Floor Statements

Yes, indeed, the taxpayers are waiting for relief at the pump, but this bill is not it. I rise in opposition to this rule and to

Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 310, had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''

Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 312, had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Markey

Mr. Speaker, I would like to share the story of 130 young men from Hawaii, who were asked by the U.S. Federal Government to occupy a trio of deserted islands in the remote Pacific Ocean from 1935 to 1942.

These young men were asked to live on the islands of Howland, Baker, and Jarvis for three-month shifts of four-men per island. The men earned $3 a day, a good wage during the Great Depression.

The majority of the colonists were Native Hawaiians because the government planners felt that the colonizing task was so daunting that only young Hawaiians would be able to survive. Kamehameha Schools, a school for Native Hawaiian children, was asked to recruit recent male graduates who could swim, fish, and handle a boat. Collectively, the group came to be known as the Hui Panalaau (group of colonizers).

The islands of Howland, Baker, and Jarvis are about halfway between Hawaii and Australia. The colonists traveled by boat and it typically took five days to reach Jarvis and another three to reach Howland and Baker.

The Hui Panalaau were supplied only with canned goods, water, and a few tents. The colonists were asked to keep logbooks about the weather and to gather natural specimens. Their lives on the islands meant enduring rats, beetles, sharks, and the blazing sun.

Why were the Hui Panalaau recruited by the United States to live on these islands? The U.S. Department of Defense considered these islands to be of strategic importance. After the first year of colonization, the United States claimed territorial jurisdiction of the islands and air supremacy. So while the public mission of the colonists was to take weather readings for potential commercial flight routes, the colonist program also served secret military objectives.

In 1941, as World War II intensified, Japanese planes attacked Howland Island likely because of the landing field the colonists were directed to construct. Two colonists, Richard ``Dickey'' Kanani Whaley and Joseph Kealoha Keliihananui lost their lives during the attack. Their deaths ended the Hui Panalaau program.

Bishop Museum, the Hawaii State museum for natural and cultural history, developed a documentary on the story of the Hui Panalaau, entitled, Under a Jarvis Moon. The film combines historical interviews of the colonists, still photographs, government documents, and newsreel footage. The film is titled after a song co-written by one of the four surviving colonists, George Kahanu, Sr. The film was directed by Heather Giugni and Noelle Kahanu, the granddaughter of George.

Under a Jarvis Moon premiered at the 2011 Hawaii International Film Festival and was nominated for the Halekulani Golden Orchid Award. On March 12, 2011, the U.S. Department of the Interior will be hosting a screening of the film and I encourage my colleagues to see it and hear the story of the Hui Panalaau from the men who lived it.

Mahalo nui loa (thank you very much).

I thank the gentlewoman from New York.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the rule and in opposition to H.R. 3, a bill that threatens women's health and access to care. Over the past 2 weeks, as I traveled in my district, the top- of-mind issues were the economy and jobs. Now that we're back in D.C., instead of working together on bills that move our economy forward, we're asked to debate divisive social policy. Clearly, the priorities of the Republican majority do not match those of the people of Hawaii.

There are those who will say that H.R. 3 maintains the status quo. Not so. H.R. 3 is an extreme, radical measure that could deny tax credits for small businesses, take us back to the days when a woman had to prove that she was a victim of rape, and violate women's medical privacy rights. Do you think small business owners have the time and needed expertise to determine if their insurance plans cover abortions? Do you want to take our country back to the days when a woman had to prove that she resisted her rapist? Do you want to share your medical history with an IRS audit?

I was a member of the State legislature in the 1980s in Hawaii when I worked with women and victim advocacy groups to change our sexual assault laws so that the prosecution focused on the perpetrator of the rape rather than on the actions of the victim. Our court system in those days, because of our law, victimized the victims of rape. Hawaii changed its laws. This bill takes us back to those days when a woman had to show that she resisted.

Hawaii was also the first State in the Nation to decriminalize abortion and give a woman the right to choose. The person who carried this bill in the legislature was Senator Vince Yano, a devout Catholic. Governor Jack Burns, a devout Catholic--he went to mass every single day--he allowed this bill to become law in Hawaii, in spite of the fact that he had a lot of pressure as a Catholic to veto this bill. He could have done so. He respected the right of a woman to choose.

