in our Nation's Capital.

His charm, humor, and generosity have been infectious, and his commitment to the work of this committee has been incredibly impactful.

The work of my committee, this Congress, and our government to honor and support our veterans was made better by Daniel's service, and he will be deeply missed.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 502, as amended, legislation to ensure veterans can recoup the money they paid into the Montgomery GI Bill.

Under current law, veterans who do not fully access their Montgomery GI Bill can lose out on the payments they made into the program, in some cases totaling up to $1,200.

The Montgomery GI Bill is in the process of being phased out for the more generous Forever GI Bill. Many veterans may not remember the $1,200 they paid into the program in their early days of service or even be aware that they are entitled to a refund of the unused funds. The process to reclaim that $1,200 can be difficult, and there are times when the veteran can simply lose out on the money because they waited too long.

This legislation eliminates that cumbersome process by making it so that the veteran is repaid, no questions asked.

The bill is fully offset, and it is supported by the veterans service organizations community, including by Student Veterans of America.

I thank Representative Banks for his work on this legislation and the VSO community for bringing this issue to our committee. We were able to pass this legislation under the House last fall, but unfortunately, the Senate was unable to consider it. That is why I am thankful we can consider this bill early in 2023, giving our colleagues in the Senate plenty of time to complete it. No disrespect to the Senate, Mr. Speaker.

I urge the rest of my colleagues to support this legislation to ensure no veteran loses out on what is owed to them, and I certainly hope that Members of the House who aspire to be Senators will remember what it is like to be a House Member and make sure this never happens again.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all of my colleagues to join me to pass H.R. 502, as amended, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 753, as amended, the VA COST SAVINGS Enhancements Act. This bill will require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to develop an analytical model to compare the costs of off-site versus on-site regulated medical waste treatment.

The VA will further be required to install on-site regulated medical waste treatment systems at VA facilities that would realize cost savings within a 5-year period.

Regulated medical waste is any type of waste generated by healthcare facilities that may be contaminated by blood, bodily fluids, or other potentially infectious materials. There are Federal and State requirements governing how it must be handled and how it may be transported given the infection transmission risks it poses.

On-site regulated medical waste sterilization systems would enable VA medical facilities to treat and compact this waste before it is transported off-site for disposal. There are potential cost savings associated with being able to sterilize and compact medical waste before it is taken off-site.

Trucking costs are higher for untreated medical waste because of all the precautions that must be taken to comply with applicable State and Federal regulations when transporting it, and because it takes more trucks to move the waste if it is not compacted first.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 753, as amended, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 815, the RELIEVE Act, as amended, which is sponsored by Representative McMorris Rodgers and cosponsored by our committee members, Representatives Pappas and Bergman.

It will address a gap for a small population of veterans who first enrolled in VA healthcare within the last 60 days to be covered for emergency care in the community, even if they have not received any services from a VA provider.

Existing VA authorities for coverage of emergency care in the community are extremely complex. They are also not well understood by veterans, who often end up blindsided by massive medical bills that they can't afford.

Under current law, VA can only cover emergency care in the community for a nonservice-connected condition if the veteran was enrolled in VA healthcare and had used VA care within the 24 months before the emergency care episode.

This bill would make an exception for veterans who first enrolled in VA healthcare within 60 days before their emergency care episode. Such veterans may not have had a reason to use VA care yet or they may have experienced a wait time for a routine appointment.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 815, as amended, which will help ensure veterans who are new to VA healthcare will be covered for unexpected medical emergencies.

I also highlight a new meaningful benefit for veterans who are experiencing acute suicidal crises. It is important for veterans and their families and caregivers to know that VA has now implemented legislation I championed to remove cost from the equation when veterans are in imminent risk of self-harm.

VA will now fully cover up to 30 days of inpatient or residential care or up to 90 days of outpatient care for veterans who are experiencing an acute suicidal crisis, regardless of whether the veteran has ever enrolled in or used VA healthcare benefits. Any veteran experiencing a mental health crisis should call 988 and press 1 to speak with a trained professional from the Veterans Crisis Line.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Pappas), the ranking

member of the Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers. In closing, let me just say, it was a delight to join my colleague from Michigan at the Joni Mitchell concert and stand up and participate in ``Big Yellow Taxi,'' which is his favorite song.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1226, as amended, the Wounded Warrior Access Act introduced by my good friend, neighbor, and chair of the House Democratic Caucus, Representative Pete Aguilar.

