Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his recognition and for his distinguished service as the chair of the Ethics Committee. I call it by its official name having served there for 7 years myself.

Madam Speaker, I rise today as the Speaker of the House of Representatives, an institution that was designed by our Founders to be the people's House, a House constantly invigorated by its accountability to the people every year. It is a place where slavery was abolished; a place where we have taken our men and women into service to protect freedom and democracy throughout the world; and a place where Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and so many institutions meeting the needs of the American people were established. The list goes on and on about the distinguished nature of the House of Representatives.

Maybe 12- or 13,000 people have been elected to this body over time-- only a few hundred women--but all very distinguished, and great heroes of our country have served in this institution including President Abraham Lincoln. That was before the Chamber was the meeting ground. Statuary Hall is the place where his desk is memorialized to this day.

So, Madam Speaker, when we come to this great institution, we understand that there are 435 Members of Congress, but only one from each district. Only one of us represents the thoughts, aspirations, dreams, fears, and hopes of our constituents.

There is no bigger privilege for any one of us in the House, be it Speaker, whip, leader, any of the titles that our caucuses may bestow on us, that is as prestigious as saying that I speak for the people of my district, in my case, the district of San Francisco.

So when we come here, we have a responsibility to uphold a high standard of integrity, decency, and respect for this institution.

The Constitution charges us to be accountable to the people, and we must represent the United States House of Representatives in a spirit in which our constituents and all Americans should be very proud.

House rule XXIII provides for our Code of Official Conduct. This provision of our rules requires that we ``shall behave at all times in a manner that shall reflect creditably on the House.''

Sadly, extremely disturbing actions taken last week by a Member of Congress, threatening another Member, wildly violate this standard. These actions demand a response.

We cannot have Members joking about murdering each other or threatening the President of the United States. This is both an endangerment of our elected officials and an insult to the institution of the House of Representatives.

It is not just about us as Members of Congress. It is the danger that it represents to everyone in the country. If you are viewing this and thinking, well, when you run for Congress, you get threats and the rest. You don't expect to get them from your colleagues.

But, nonetheless, the example set in this House is one that is viewed across the country. Women across the country particularly feel vulnerable if insults of the nature that exist in this House are allowed to stand. I will speak about that in a moment.

Again, when a Member uses his or her national platform to encourage violence, tragically, people listen to those words and they may act upon them. Words spoken by elected officials weigh a ton. People hear them very differently.

As the resolution that the committee is putting forth states: ``Depictions of violence can foment actual violence and jeopardize the safety of elected officials, as witnessed in this Chamber on January 6, 2021.''

It is inconceivable that a member of our community here would wish to repeat the violence of that dark day, that deadly day.

As a woman Speaker of the House, I want to be clear. These threats specifically target a woman, a woman of color, which is part of, as the resolution states, a ``global phenomenon meant to silence women and discourage them from seeking positions of authority and participating in public life.''

Again, this is about workplace harassment and violence against women.

Yet, the Member has never apologized for his actions. ``It's a cartoon. Relax,'' he said.

Really? A cartoon? Relax?

And he wrote to supporters:

The hyperventilating and shrill accusations that this

cartoon is dangerous are laughable or intentionally

hyperbolic.

``I am entitled to speak to the people and to do so in a manner that is engaging,'' he said.

Really? Is it engaging to depict killing a colleague or anyone? It is not just about Members of Congress; anyone, threatening anyone.

Disguising death threats against a Member of Congress and the President of the United States in an animated video does not make those death threats any less real or less serious. And indeed, conveying them this way makes them potentially more dangerous by normalizing violence.

It isn't funny. And yes, you have a right to speak; and so do we have a right to react to what you are saying when you are threatening the lives of Members of Congress and the President of the United States.

It is sad that this entire House must take this step because of the refusal of the leadership of the other party. Indeed, it took 9 days before the minority leader publicly spoke out about this threat; and when he did, he merely said:

It was not the Member's intent to ever harm anyone.

Really?

And many other Members on the other side of the aisle have refused to strongly condemn these actions. One member of leadership said: ``Unfortunately, in this world we are in right now, we all get death threats, no matter what the issue is.

Death threats from our colleagues? Death threats from Members of Congress? We all get death threats?

So Members think it is okay to use their platforms to directly encourage more death threats against their own colleagues?

The resolution on the floor today is about accountability. It is about integrity in this House. And it will serve as a reminder to this Congress and to this country that the House is committed to upholding the highest standards of decorum in all that we do, as is said in rule XXIII, ``shall behave at all times in a manner that shall reflect creditably on the House.''

In our actions, we must be mindful of all who make up our congressional community, including not only Members, but also the committees, the committee staff, the institutional staff--and thank you for your service--the custodians of the Capitol, the Capitol Police, and others.

As we proceed to make progress for the people, let us be guided by our love of this institution, respect for this institution in which we serve and, again, an example that we wish to show to the world.

Again, a threat against anyone is wrong, whether you are a Member of

Congress or not. So this is just about the example, again, that is total violation by the action of the Member.

Yes, indeed, Madam Speaker, it is a sad day for the House of Representatives, but a necessary day, so that we can, again, behave at all times in a manner that shall reflect creditably on the House.

Madam Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairman, again. I thank Congresswoman Jackie Speier for her leadership in bringing this legislation forward, this resolution forward.

Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for his great leadership in bringing this important legislation to the floor, a rule of the House, to expand opportunity for so many people in our country, to protect our planet for future generations, to do so with great equity in a way that builds back better for women.

Madam Speaker, thanks to the tireless work of so many in the House Democratic Caucus, all of our Members, our chairs of the committees of jurisdiction, the members of those committees worked so hard bringing their years of experience, knowledge, and judgment on how we would go forward to fulfill the President's vision.

President Biden has a big vision for America and for our future, a vision that has equity in it so that we are building with fairness for all in our country to participate in the increased prosperity of our Nation.

We thank the President for his great leadership, the vision that he has put forth, the knowledge of all of his years in the Congress, and as Vice President, in terms of legislation, and his respect for all of our Members, paying so much attention to their concerns and, more especially, to how we can work together to meet the needs of the American people. This is build back better with women, build back better for the people.

It will be one of the most significant legislative undertakings that any of us has ever been part of. And I say that with great proprietary attitude toward the Affordable Care Act, which was transformative and historic. This is even bigger than that. In fact, it strengthens the Affordable Care Act.

So if you are talking about how we want to have immediate and enduring difference for the workers and families, creating jobs, securing middle class tax cuts, lowering costs for families, and making the wealthiest pay their fair share, all while contributing to reducing the national debt--making everyone pay their fair share.