I urge my colleagues to join me in voting against this rule and this bill.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to introduce the Asthma Management Plans in School Act.

Asthma is the most common childhood disease in the United States, affecting 7.1 million children.

Every year, children lose more than 13 million school days due to asthma, and their parents must skip work to take care of them.

Hawaii has a higher rate of childhood asthma than any other state. According to the latest data from the Centers for Disease Control, 18.6% of children in Hawaii have had asthma at some point in their life. This is much higher than the national rate of 13.3%. Along with common allergens and irritants, Hawaii's volcanic fog, or ``vog,'' is a common trigger for asthma attacks, due to the continuous eruption of Kilauea volcano on Hawaii Island.

In Kona on Hawaii Island, 13.8% of people with asthma have needed to go to the emergency room for treatment. In the Nanakuli/Waianae area on Oahu, 10.4% went to the emergency room. Asthma costs Hawaii an estimated $18.2 million each year in direct medical costs alone.

Although asthma cannot be cured, it can be controlled with education and the right medicine.

The Asthma Management Plans in School Act will help children who suffer from an asthma attack while in school. My bill will provide grants to schools or local public health agencies in high-asthma areas to develop asthma management plans.

Grantees will be able to purchase emergency asthma medication and devices including inhalers, nebulizers, spacers, valved holding chambers (VHCs), and epinephrine to stop anaphylactic shock. School staff will learn about the disease and gain tools to help children if they have an asthma attack at school.

This bill has been endorsed by the Allergy & Asthma Network Mothers of Asthmatics (AANMA), the leading nonprofit organization dedicated to eliminating suffering and death due to asthma, allergies, and related conditions.

I am proud to work with the Hawaii Department of Health Asthma Control Program and the Hawaii Asthma Initiative.

I also thank my colleague Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter for her work on this legislation in the previous congress.

I urge my colleagues to support the bill.

Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to H. Con. Res. 34, the FY 2012 Budget Resolution. Instead of having the wealthiest pay their fair share, this budget just helps the ``haves'' at the expense of everyone else.

The Republican majority has brought this bill to the floor for a vote today, claiming that this budget will resolve our fiscal crisis and lead our country back on the ``path to prosperity.'' Sadly, this path to prosperity only applies to those who already have a lot and don't need more. Millionaires and billionaires will like the tax breaks that they'll get from this budget. The wealthiest Americans will get the Bush tax cuts permanently extended to the tune of $1 trillion. Big Oil companies will get tens of billions of dollars in subsidies. Special interests that send jobs overseas will also like this budget's tax giveaways.

What should scare us most about this FY2012 budget is that it pays for all of these tax breaks--over $4 trillion in tax cuts--on the backs of working and middle-class people. It asks those who are struggling the most to sacrifice even more.

The recession has increased the child poverty rate in Hawaii to its highest level in years. This reverse Robin Hood budget would drastically cut food programs for poor children, Head Start, and child care for working families. Today, my staff and I are fasting in solidarity with the 50 million people in America who don't know where their next meal is coming from. HungerFast.org is coordinating this effort with over 30,000 people, including Members of Congress, Ambassador Tony Hall, faith leaders, MoveOn and SEIU members, Moby, and others.

H. Con. Res. 34 ends Medicare as we know it. All of you under the age of 55 will not be able to enroll in the original Medicare program. In Hawaii, the under-55 population is slightly less than a million. When you are age 67--yes, that's right, Republicans are raising the Medicare enrollment age by two more years--you will receive a voucher that you will use to buy insurance from a private company. We don't know what the amount of the voucher will be or whether it will keep up with the rising costs of health care. This scheme privatizes Medicare.

You're 67 years old. Is trying to buy health insurance with your voucher what you want to be doing? Every year? And who knows if the doctor you like is even going to participate in your private insurance plan. One thing is for certain--privatizing Medicare will mean more business for the insurance companies.

The Republican plan doesn't take on the 48 million Americans already on Medicare or those that will enter the program in 10 years because the Republicans know that this voucher plan would make these seniors mad as hell. Many of you have parents on Medicare. My mom is on Medicare. Without Medicare, we would be worried sick about how our parents will pay for health care.