This bill would require VA to establish and maintain a secure internet-based portal to establish a claimant or their representative to make records requests related to VA claims and benefits.

Additionally, this bill contains a provision requiring VA to warn claimants about benefit scammers, provide a way to report potentially fraudulent activity, and provide a tool for claimants to search for accredited representation.

Currently, to make records requests related to VA claims and benefits, veterans or designated representatives must submit a Freedom of Information Act, otherwise known as a FOIA, or Privacy Act request.

Submitting this form, followed by waiting for it to upload into an individual's electronic claims file, and then awaiting action on the request can be time consuming and can negatively impact a claimant's ability to understand what records VA is evaluating and what information could better assist in a claim's positive adjudication.

Establishing and maintaining a secure, internet-based portal to enable a claimant or their representative to make records requests related to VA claims and benefits would modernize this essential process and assist in more timely, positive claim outcomes.

This bill would also add another tool in the toolbox for veterans when navigating the complexities of the claims process and will help veterans gain a little more autonomy over their claim.

It is my hope that my colleagues will join me in supporting this legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Aguilar), my good friend who serves on the House Appropriations Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I again ask all my colleagues to join me in passing H.R. 1226, as amended, the Wounded Warrior Access Act, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in fervent defense of a great friend and loyal colleague, Congresswoman Judy Chu, in light of recent attacks against her character. I consider Congresswoman Chu to be a fearless advocate for her community, a loyal Member of the United States House of Representatives, and a close personal friend.

The disgraceful remarks made by a fellow Member of Congress towards Congresswoman Chu challenging her ``loyalty and competence'' exemplify the extremes Republicans will go to discredit the credibility of those they disagree with. To insinuate Congresswoman Chu is disloyal to her country is baseless and a blatantly racist attempt to vilify a faithful public servant. Congresswoman Chu's heritage as a proud Chinese American woman is a strength for this legislative body, rather than a danger. It is a somber reminder of the relentless scrutiny individuals of Chinese descent face on a daily basis. The unfortunate reality is these types of attacks on Chinese Americans are not atypical, as grotesque stereotypes perpetuate that Asian Americans are always foreign.

The Republican Conference must hold all of their members accountable and must condemn all xenophobic attacks of all forms. Words matter--and can bring about significant harm to communities of all types. Our country has lived through the impacts of targeting Americans based solely on their country of origin. We must avoid the mistakes of our past and denounce bigotry and racism as it occurs, not channel it into hatred and baseless attacks against our fellow Americans.

Mr. Speaker, this resolution is not about socialism. It is about political cynicism.

No one in this Chamber would defend the atrocities committed by murderous Communist ideologues such as Mao Zedong or Fidel Castro, but that is not what this resolution is about. This resolution is about conflating some of our most cherished social safety net programs with so-called socialism.

With this resolution, Republicans demonize Social Security, on which more than 46 million retirees rely today. Republicans demonize Medicare, which has saved the lives of countless Americans. Republicans demonize many other Federal programs, including benefits offered to our Nation's veterans.

Harry Truman was right when he said that: ``Socialism is a scare word that [Republicans] have hurled at every advance the people have made in the last 20 years.''

Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to oppose this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Ranking Member McGovern for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I had hoped to rise today to offer an amendment which was a clarifying amendment, which would have clarified what the resolution before us today meant by the words ``socialist'' and ``socialism.''

None of us have any objection to, in fact, embrace the whereas clauses that we condemn egregious examples of totalitarian authoritarianism and the excesses thereof. But we are very concerned about what the resolved clause means and the way ``socialism'' is defined. There are many ways to look at socialism.

My amendment simply was to clarify that the implementation of any opposition of socialist policy in the United States does not include Federal programs such as Medicare, Social Security, TRICARE, VA Healthcare, the VA Loan program, VA burial benefits, and VA homelessness programs.

But you know what? Unfortunately, the Committee on Rules last night blocked my amendment. The rejection of my amendment sends a clear message to the American people under this Republican majority.

Social Security and Medicare and veterans benefits are not safe because they construe those to be socialist programs.