Did I hear a laugh over there? Did I hear a laugh from those who added $2 trillion in tax cuts for the richest people in America, 83 percent of it going to the top 1 percent?

This is paid for. And more than paid for.

In terms of jobs, together with the also historic bipartisan infrastructure bill, it will create an estimated 2 million jobs each year, 20 million jobs into the next decade. And that is just immediately to this legislation, not talking about what it will generate as many more women are in the workplace. If you look at any piece of the bill, it would be extraordinary.

Madam Speaker, if we came to the floor and just talked about protecting our planet for our children, it is always about the children, the green aspects of this bill are for the children and their future. It is about creating good-paying jobs. It is about, again, a generational challenge that we have. It is about healthcare, the air our children breathe, the water they drink, an atmosphere in which they can thrive. It is about jobs--again, good-paying, green jobs, making America preeminent in the world in the new green technologies and sharing that information with other nations and underdeveloped countries, so that they can succeed as well.

It is also about security. National security experts come to us and say that we must treat this as a security issue. Years ago, when I was still on the Intelligence Committee itself--I am still ex-officio--but then in the committee, we were even seeing the need for using our technology and our knowledge in terms of protecting our country, recognizing the assault on our planet that the climate crisis would be.

And why? Because as you know, with rising sea levels, encroachment of deserts, drying up of rivers, the great rivers of Asia, all of the things that are happening, the thermal management of the planet, the list goes on and on, all of this has created, in many ways, drought, famine, floods, violent storms of record proportion.

So the experts say that the competition for habitat and resources that this causes can increase conflict. Migrations and the rest can cause conflict. We must anticipate that as a security concern, as it is already.

And then when we talk about health for the children, jobs for their families, security for our country, we also recognize that this is a moral issue for us all. If you believe, as do I, that this beautiful planet is God's creation, then we have a responsibility to be good stewards.

But even if you don't share that religious belief, we all agree that we owe it to our children--I would hope we all agree--that we owe it to our children to pass this planet on to them and future generations in a responsible way.

So even if this bill were just about that, it would be historic in its proportion and its transformative nature, and worthy of just voting for that. But it isn't about just that. We will make historic progress to universal healthcare coverage in America, strengthening the ACA to make coverage more affordable for those who buy insurance on their own. It also contains the Medicare hearing benefit, making a major difference for seniors.

As you probably know, Madam Speaker, I know you do, but there are some States that would not expand Medicaid. This is a great disadvantage to children, not only children but seniors who depend on Medicaid for long-term healthcare and the rest. In this legislation we expand not just Medicaid but the Affordable Care Act to draw those people into the plan at practically no cost to them, except their participation in an appropriate way.

Build Back Better contains historic Medicare prescription drug negotiation. For the very first time, the Secretary of Health and Human Services would have the power to negotiate lower prices for some of the most expensive medicines our seniors use.

What is in the bill is a compromise. I have, for a generation, been fighting for this important provision, for the Secretary to negotiate for lower prices, really since, on this floor, we passed Medicare part D, which was a real giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry. This now reins that in.

Under this agreement, when people go to the pharmacy, instead of paying hundreds and hundreds of dollars for their insulin, their bill will be capped at just $35 a month. Think of what the difference that makes in people's lives and how important insulin is to them.

In total, the most that any senior would be allowed to pay for their medications in Medicare part D per year is $2,000 and not one penny more. Big Pharma's outrageous price hikes above inflation will be halted, not only for seniors, but for all Americans. That is remarkable. That was one of the strong points of this agreement. There we are with healthcare.

Under the green framework, we talked about climate. Under the health, we talked about the Affordable Care Act, Medicare, et cetera, and the prescription drug benefit. Now we are talking about Build Back Better.

There is a hashtag: Care can't wait. Indeed, it can't, and help is on the way. In terms of family care, Build Back Better is the most transformative initiative in children and caregivers in generations. For decades, hardworking families have been struggling under a system that stacks the deck against them. A situation made even worse by the COVID pandemic. And that COVID pandemic sort of pulled back the veil on how hard it was for people to deal with many of these challenges.

Our legislation, the Build Back Better, builds back better because it saves most families more than half of their spending on childcare; delivers free pre-K for every 3- and 4-year-old in America. Just on those two scores, parents earning, children learning. It is possible because of childcare and the universal pre-K; giving more than 35 million families a major tax cut by extending the expanded Biden child tax credit; putting money in the pockets of families with children; expand access to high-quality home care for older Americans and Americans living with disabilities.

Madam Speaker, even some of my colleagues in this body on both sides of the aisle have frequently told me that they spend more time caring for their parents when they are sick than they did when their children were small and they were sick because their parents are older and more in need of that attention.

Well, this not only provides the high-quality care for older Americans and Americans with disabilities, it also recognizes the value of those people who are providing that care, treating them with respect and with proper pay.

Then we make a significant contribution to workforce development. If we are going to build back better, even in this bill, the bipartisan infrastructure framework, it is important to have people be trained for the jobs; and not only in construction, but in home healthcare and in other ways.

In doing so, it was very important to President Biden and to all of us, but this was a must for him in every aspect of the legislation, to advance equity and opportunity with investments in maternal care, nutrition, housing, and more. That equity is part of what is happening in the infrastructure bill and here. We must have equity. We cannot perpetuate disparities in income and living conditions and the rest, and to do so with respect for work, honoring work, and to do so in a way that has equity.

We have included permanent universal paid family and medical leave, which is a pillar of our work for families. I hope that this will stay in the bill.

We must get children learning, parents earning, as I mentioned, in a way that assures women can follow a career path as they meet their family needs. Just think of the liberation that this is, that women will be able to go to work, follow their career path, help provide for their families--maybe they are a single parent--provide for their families, all the while knowing that their children, or if it happens to be a parent, are well cared for. I am very excited about what it does in that regard.

Again, I talked about the climate, and I won't go back into it, except to say that with all that we want to do in the climate sector, we have to meet our goals. If we are going to be true to any promise to our children, grandchildren, or future generations, Build Back Better will enable us to do so by cutting greenhouse gas pollution by over a gigaton, helping meet the President's vision to cut pollution in half by 2030, and protecting our children's health. It will drive forward the clean energy economy, creating good-paying jobs and lowing families' energy costs. It will advance environmental justice, back to that equity issue, as it will educate a workforce for the future and advance housing initiatives that are resilient and green.

The Build Back Better is fully paid for and reduces the national debt. According to the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation, this legislation is fully paid for with its tax increase provisions in the bill raising $1.5 trillion over 10 years, not including the additional savings from the prescription drug pricing and the IRS tax enforcement.