Before Medicare became law in 1965, half of all seniors had no health insurance. The Republican budget is not only out of step with the priorities of the nation, but it is also a step backwards when it comes to health care for those who need it the most.

This budget also takes away important health care reform benefits for seniors who are already on Medicare. It repeals the gradual elimination of the Medicare ``donut hole'' in prescription drug coverage. It also repeals free access to key preventive services and annual checkups. Over 48 million seniors with Medicare, including 208,500 in Hawaii, would have to pay more if they want to stay healthy by getting regular check-ups.

Another group most in need of medical care in our country--the poor-- would see cuts of about $771 billion from Medicaid over 10 years. Medicaid would be converted into a block grant program, which won't reflect the actual need for Medicaid services. Converting Medicaid into a fixed funding stream would raise the cost of nursing home care for millions of families, potentially reducing the quality of care. It would also impact seniors and disabled individuals who want home- or community-based support as opposed to expensive institutional care.

Seventeen governors, including our former colleague and now Governor of Hawaii Neil Abercrombie, have written to the Speaker in opposition to the Republican plan to block grant Medicaid. They know that this would place an unfair burden on the cost of health care on the states. Under the Republican plan, Hawaii alone would lose $2.8 billion in federal Medicaid dollars over 10 years. This means that 29,600 seniors could lose their Medicaid coverage or see reduced benefits due to the proposed Republican cut, resulting in 161,500 children losing their Medicaid coverage.

In addition to the problematic changes that this budget makes to Medicare and Medicaid, this short-sighted budget prevents us from investing in our workforce and growing our economy. The Republican budget cuts education and job training by more than 25 percent below current levels. Pell grants, funding for low-income elementary and secondary schools, and workforce training programs would be targeted for steep cuts. The bill also makes drastic cuts to local law enforcement and first responder programs at a time when many states, including Hawaii, are dealing with severe budget deficits.

This short-sighted budget also fails to invest in infrastructure or create jobs in the transportation sector. While I'm working with my colleagues in the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee to approve a new multi-year highway and transit program, this Republican budget withdraws about $318 billion in resources from highway, transit, and other transportation initiatives over the next 10 years. In the meantime, commuters are paying higher gas prices at the pump, seeking alternative modes of transportation, and dealing with congestion on our nation's roads, which along with our public transportation, were given a grade of ``D'' by the American Society of Civil Engineers.

The resolution offered by the Republicans further fails to make critical investments in research and development (R&D) in science, health, and renewable energy, undermining our global competitiveness in R&D. Hawaii's families pay higher energy costs than anyone else in the country. Under this bill, oil companies can continue to get subsidies while making record profits. Funding for development of renewable energy sources is slashed by 60 percent, ensuring that we will remain dependent on imported fossil fuels and sending a signal to the markets that clean energy jobs are not a priority.

Instead of supporting the draconian cuts proposed by this Republican plan, I will vote for the fairer and more balanced plans proposed as alternatives to H. Con. Res. 34. These alternatives address our deficit in a more responsible way by assisting our most vulnerable during a time of fragile economic recovery. I will support investments that will create jobs and ensure that our country remains the leader in innovation and the engine driving the global economy.

I urge my colleagues to vote against H. Con. Res. 34.

Mr. Speaker, I was saddened to learn that Abraham Breehey passed away yesterday from a brain tumor and stroke. Abe was the Director of Legislative Affairs and Special Assistant to the International President of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers. Abe also served as Chairman of the AFL-CIO Building and Construction Trades Department's Legislative Task Force.

Abe was only 34 years old.

His death is a tragedy for his family and a loss for the working men and women of America on whose behalf he was so deeply committed.

I share in sadness and reflection with Hawaii's members of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers, Locals 90 and 627.

It is always sad when we lose a labor leader, especially one so young and with such promise. I have been told that Abe was a passionate advocate for working people around the world. He was well-respected in the labor community for using his sharp intellect to build consensus across party lines.

Abe has testified in front of several U.S. Senate Committees, and he represented the Boilermakers in international negotiations on the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

My thoughts and prayers are with the entire Breehey family and the U.S. labor movement.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the people's budget.

I heard mention that our country was based on the goal of equal opportunity. Yes. But what about ``and justice for all''? That is in our Pledge of Allegiance. We pledge that on the floor of this House every single day. This budget is not justice for all.