This resolution being considered today is really ridiculous. It dishonestly conflates any effort to improve the lives of Americans with the violence of totalitarian Communist regimes. Without my amendment, it could only be read as an attack on Social Security, Medicare, and veterans' benefits.

The programs my amendment specifies helps veterans receive healthcare, aid struggling families who have fallen on hard times, and support millions of Americans by ensuring they receive the benefits they have spent their life working and paying for.

Medicare, Social Security, TRICARE, VA Healthcare, the VA Home Loan program, VA burial benefits, and efforts to end veteran homelessness are programs every Member of this body should be proud to support. But instead, my colleagues on the other side have spent years attempting to undermine and dismantle them, and they are doing it again with this so- called resolution. This so-called anti-socialism resolution is simply the latest volley in an assault that goes back decades.

Despite these attacks, the programs my amendment defends are overwhelmingly supported by the American people. Americans know that these policies work. They are practical. They are beyond ideology. They are simply common sense. The people want us to join together to bolster and expand them, not to denigrate and defund them and play stupid games to distract and propose red herring amendments such as this to get us off the track of working for the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Ranking Member Pallone for yielding time.

I rise today in opposition to H.R. 382, the Pandemic is Over Act. This is an effort by our Republican colleagues to hastily terminate a public health emergency designation that will have damaging effects on our Nation's veterans and those who care for them.

Currently, this emergency designation grants our government a number of critical flexibilities that not only allow it to work more efficiently and effectively but that are essential to support America's veteran population.

When we passed the CARES Act in 2020, we did so carefully and thoughtfully to ensure that veterans would be able to safely and quickly access the care they needed throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. We also ensured the Department of Veterans Affairs and its employees had the tools and flexibilities they needed to meet their mission.

I am especially concerned by the risk that would be caused by hastily terminating healthcare providers' ability to prescribe controlled substances via telehealth. This will severely impact millions of patients' access to medications they need to manage chronic pain, complex mental health conditions, and substance abuse disorders.

Veterans who experience these conditions at greater rates than their nonveteran counterparts are among those who would be severely affected.

VA estimates at least 47,000 veterans have active controlled substance prescriptions from prescribers they have never seen in person. A sudden termination of the public health emergency would mean all of them would need immediate in-person visits with their prescribers in order to continue their treatments.

An additional 247,000 veterans have active controlled substances prescriptions through virtual care at VA, and many of these veterans' continued access to medications could also be at risk.

During the public health emergency, we also specifically addressed the unique health and safety needs facing homeless veterans. Those actions included ensuring that veterans experiencing homelessness had access to basic needs, like shelter, food, clothing, and transportation, while also ensuring service providers had the funding they needed to maintain social distancing and distribute those in need across multiple facilities to reduce the spread of COVID-19.

What we learned from the pandemic is that providing these foundational basic needs to homeless veterans and service providers works in promoting housing security.

Last week, VA announced it housed over 40,000 veterans experiencing homelessness in 2022, surpassing its goal of housing 38,000 veterans. That tremendous accomplishment can be directly attributed to the authorities Congress put in place during the pandemic.

Rolling back those flexibilities now would mean more veterans would go without the resources they need to survive.

If my Republican colleagues are so insistent on ending the public health emergency prematurely, I hope they are equally insistent on ensuring that we quickly make permanent those pandemic authorities that veterans need.

I am proud to support Congresswoman Nikema Williams' bill, H.R. 491, the Return Home to Housing Act, and cosponsor Congresswoman Cherfilus- McCormick's bill, the Healthy Foundations for Homeless Veterans Act.

These bills will ensure that there is no lapse in the care and resources homeless veterans need when the public health emergency designation ends, and I hope my Republican colleagues will support them.

The Biden administration announced last night it intends to extend the COVID-19 emergency declarations to end on May 11. Unlike my colleagues on the other side who want to irresponsibly put an end to the national emergency today, the additional time gives the agencies and Congress time to ensure there is no disruption in care and services for veterans.

My Republican colleagues have a choice to make. They can continue to insist on pushing an agenda that politicizes the pandemic, terminate the public health emergency designation prematurely, and wholly disregard the disastrous impact such an action would have on veterans, or they can put aside this shortsighted approach and use their newfound control of Congress to actually do the job they were sent to Washington to do: pass legislation that helps our Nation's veterans.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 382.