Further analyses, based on CBO estimates, show that the legislation reduces the deficit by over $36 billion over the next 10 years--are you ready for this, Madam Speaker--then by at least $2 trillion over the second decade.

As it reduces the debt and grows the economy, Build Back Better will not increase inflation, according to experts. As 17 Nobel Prize-winning economists recently wrote: ``Because this agenda invests in long-term economic capacity and will enhance the ability of more Americans to participate productively in the economy, it will ease longer term inflationary pressures.''

Inflation is very important. We must pay attention to it. That is why it is so essential to pay for the legislation. But I am a pay-as-you-go person. I always want to be able to pay for and offset any new investments that we have, so this legislation is consistent with that.

President John F. Kennedy once said that to govern is to choose. To craft and pass this bill, choices had to be made. We see it is big; it is transformative; and it is historic, so it will be challenging. Different Members will have different views of how we go about prioritizing and the rest.

In this very Chamber, when people come here, I love to tell them about the history of this Chamber. This is a chamber that abolished slavery, a chamber that declared war in World War II and before. It is a historic chamber, a place that we all must treat with great respect. And we will enhance the luster of this institution if we pass this historic, transformative legislation.

No piece of legislation contains everything, and once we pass Build Back Better, more work will remain to strengthen the financial security of America's working families, to improve families' healthcare, to protect the planet, and more. But we cannot and will not miss the opportunity to build back better for women, for children, and for the people.

The Build Back Better agenda creates more jobs, secures more major tax cuts for the middle class, and lowers costs to families while making the wealthiest pay their fair share. It is not punitive; it is fair share.

It is an agenda for workers, for families, for children, for the planet, and, as I said, for women. The passage of this rule will take a strong step in achieving this goal.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the rule. I do so with, again, special congratulations and gratitude to the distinguished chair of the Rules Committee, Mr. McGovern; the distinguished chair of the Budget Committee, Mr. Yarmuth; and so many of the chairs that you have heard from here this evening: Mr. Richie Neal from Ways and Means, so important in all of this; Frank Pallone of the Energy and Commerce Committee; and Bobby Scott in terms of the Education and Labor Committee--these are three really important committees in the legislation--and housing, Maxine Waters and her contribution in that regard; Mr. Grijalva, in terms of climate issues, from the Natural Resources Committee. The list goes on and on.

It is a list that is really a gallery of heroes, of people who have brought their knowledge, their experience, their judgment, and their legislative skill to bear to get the job done for the people.

We do all of this in such a way that it has equity.

We thank the President of the United States for his extraordinary leadership, his encyclopedic knowledge of what is in the legislation because he has been working on these issues so long, affording the opportunity it will provide for families, children, dads, and moms who need to have help at home and to do so in a way that treats people with respect, respect for their work, respect for their families, and respect for their future.

Madam Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the legislation.

Madam Speaker, I thank Congressman Levin for organizing this Special Order for a very special person. It is my honor to participate. I know you were a great friend and ally of President Trumka, and he would be so proud that you are leading the way for us this evening.

Richard Trumka. That name is synonymous with workers' rights. Richard Trumka, fairness for everyone. Richard Trumka, middle class with a union label on it. Richard Trumka, fighter for the people.

As we are engaged in our negotiations now, I think of Richard every day because he always said, when you get down to the end of the negotiation, that is when you have to be the strongest. Never tire. Never tire. Always save energy for that final negotiation. Because sometimes people relax and say, well, let's just get it over with, but Richard Trumka would never adopt that attitude when he was there working for the workers.

Richard Trumka was an unsurpassed titan of the labor movement. A third-generation coal miner, Richard dedicated his life for the right to organize from his work at the United Mine Workers of America to his decades-long leadership of the AFL-CIO.

In everything he did, Richard Trumka was always thinking about the workers. What can we do to give them more certainty in their lives in terms of good pay, jobs, benefits, and working conditions?

Richard Trumka was a great patriot, and he fought always to strengthen the middle class, as I said, and lift up those who aspire to it, understanding that the middle class--again, which is the backbone of our democracy--has a union label on it.

Richard carried his values into other realms of public policy, as he recognized and respected the dignity of all people, whether speaking out against Apartheid in South Africa or fighting bigotry and racism at home. His leadership transcended any single movement.

Richard's courage in speaking truth to power made a difference for millions. And it made Richard a respected ally in Congress' mission to advance the health, financial security, and well-being of working families.

After his passing, many members immediately called for the PRO Act-- the cornerstone of Democrats' proworker agenda--to be renamed in his Honor. Doing so would be a fitting way to pay tribute to this great hero for workers. We did pass the pension bill in the rescue package and now the PRO Act.

While we remain heartbroken over Richard's passing, we take comfort in knowing that Richard's leadership gives a legacy that will inspire countless people for years and generations to come.

I know I share the same impression when we heard that he died. It was like, it can't be. He is a giant. He is so strong. It can't be, but it was.

Again, the legacy that he left is something we will always build on in his memory. May it be a comfort to his wife, Barbara, their loved ones, and the 11 million men and women of the AFL-CIO that so many mourn their loss. We are praying for them at this sad time.

Richard Trumka, we love you. We miss you. May you rest in peace.

Mr. Speaker, the book of Isaiah recounts how the prophet Isaiah began his service. In a time of darkness, the Lord asks, ``Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?''

Isaiah's response was to volunteer for service: ``Here am I; send me.''

When their nation called them to serve, so said a generation of American servicemembers, diplomats and intelligence officers: ``Here am I; send me.''

Two months ago tomorrow, thirteen of those servicemembers were killed as they helped bring nearly 130,000 Americans, allies and Afghan partners to safety.

That action was one of profound valor, selflessness and sacrifice, for which the Congress and Country are united in grief and in gratitude.

We salute and pray for: Marine Corps Staff Sgt. Darin T. Hoover (Salt Lake City, Utah); Marine Corps Sgt. Johanny [jo-HAN-nee] Rosario Pichardo (Lawrence, Massachusetts); Marine Corps Sgt. Nicole L. Gee [JEE] (Sacramento, California); Marine Corps Cpl. Hunter Lopez (Indio, California); Marine Corps Cpl. Daegan [day-gan] Page (Omaha, Nebraska); Marine Corps Cpl. Humberto A. Sanchez (Logansport, Indiana); Marine Corps Lance Cpl. David L. Espinoza (Rio Bravo, Texas); Marine Corps Lance Cpl. Jared M. Schmitz (St. Charles, Missouri); Marine Corps Lance Cpl. Rylee J. McCollum (Jackson, Wyoming); Marine Corps Lance Cpl. Dylan R. Merola (Rancho Cucamonga, California); Marine Corps Lance Cpl. Kareem M. Nikoui [neh-KOO-ee] (Norco, California); Navy Hospitalman Maxton W. Soviak (Berlin Heights, Ohio); and Army Staff Sgt. Ryan C. Knauss [kuh-nows] (Corryton, Tennessee).