I was visited by advocates from Hawaii, eighth graders, who support funding for the disabled, for the blind, for our seniors. They were astounded by the anti-people priorities in the Ryan budget.

A budget has to be fair. That means the multi-millionaires in our country have to pay their fair share. That means the oil industry that's making money hand over fist, getting billions of dollars, has to pay their fair share. That means the companies that ship our jobs overseas have to pay their fair share.

Then we can invest in the future. That means education, energy self- sufficiency, infrastructure. I urge my colleagues to vote for this people's budget.

Aloha.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1473, the FY2011 Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act.

American families in each and every one of our congressional districts are relying on Congress and the White House to avoid a government shutdown and agree on a budget that funds the government for the rest of the fiscal year. While this bill is far better than H.R. 1, the Republican's FY2011 continuing resolution that passed the House earlier this year, I am voting against H.R. 1473 because far too many people will be adversely impacted by the cuts it will make.

Compared with the draconian cuts proposed under H.R. 1, H.R. 1473 provides additional funding for many programs that people in Hawaii and across this country rely on for support--including Head Start, community services, and public broadcasting. H.R. 1473 also invests in our economic future by supporting Race to the Top and funding key science and energy R&D programs.

This legislation is also a better bill than H.R. 1 because it doesn't include legislative riders that defund the Affordable Care Act or prohibit funding to Planned Parenthood. I fundamentally disagree with these riders on a substantive and procedural basis. Members of Congress should have the opportunity to debate and vote on these issues separately and deliberately on their own merit rather than have them be rammed through an appropriations measure.

But H.R. 1473 falls short in many respects. Many families in Hawaii and across the country are barely scraping by and will get little help from this legislation.

What is most alarming about this compromise bill is that it asks working- and middle-class Americans to bear the brunt of the budget cuts without asking the wealthiest Americans to do the same. Where is the shared sacrifice? Where is the aloha?

This continuing resolution takes a meat axe approach by slashing funding for so many programs that I can't even name all of them here. Cuts to community health centers? Check. Cuts to workforce training programs? Check. Cuts to law enforcement grant programs? Check. What about programs for low-income college students? Those programs are cut, too.

The bill also cuts Community Development Block Grant funding by $950 million from the enacted FY2010 level despite wide bipartisan support from counties in Hawaii and across the country. CDBG supports economic development, job creation, and facility needs for the most disadvantaged. The CDBG program has given thousands of Americans a much needed hand up when times were tough--a hand they wouldn't have received without sufficient levels of funding.

In fact, just a few weeks ago, representatives from Hawaii's counties were in town. Their message was simple: preserve CDBG funding.

Not only that, but they were also keen on preserving federal programs that are helping them to upgrade their emergency communications systems to comply with federal law. Instead, this bill terminates the Interoperable Emergency Communications Grants program and cuts $45 million from the Emergency Operations Center Grants program, both run by FEMA. Not only are we reducing resources our communities need, but we are making them less able to comply with the requirements that we at the federal level are forcing them to meet.

In addition to cutting funds that our communities depend on to help people, it also cuts funding for programs that help to keep our communities healthy and safe.

For example, we're reducing allocations for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund and Drinking Water State Revolving Fund by almost $1 billion. These are two of the most important federal sources of funding for improving our wastewater and drinking water infrastructure. This cut reduces Hawaii's Clean Water State Revolving Fund by $4.4 million. Access to clean water should be one of our highest priorities, as it is one of the most basic needs of all of our people. Yet, we are making cuts to these programs, which provide federal funds that ensure clean, safe water for our communities.

Of course, these are two major federal programs. This legislation is even crueler when it comes to smaller federal programs--like the Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations program run by the Department of Agriculture, which is zeroed out in this bill. This program is one of the only federal programs available for flood prevention and watershed development programs in America's rural communities. Even though it is a relatively small program, it has a big impact in communities that receive funding--like those on the islands of Maui and Hawaii.

My colleagues may be aware that Hawaii recently received a Presidential Disaster Declaration to assist with rebuilding the communities that sustained damage in the recent tsunami. Certainly, providing assistance to communities affected by disasters should be a national priority. Unfortunately, this bill cuts Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant funding by 50 percent. Thanks to the Declaration we recently received, Hawaii's counties are eligible to apply for this funding, which can be used to help prevent damage in the event of the next natural disaster. This is the kind of forward-thinking investment in preparedness we should be prioritizing. Instead, we are cutting funding in half.

I am concerned about the economic impact that this bill will have on Hawaii and our nation. I am concerned about what it says about our priorities as a people. At the same time, I understand the pressures that President Obama and our Senate colleagues were under. America's families already have enough to worry about--they shouldn't have to be concerned that their government is going to shut down.

However, the negotiations over this important decision were hijacked--as this House has been--by an extreme, ideological minority. This faction has adopted an irresponsible ``my way or the highway'' negotiating position. They believe that because they have the majority in this chamber, that they can drown out the voices of those of us who want to work to ensure that our government works for our constituents and reflects the priorities of our communities.

I support the President and know that this is a deal he didn't want to have to make. As a member of the House, I want him to know that these extremists do not represent the full will of the American people--so I feel that it is my duty to vote against this deal.

I will continue to oppose legislation that weakens our economy when it is already fragile, increases the burden on our families when they are struggling, and fails to adequately invest in our nation's future success.

Our priority needs to be jobs. H.R. 1473 doesn't create jobs or help the middle class, which is why I must vote against this bill.

Mr. Speaker, at 12:40 a.m. on Saturday, April 9, I voted against the most recent short-term continuing resolution to keep government running for another seven days.

I was one of 42 Democrats who voted against this short-term extension, which passed 348 to 70. I voted ``no'' in protest of the irresponsible way the Republican leadership has handled these funding negotiations and to register my strong concern about what the next appropriation and budget bills will mean to the American middle class and poor.

I am on record in support of keeping government running. I voted four time during April 7th and 8th to allow a vote on a clean, straightforward short-term extension of funding at current levels to allow time for negotiation on a final deal for the balance of funding for FY2011. The Republicans would not allow this commonsense approach; instead we finally were given a chance to vote on a resolution that provided a short-term extension with another $2 billion in cuts. This time the cuts came from needed investments in transportation infrastructure and HUD Public Housing. This included cuts for airport facilities, transit programs, and rail projects. These are exactly the wrong kind of cut to make at this time, when we should be investing in infrastructure to help create jobs.

On Wednesday, April 13, we will be voting on a bill containing $39 billion in cuts to fund the balance of 2011. My priorities are to help the middle class and create jobs. I will be looking at the details on those cuts before making a final decision on how to vote on that bill.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Colorado for yielding me this time.

I rise in opposition to this rule and to the underlying legislation, H.R. 910, the Energy Tax Prevention Act. In spite of the title of this bill, it has absolutely nothing to do with limiting taxes on energy or taxes from the get-go. This bill should be called the Dirty Air Act because it turns back the clock by erasing years of advances that we have made in fighting air pollution and curbing greenhouse gas emissions.

This bill ignores the clear-cut scientific evidence: carbon pollution is endangering our health and the environment and that the need for urgent action to address climate change is indisputable.

This bill prevents the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, from acting under the Clean Air Act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions unequivocally linked to climate change. Under this bill, EPA will be prohibited from enforcing common sense, and I want to repeat that word, commonsense protections against carbon dioxide pollution and other greenhouse gases.

Since its enactment in 1970, the health benefits of the Clean Air Act have far outweighed industry's compliance costs. Toxic and health- threatening air pollutants have been reduced by 60 percent, and the world did not come to an end for corporations. In fact, during this time the economy grew by 200 percent.

This legislation guts the Clean Air Act pollution standards and repeals EPA's authority to limit health-threatening pollution. And for what? For what, to protect the profits of the big polluters; and in so doing, this bill repeals important safeguards that are needed to create American clean energy jobs, reduce energy costs, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and increase our economic competitiveness.

We cannot pass this Republican majority's anti-science, anti- innovation bill. And let's not forget one of their top goals: continuing multi-billion dollar tax breaks for the oil and gas solution.

In my book, clean air and the health of the American people trump profits for polluters every time. I urge my colleagues to vote against this rule and against this bill.

Mr. Speaker, today we are beginning to get some of Budget Chairman Ryan's proposals for so-called ``fixing'' our economy.