Today, we honor their heroism by awarding them the Congressional Gold Medal: the highest honor that the Congress can bestow.

Their service brings great honor to our country, and their being awarded this honor brings luster to this award.

As we honor the heroism of the fallen, we salute each member of our military, intelligence and diplomatic communities who conducted this evacuation--and all who have served or are serving our country.

We pray for all fighting for our freedoms and for their families. And we pray for the people of Afghanistan and in the region.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, for his ongoing leadership to bring this important legislation to the floor, and for the work of the Rules Committee ongoing to make sure that we have the right discussion on the floor to meet the needs of the American people.

Mr. Speaker, multiple times now, the Democratic House has taken action to honor our responsibility to address the priority of the debt limit. We have done so because this is about protecting families.

The failure to lift the debt limit could result in the loss of up to 6 million jobs, the elimination of $15 trillion in household wealth, and drastic increases in the cost of car loans, mortgages, student loans, credit card bills, and other borrowing.

Our action also protects the American economy. When we say domestic economy, we are talking domestic, we are talking kitchen table when we talk about car loans, mortgages, student loans, credit card bills, et cetera, as well as jobs and trillions of dollars in household wealth.

In terms of the domestic economy at large, our action protects the economy, preventing a decline in the real GDP of up to 4 percent, a surge in the unemployment rate, as I mentioned, and what JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon called a: ``catastrophe of unbelievable proportions and damage to America for up to 100 years.''

This is also about the health of the global economy; kitchen table economy, broader domestic economy, national economy, the global economy.

The Council of Economic Advisors has stated: ``A default would send shock waves through global financial markets and would likely cause credit markets worldwide to freeze up and stock markets to plunge. Employers around the world would likely have to begin laying off workers.''

It goes on to say: ``The 2008 financial crisis had ripple effects throughout the global economy that ricocheted back to the U.S. shores, causing firms to lay off workers and cut private investment. A financial crisis driven by a default has the potential to be even worse, in addition to hitting a global economy not fully recovered from the pandemic.''

Addressing the debt limit honors our duty to the Constitution. The 14th Amendment, Section 4, states: ``The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law . . . shall not be questioned.''

My question, Mr. Speaker, to you and to our colleagues, is: What is it that they have against families, when they want to increase unemployment, decrease household wealth, and have families be charged more for car loans, credit card loans, mortgage payments, and other borrowing?

Don't you care about that?

What do you have against our own economy, where this catastrophe of unbelievable proportion could have impact for over 100 years?

Don't you care about that?

Also, the health of the global economy, which I described so clearly causing credit markets worldwide to freeze up and stock markets to plunge and employers around the world have to begin laying off workers, again, coming back to our shores.

Certainly, you have respect for the Constitution of the United States to which we take an oath to protect and defend, which states: ``The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law . . . shall not be questioned.''

Let us be clear about what this means. Addressing the debt limit is not about future spending, as some have tried to represent. This is about meeting obligations that the Government has already incurred, including from the bipartisan COVID relief legislation passed last year. Only 3 percent of the current debt that we are addressing here has been incurred during the Biden years. We are talking about the Trump debt incurred and some of it in a bipartisan way to address the COVID crisis. Not all, though. We were not complicit in the Republican tax scam to give 83 percent of benefits to the top 1 percent in our country, adding about $2 trillion that we have to cover here now.

Let us remember: This should not be controversial. The debt limit has been a longtime bipartisan issue. Congress has addressed the debt limit 78 times since 1960: 29 times with a Democratic President in the White House and 49 times under a Republican President, almost twice as many times under a Republican President.

But it has always been bipartisan. It has not always been unanimous. People have registered their concerns and their complaints. But up until now, they haven't stood in the way of passing legislation.

More recently, in 2011, each of the seven times that the debt limit was addressed, Congress did so on a bipartisan basis. This includes three times under the last administration, when Democrats cooperated in order to protect the economy from catastrophe.

I want to remind us that when President Obama was President and the Republican majority in the Congress was threatening to not lift the debt limit, just the threat of that had an impact on our credit rating. Our credit rating went down. The mere discussion of not lifting the debt limit had a negative impact on our credit rating.

Don't you care about that?

It is sad that Republican obstruction has delayed action for so long, and it is sad that they will not join us for a longer-term suspension.

The full faith and credit of the United States must never be questioned and the financial security of families must never be gambled with, as our Republican colleagues seem to be doing, even though, as Mr. Hoyer mentioned, that Mr. McConnell at one point was saying was playing Russian roulette with the economy.

Russian roulette from Moscow Mitch. Interesting.

Democrats are for the people. I urge a strong bipartisan vote for this legislation and for protecting the economic strength of America's working families.

Mr. Speaker, I commend the chairman for bringing this to the floor and ask for a unanimous vote on this important legislation.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding and for her extraordinary service and leadership as the chair of the Appropriations Committee. I commend her and I commend the ranking member for their leadership in bringing this bipartisan legislation to the floor. It was formulated in a bipartisan way. It was voted for in the Senate with a large bipartisan vote just earlier today, and now we will be able to pass this legislation, enroll it in a ceremony, and send it to the President of the United States.

Madam Speaker, I thank not only the chair but the chairs of the subcommittees. We call them the cardinals. They have all worked so hard to get us to this place, which will make such a difference.

Actually, Madam Speaker, it helps us honor what the Constitution is about. The Preamble said to ``establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.''

So establishing justice, justice in many broad senses of the word: helping hungry families, ensuring people have access to justice and the courts, advancing fairness in health and in the workplace.

Ensure domestic tranquility: funding Interior, keeping the commerce and economy of America running smoothly.

Providing for the common defense: paying our troops and diplomats and keeping our homeland safe.

Promoting the general welfare: educating our children, keeping workers paid, fighting the climate crisis, protecting the environment, providing relief for families suffering from natural disasters.

Securing the blessings of liberty: including by helping resettle Afghan refugees.

Madam Speaker, I thank the chair for the important language she crafted in a bipartisan way in this legislation.

What is important about it right now is that it meets the needs of people who are affected by Hurricane Ida across our country. That is why it is hard to believe, from time to time, that our colleagues cannot support something that helps the immediate needs of their constituents at home.

When disaster strikes, it is clear in our country that we are there for them. There is a social compact. Disaster strikes. We are there. And this, in record time, has come out since Hurricane Ida. And so many people affected--both in elective office and people affected by elective office who have to deliver the services--have said this is the fastest we have ever received relief.

Madam Speaker, I thank the chair and the ranking member for their tremendous leadership in honoring the vision of our Founders and meeting the needs of the American people; honor our commitment to the Afghan evacuees who have come here, and in so many other ways; and, of course, addressing the disaster assistance, Hurricane Ida and other disaster assistance that is needed.

Again, it provides secure government funding through December 3, providing an appropriate amount of time for Democrats and Republicans, House and Senate, to address appropriations priorities in the regular order process for fiscal year 2022.

Democrats are for the people, and we will fight to protect their health, the national security, and their well-being. This legislation does just that, especially in time of natural disaster, which is especially important.

Madam Speaker, I once again commend the leadership on this, and I urge a ``yes'' vote.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and thank him for his masterful leadership of the Committee on Ways and Means to address many of the health concerns and climate concerns, issues of fairness in our economy in such an important way that has been manifested in the rescue package and now in the Build Back Better legislation.

Today, we come to the floor about a very important issue of concern on the economic stability and fiscal soundness of our country.

Madam Speaker, as you recall, last week, House Democrats honored our responsibility to the American people by voting on lifting the debt ceiling and on a continuing resolution to keep government open to avoid a devastating shutdown. Not one Republican voted to lift the debt ceiling or to keep government open, even though there were very important measures to address the needs of people affected by Ida and to help us help the evacuees from Afghanistan, and other issues in there of concern to all Americans.

We all know the full faith and credit of the United States should not be questioned. This is in the Constitution. In the Fourteenth Amendment, Section 4, states: ``The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, shall . . . not be questioned.''

Madam Speaker, even by questioning it, our credit rating was brought down when the Republicans questioned it when President Obama was in office.

Let's just talk about the consequences. Our distinguished chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means talked about what it meant in people's personal lives. And that is really what we are here about, for people in their personal lives, their financial and health security.

The consequences of not lifting the debt ceiling would be catastrophic. The nonpartisan Moody's Analytics found these consequences could include a loss of 6 million jobs, the elimination of potentially $15 trillion of household wealth, sending the unemployment rate surging to 9 percent, and a decline in the real GDP of our country by 4 percent.

What that means in people's personal lives, according to the Joint Economic Committee, default on not lifting the debt ceiling could prompt a lasting downgrade in America's credit, drastically increasing the cost for car loans--families have car loans--mortgages, student loans, credit card bills, and other borrowing. I don't know if there is anyone in the country who doesn't have such a loan, certainly among America's working families.

In a larger sense, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon predicted that such a default ``could cause an immediate, literally cascading catastrophe of unbelievable proportions and damage to America for 100 years. Let me repeat that: ``could cause an immediate, literally cascading catastrophe of unbelievable proportions and damage to America for 100 years.''

As I said before, it would be catastrophic. We must act now.

Yesterday, Secretary Yellen announced that by October 18, the Treasury is set to exhaust extraordinary measures and cash on hand, leading us barreling towards a default. This has been going on since the end of July when the debt limit expired.

Addressing the debt limit is not about future spending. This is about meeting the obligations that the American government has already incurred, including when we worked together on the bipartisan COVID relief legislation last December. Only 3 percent of the current debt that we are lifting the debt ceiling to accommodate has been accrued under President Biden.

A big chunk of this, though, is attributed to at least $2 trillion in the tax scam of 2017 where the Republicans gave 83 percent of the benefits to the top 1 percent. And now we have to lift the debt ceiling to pay for that.

The debt limit has long been a bipartisan issue, and you could talk about times when Democrats and Republicans voted against it, in part. But it is very hard to find a time when they said my vote will take down the debt limit. Democrats have never done that.

Congress has addressed the debt limit 78 times, as the distinguished chairman mentioned, since 1960; 29 times with a Democrat in the White House; 49 times under a Republican President.

More recently, since 2011, each of the seven times that the debt limit was addressed, Congress did so on a bipartisan basis. This includes three times under the most recent former President when Democrats cooperated.

We did so because the full faith and credit of the United States of America cannot be questioned--the Constitution says that--and because of all of the consequences that would happen if we did not lift the debt ceiling. Republicans' refusal to support a suspension of the debt limit now is cynical, hypocritical, and downright dangerous.

As Mitch McConnell himself has said about the need to address the debt limit, this is what he said last time: ``Don't play Russian roulette with our economy.'' Yet, that is exactly what he is doing: playing Russian roulette--interesting that he is playing Russian roulette--with our economy and with the financial security and the well-being of America's working families. The kitchen table concerns: How are they going to pay the bills? Well, now the interest rate will be higher if the Republicans prevail.

That is why today, we will pass this suspension of the debt limit. Democrats are for the people and will never let the full faith and credit of the United States be questioned because we take an oath to the Constitution of the United States--and that is an oath that we always intend to uphold--and because we have a responsibility to the health and well-being of America's working families, and this would have a disastrous effect on them.

Madam Speaker, I salute the distinguished chairman once again, and I urge--and hopefully--a strong bipartisan vote on this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and, more importantly, I thank him for his tremendous leadership. His understanding of infrastructure in our country and the way to build it in a green way to honor our commitment to our children is something that is a blessing to the Congress.

For decades he has served on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and he has done so in a way that has taken us into the future.

But we haven't had a bill in a while, and so I thank him for his INVEST in America Act that he had earlier that is not all reflected here, but nonetheless hopefully we will see some provisions in the Build Back Better Act.

I rise in support of the bipartisan infrastructure bill, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which is about jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs. Support for this legislation is bipartisan, bicameral, and respectful of the needs of workers and communities across the country.

Following the vision of President Biden, the bipartisan infrastructure bill addresses a great need in America which has been neglected for decades, as I mentioned. Our roads, bridges, and water systems are crumbling. Some water systems are over 100 years old, Mr. Speaker, made of brick and wood.

Our electric grid system is vulnerable to catastrophic outages.

We must not only rebuild the infrastructure for the 21st century economy, we must rebuild the middle class, creating good-paying American jobs and turbocharging American competitiveness and growth. These are connected.

Again, I thank President Biden. He said: I am happy to work in a bipartisan way in order to have an infrastructure bill where we come to agreement, but I will not confine my vision to that piece, that legislative piece. We must build back better.

I think it is very important to note for people across the country who have seen infrastructure in the past come in and divide their communities, perpetuate injustices, environmental injustice in their communities, that it is necessary for us to build back better in a way that empowers.

When I say ``rebuild the middle class,'' it is about jobs, but it is about jobs in a new way; more inclusive for women, for people of color, for younger people to be engaged and trained with workforce training to participate in the new economy. With jobs and justice.