He doesn't propose eliminating tax breaks for the hugely profitable oil and gas industries. He doesn't consider asking multimillionaires to pay a fairer share. In fact, he wants to reduce the top corporate and individual tax rates so that middle class Americans can pay even more.

Instead, he is focused on cutting the safety net programs for our seniors and those less fortunate. He plans to turn Medicare into a voucher plan and to dramatically restrict eligibility for Medicaid.

Last week, Majority Leader Cantor clearly explained Republicans' plans for Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security when he said, ``Listen, we're going to have to come to grips with the fact that these programs cannot exist if we want America to be what we want America to be.''

It is clear whose side Chairman Ryan and Majority Leader Cantor are on. I stand with the Nation's seniors and the working people who are counting on Medicare and Social Security when they retire. When will these heartless attacks on the most vulnerable members of our communities stop? How about a little aloha?

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to introduce the Local Taxpayer Relief Act of 2011, a bill to reauthorize the Impact Aid program.

The majority of public school funding in America comes from local property taxes. However, in areas with military bases, Indian lands, national parks, federal low-rent housing, or other federal property, local school districts cannot collect needed revenue.

Without relief: taxpayers in these federally impacted areas would need to pay more in local taxes to support the same level of education as areas with no federal impact. This is patently unfair.

In 1950, Congress recognized the need to address this inequity and created Impact Aid, the original federal K-12 education law. Impact Aid helps local taxpayers by reimbursing school districts for the costs of hosting federal property and educating federally connected children. Today, Impact Aid supports over 12 million children in more than 1,300 school districts in all 50 states, DC, and U.S. territories.

In Hawaii, we have Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine bases where our brave men and women in uniform are stationed. Thousands of military- dependent children are students in Hawaii schools, but our state cannot collect local taxes from these bases. No matter what type of land you live on--and especially if your family serves our nation--all our children deserve a high-quality education.

Impact Aid is especially important now, as school districts nationwide continue to recover from the greatest recession since the Great Depression. Impact Aid funds come with few strings attached, helping districts support a wide range of vital services.

Impact Aid is currently Title 8 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, ESEA, also known as No Child Left Behind. As we work to reauthorize ESEA in the House Education and Workforce Committee this year, I am optimistic that we can improve Impact Aid in a bipartisan way.

My bill increases efficiency, eliminates subjectivity, and seeks funding equity. This bill has strong bipartisan support. The National Association of Federally Impacted Schools, NAFIS, worked tirelessly to develop this bill with the broad input of these impacted districts. The Impact Aid Coalition includes 105 Members of Congress.

The bill includes the following major improvements: maintains stability for school districts with military bases going through housing renovation and privatization; allows for an updated ``current year count'' when districts see a major influx of students due to troop deployment or other federal action; and expedites the U.S. Department of Education's payments, which currently run up to four years behind.

I thank my principal co-sponsor Congresswoman Kristi Noem of South Dakota for her partnership. I urge my colleagues to support this bill to provide relief to local taxpayers and ensure that all our children receive the education they deserve.

Mr. Speaker, before I talk about the bipartisan Local Taxpayer Relief Act, to reauthorize Impact Aid, before I go to that, I, too, would like to add my condolences to the family of John Adler.

John and I used to do yoga and tai-chi together--he much more often than I--at 6:30 in the morning. I got to know him and to really admire him for the commitment that he had to be of service. And the times that I would miss our tai-chi sessions, he would say, ``We missed you, Mazie.''

We miss you, John.

Impact Aid

Most public school funding comes from local property taxes. However, in areas with Federal property, Indian lands, or military bases, school districts cannot collect these needed revenues. Without relief, taxpayers in these federally impacted areas would need to pay more to support the same level of education as other districts.

The bipartisan bill that I am introducing today would make sure that these districts would have the kind of Federal support through Impact Aid that they need to ensure that all of our students, our children, have the kind of good education they deserve. Impact Aid supports over 12 million children in more than 1,300 school districts in every single State, D.C. and the U.S. territories.

I want to acknowledge the work of the National Association of Federally Impacted Schools, NAFIS, who worked tirelessly to bring this bill to the floor. The Impact Aid Coalition includes 105 Members of Congress.

I thank my principal cosponsor Congresswoman Kristi Noem of South Dakota for her partnership, and I urge all my colleagues to support the bill.