In the past our infrastructure bills have reinforced that environmental injustice and divided communities. The Build Back Better Act will undo that. With the passage of this bill, accompanied by the Build Back Better legislation, with its equity piece, much of that injustice, as much as possible, will be reversed.

It is about building up. It is not about trickle-down: Oh, this is what we are going to do and a lot of people will benefit and maybe you will get some of it. No. It is about meeting the needs of people, both for the water needs or transportation needs or infrastructure needs in many ways, but also that starts and then builds up.

Along with the Build Back Better Act, this prioritizes some aspects of justice and opportunity.

Let me be clear. While the investments in the bipartisan infrastructure bill are strong, historic down payments to build back better, we are not confining our vision--as the President has said, he is not confining his--for rebuilding infrastructure to this legislation.

We all know that we have to build back in a responsible way to meet our green climate initiatives, our goals, and our responsibilities in that regard.

Passing an infrastructure bill is always exciting for what it means in terms of jobs and taking our country into the future, and it has always been bipartisan over the years here. Not for a while because there was resistance when President Obama was President. We passed a bill, but it was not of the magnitude that we needed.

This is a step closer to a once-in-a-generation investment in our infrastructure, as the Conference of Mayors have said. Now we must go further to build back better.

I urge strong bipartisan support for this legislation.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and thank him for his leadership on this very important issue and to all of our colleagues in this pro-choice House Democratic Caucus. This is the first time, Madam Speaker, that we have had a pro-choice Democratic Caucus with a Democratic President, and the timing could not be better because of the assault that has been made on the constitutional rights of women in our country.

Madam Speaker, coming to the floor today, I recall an experience from when I was in high school. Now, that was a long time ago. We were in a debate, a contemporaneous debate situation, and you were to pick something out of a hat and then speak to it.

Well, a person, a friend of mine, drew the question, and it said-- now, again, ancient history, a long time ago. It said: ``Do women think?'' That was the question that she had to speak to: ``Do women think?'' It seemed horrible at the time. It seems out of the question, beyond horrible now.

Today, years later, it seems that there are some who want to debate that question because the disrespect for women and their ability to determine the size and timing of their family, and so many other things, is disrespected in the action taken by the State of Texas.

But even worse than that--because what do you expect? Worse than that was the decision of this Court, the Supreme Court of the United States, to embrace the horror of it all, in terms of the legislation and what it did to remove the sanctity of private decisionmaking from women, but also that it gave an imprimatur to vigilantism, something so outrageous, so unpatriotic, so un-American, madly embraced by this shameful Court, with total disregard for stare decisis, the precedent that the Court had already established, that Roe v. Wade was constitutional.

Today, I want to thank Judy Chu for her leadership, Congress in, Congress out, but now we have the majority and a President and a Democratic Senate. I thank her for her leadership in introducing this again and again.

In advocating the Women's Health Protection Act, we are standing on the side of women to defend their freedoms and to uphold this truth: Every woman everywhere has the constitutional right to basic reproductive healthcare, no matter what State you live in. Constitutional rights are not meted out geographically. They are for the country.

Again, I salute Congresswoman Chu, chair of the Contraception and Family Planning Task Force of the Pro-Choice Caucus, who has been introducing this bill over and over again.

Again, we have produced legislation that can become law. For years, radical restrictions on women's reproductive health freedoms have been pushed across the Nation, with 2021 on track to be the worst legislative year for women's health rights.

I come to this as a Catholic and a mother of five, in 6 years and 1 week, and with the joy that all of that meant to us but with the recognition that it was my husband and I--it was our decision. And we should not, in this body or in that Court, be making decisions for the women in America.

As of July, 90 reproductive health restrictions have been enacted, more than in any year since Roe v. Wade was enacted in 1973.

But here is the thing. It is important for the women of America to know that, as this impedes their right to make decisions, the same forces at work don't want in vitro fertilization--actually, even the State of Mississippi rejected that, their prohibition on that--and stand in the way of reproductive health and guidance, in terms of family planning, birth control, and the rest. It is important for American women to know what we are up against when it comes to intrusion into the privacy of a family's life.

You would think that since they are so averse to governance in any way, they wouldn't be so bullish about going

into people's private lives in the way that they do.

What the Supreme Court did was cowardly, a cowardly, dark-of-night decision to allow that bill to go into effect. How could it be? Because it was a decision. The Court made a decision.

But the Republicans in Congress and the then-President made a decision, in a way that was almost shameful, to make sure that so many Justices on the Court--I say shameful because the last one, which they railroaded through, while opposing the review of a Democratic President's suggestion a few years earlier, saying they didn't have enough time, a year. They had enough time, a month.

I just want to say this about Roe. In Roe, the Supreme Court held that personal liberty is protected by the Constitution, which the Court had recognized as extending to decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relations, and childrearing, and it is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.

S.B. 8 is an extreme ban on abortion for most women before they even know. Sometimes I wonder if they don't need a lesson in the birds and the bees, but, again, I just want to go to this point. S.B. 8 unleashes one of the most disturbing, unprecedented, far-reaching assaults on healthcare providers and on anyone who helps a woman in any way access an abortion by creating a vigilante bounty system that will have a chilling effect on the provisions of any healthcare services.

What is next? What is next with these vigilantes and their bounty system?

I associate myself with my colleagues' remarks on all of this because they bring so much knowledge of the Constitution, knowledge of the history since 1973 and even studying it before. Diana DeGette, one of the co-chairs of the caucus, fought this issue in the courts and won, fought it in the court of public opinion, and fought it in the Congress of the United States. She, Barbara Lee, and, of course, Judy Chu, so many of our women have taken the lead on this.

But, again, although we are about a third of our Caucus--more than a third of our Caucus are women--our male colleagues have been very strong on this as well. Therefore, we will have today a vote for women, a vote for respect for women, a vote for decency, a vote for pride in our Constitution and in our women.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee for yielding, but more importantly, for her unwavering support for this important priority. Thank you, Ms. DeLauro, for your leadership in bringing this legislation to the floor to further express the will of Congress in a bipartisan way for the security of Israel.

Iron Dome is a purely defensive system designed to safeguard all civilians living in Israel. The system was codeveloped by the United States and Israel and has saved thousands of lives.

Additional financial support for Iron Dome was part of the memorandum of understanding negotiated by President Obama in 2016. The funding being appropriated today simply continues and strengthens this support.

Passage of this bill reflects a great unity in Congress on a bipartisan and bicameral basis for Israel's security.

Assistance to Israel is vital, because Israel's security is an imperative for America's security.

Today and every day, Congress stands in support of a comprehensive, durable peace in the region, and we pray for every life lost on all sides of this conflict.

I urge a strong bipartisan vote for the security of the people of Israel and for this legislation.

Again, I commend all who have been a part of putting this together, Congresswoman Wasserman Schultz, Congressman Deutch, and so many others that I see here.

Madam Speaker, I rise to support this bipartisan National Defense Authorization Act: which honors our values, supports our servicemembers and families, strengthens our security and advances our leadership in the world.

Thank you to Chairman Smith, the Committee and staff for their patriotic, persistent leadership on this legislation, which reflects the brilliance and diversity of the whole House.

This bill honors our responsibility to meet the needs of the servicemembers who sacrifice for our freedoms, and their families. It does so by:

Providing a pay raise for our men and women in uniform,

Strengthening parental leave for caregivers,

Expanding access to child care,

Improving the financial security of military members, including those who are low-income and have family members living with disabilities,

Protecting military communities from PFAS ``forever chemicals.''

This NDAA also makes historic changes to better combat sexual assault in the military, including creating an Office of Special Victim Prosecutor within each service to prosecute crimes and criminalizing sexual harassment under the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice).

And it improves military health care, including related to mental health, women's reproductive health and suicide prevention.

In terms of protecting our security, there are many provisions of which to be proud in this NDAA. This legislation helps America combat our adversaries and invest in our alliances--with strong action to deter China and Russia, fight transnational threats and counter violent extremism.

And it brings our defense further into the 21st Century--with an historic 36 percent increase in defense-wide research & development, $2.5 billion to fix aging infrastructure & support security-related R&D, $1 billion in new cybersecurity investments, over $1 billion for artificial intelligence efforts and investments in new partnerships with the private sector and academia, including HBCUs and Minority- Serving Institutions.

This NDAA builds on Congress's bipartisan action in passing Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) legislation to provide for the relocation of our Afghan allies and partners, as it authorizes $500 million for this effort.

This bipartisan policy bill has been signed into law for 60 consecutive years. We all look forward to seeing the Congress continue this proud tradition, as we pass this NDAA on a bipartisan basis and send it to the President's desk for his signature.

Doing so allows us to honor the vision of our Founders, as set out in the Preamble, to ``provide for the common defense,'' and ``secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.''

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding, the distinguished chair of the Appropriations Committee, Congresswoman DeLauro from Connecticut. Thank you for bringing this important legislation to the floor in such a substantial way for our country in such need.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this continuing resolution, an essential step to keep government open. But it is not about government; it is about the people, meeting their needs. Congress can

continue our work for the people, whether we are talking about Social Security recipients, veterans, millions who have a need and would benefit from what we are doing, and address the health crisis in our country, and the rest, this legislation goes a long way to doing that.

In fact, it is essential that we keep government open. A government shutdown would be a very bad thing for our country, for our economic growth, and for meeting the needs of the American people, as I suggested.

This legislation secures government funding through December of this year, providing an appropriate amount of time for us to work in a bipartisan way, Democrats and Republicans, House and Senate, to address appropriations priorities in the regular order process for fiscal year 2022 while funding government and meeting the needs of people and avoiding a government shutdown, which would be catastrophic for families and the economy, and recover from the COVID pandemic and the economic crisis.

This legislation also meets other important priorities, helping American families devastated by recent natural disasters. Earlier this evening, we had a moment of silence for all those who lost their lives and for their families--it is very sad--in Hurricane Ida, throughout the country.

Then, helping resettle Afghan evacuees fleeing danger, my colleague, Congresswoman Barbara Lee, has spoken about the need to do that and how important that is. We have a commitment in this House on both sides of the aisle, and the women on both sides of the Capitol, to help the Afghan women in any way that we can.

Another item previously prioritized in the continuing resolution is the funding for the Iron Dome. I thank the chairwoman for her leadership in bringing this legislation to the floor this week to further express the will of Congress for the security of Israel manifested in funding for the Iron Dome. I thank her so much for that.

Mr. Speaker, crucially, this funding will also include the suspension of the debt limit through December 2022. Addressing the debt limit is about protecting the full faith and credit of the United States, which the Founders wrote into the Constitution in the 14th Amendment. Section 4 states: ``The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law . . . shall not be questioned.''

This is not about future spending. Some would like to give the impression we are just doing this. No, this is about paying bills already incurred, including to Social Security recipients, veterans, and millions who have benefited from the bipartisan COVID relief legislation passed last December.

As I said before, Congress is ironclad in its commitment to never letting the full faith and credit of the United States come under threat, a commitment that has long been bipartisan.

Indeed, our approach in the CR to the debt limit is modeled after legislation proposed by GOP Senators in recent years. Since 2011, each of the seven times that the debt limit has been needed to be addressed, Congress has done so on a bipartisan basis, including three times during the Trump administration when the debt, during the Trump administration, rose by $7.8 trillion. Again, much of that was incurred in terms of honoring our commitment on COVID, but a very big chunk of it in a tax scam that gave 83 percent of the benefit to the top 1 percent.

It should be noted that just 3 percent of the current debt has been accumulated under the Biden administration.

Threatening to force the United States into default would be reckless and dangerous beyond measure. The last time Republicans tried this, a number of years ago, even the thought of not honoring the full faith and credit lowered our credit rating.

The failure to address the debt limit, as Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen recently stated, would ``have absolutely catastrophic economic consequences. It would be utterly unprecedented'' and ``would precipitate a financial crisis. It would threaten the jobs and savings of Americans, and at a time when we are still recovering from the COVID epidemic.''

A study released just today found that the failure to address the debt limit would cost the U.S. economy up to 6 million jobs, wipe out potentially $15 trillion in household wealth, make borrowing rates skyrocket, and send the unemployment rate surging up to 9 percent, almost twice the level it is now. As the report states, the situation would be cataclysmic and comparable to that suffered during the financial crisis of 2008.

Indeed, this situation would be ``financial Armageddon,'' according to Mark Zandi of Moody's. It could ``cause an immediate, literally cascading catastrophe of unbelievable proportions and damage America for 100 years,'' according to JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon.

As I mentioned before, this has always been bipartisan. Not everybody on every side of the aisle has voted for it, but nobody would let it fail.

In 2019, when supporting a suspension of the debt ceiling under President Trump, Leader McConnell stated, while supporting suspension of the debt, he stated that doing so ``secures our Nation's full faith and credit and ensures that Congress will not throw this kind of unnecessary wrench into the gear of our job growth and thriving economy.''

If it was true then, why isn't it true now? Why would Senator McConnell reverse his position and decide to throw an unnecessary wrench into the gears of our job growth and thriving economy? Today the stakes remain high, and they remain the same.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to come together in the spirit of bipartisanship to protect the full faith and credit of the United States.

I also want to, again, thank the committee and the distinguished chair for the bipartisan conversations that you have had, settling some internal aspects of this legislation, some of the important provisions in it.

Remember, we cannot shut down the government. That would be catastrophic in its own right. We cannot ignore and not support the full faith and credit of the United States of America.

Right in this Constitution of the United States, the 14th Amendment, Section 4: ``The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law . . . shall not be questioned.'' The Constitution says that. Why should the Congress question that?

Mr. Speaker, I urge a strong bipartisan vote for the continuing resolution.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his distinguished role on the Committee on Rules.

Now, let us praise the Committee on Rules for the important work that they do making sure that legislation comes to the floor in a way that is consistent with the rules of the House, and in this case, a budget that is consistent with the values of our country.

I thank the gentleman from Colorado and the chairman, Jim McGovern, for his leadership as well. And to each and every member of the Committee on Rules, we have to salute them, on both sides of the aisle, for the time they put in and how they facilitate the work of the House.

Madam Speaker, today is a great day of pride for our country and for Democrats. We have a President with a big, bold vision for our country and unprecedented opportunity to keep our promises for the people. We promised ``for the people'' that we would lower healthcare costs by lowering the cost of prescription drugs; we would increase paychecks by building the infrastructure of America; and we would have cleaner government by passing legislation.

This rule does all three of those things and much more, enabling the Congress to vote on some of that legislation today; some of it in the bill, and some of it for later.

When the President spoke about the infrastructure bill which is provided for in this rule, he said to our Republican friends, I want to find our common ground on infrastructure, but I will not confine my vision to what is in the bill that we can do in a bipartisan way unless you want to help us build back better. I like to say build back better for women, because that is what this budget will do; that is in this rule.

So I salute the President, not only for his vision and his determination to get the job done, but for the priorities that will be contained here in this budget as we go forward.

The Build Back Better budget agenda is one that is liberating for families, not just women, moms and dads, with childcare, with a child tax credit, with universal pre-K, with home healthcare, with workforce development. So that not only are we building the physical infrastructure of America, we are building the human infrastructure of America to enable many more people to participate in the success of our economy and the growth of our society. It does so with equity, a 40 percent justice provision that will be in there.

Now, it remains for us to work together, work with the Senate, to write a bill that preserves the privilege of 51 votes in the Senate. So we must work together to do that in a way that passes the House and passes the Senate, and we must do so expeditiously. Expeditiously.

The authorizations for highway, et cetera, will expire September 30. By October 1, we hope to have in place, that is the plan, to have in place the legislation for infrastructure. That is bipartisan, and I salute that, but it is not inclusive of all of the values we need to build back at a time when we have a climate crisis.

So I salute our distinguished chair of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Mr. DeFazio, for the knowledge that he brings, the value system and the knowledge that he brings to looking at how we do a reconciliation bill, a build back better bill in a way that is preserving of our planet for the children. For the children.

Exciting in all of this is the fact that we will have the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. This is pretty exciting. And I commend you, Madam Speaker, for your leadership in making this possible; for you to be the author of it. But when you are the author, though, you will no longer be able to preside, you have to come down and manage us on the floor. So it is appropriate that during the rule that will enable this to come to the floor, you are presiding, so we can all congratulate you in a highly visible way.

This legislation is so important. I was very much a part of passing the previous bill, that was in 2007, we wrote it in 2006, it became effective in 2007 when President Bush was President. We had Republican majorities in the House and Senate, and we passed the legislation overwhelmingly. Over nearly 400 votes in the House, unanimous in the Senate; signed by President Bush, as bipartisan as anything that has come to the floor.

We walked down the steps of the Capitol in a bipartisan way, saluting the fact that we had extended the Voting Rights Act and President Bush signed it. And with great pride, he came to your neck of the woods, to Selma, on the 50th anniversary of the Selma march. But he came as the person who had signed the Voting Rights Act. And even more important than that, Laura Bush came, too, so their hearts are in this legislation.

I would hope that there would be some level of bipartisanship on that as well. We will talk more about that as we go into the debate on that bill in a little while.

But I do, again, want to thank Congresswoman DeLauro for her relentless, persistent, dissatisfied until now, I hope satisfied to a certain extent, more to come, of the child tax credit. For 10 Congresses she has introduced that bill, and now it is being advanced.

And Mr. Yarmuth, the chair of the Budget Committee, will lead us now as we prepare in our individual committees, our work for the Budget Committee to put together a package.

Madam Speaker, as you know, a national budget should be a statement of our national values. What is important to us as a Nation should be reflected in our budget. And this will be the case. And under the leadership of Mr. Yarmuth, who is not only values-based, but eloquent in conveying that message, we are very excited about how we go forward.

Again, I mentioned Peter DeFazio. In terms of the Voting Rights Act, the very distinguished chair of the Judiciary Committee, Mr. Nadler; and Zoe Lofgren for her work as chair on the Committee on House Administration; Mr. Butterfield, and so many people; and our distinguished whip, Mr. Clyburn, who has made this his life work.

Passing this rule paves the way for the Build Back Better plan, which will forge legislative progress unseen in 50 years that will stand for generations alongside the New Deal and the Great Society. This legislation will be the biggest and perhaps most consequential initiatives that any of us have ever undertaken in our official lives.

Everything we do is about the children. As you have heard me say when people ask me, what are the three most important issues facing the Congress? I always say the same thing: Our children, our children, our children; their health, their education, and the economic security of their families, a safe environment in which they can thrive, and a world at peace in which they can reach their fulfillment.

When children come here to the Capitol, it is such an invigoration for us and an inspiration to us to see them because we are here for them. And as I say to them, as you see the statues and the monuments to those who went before, it is appropriate that we honor them, but they want us to honor you, the future of our country, to make it better for the children.

Again, any delay in passing the rule threatens the Build Back Better plan, as well as voting rights reform, as well as the bipartisan infrastructure bill. We cannot surrender our leverage for the children. For the first time, I don't remember a time as historic as this, for the children.

President Biden has given children leverage in his visionary proposal. The children have the leverage, not those at the high end who benefitted from the Republican tax bill, and I wouldn't even have brought it up except you are

acting as if you don't even know, when you added $2 trillion, or more, to the budget to give 83 percent of the benefits to the wealthiest people in our country.

Leverage for the rich, no. We don't begrudge them their success, but this is about leverage for the children, for them, for their families for the future.

And guess what? It would be our attempt to pay for this bill so it is not a burden to those children as we go forward. And that means that some of the people that benefitted from that tax bill, that tax scam in 2017, are now going to have to pay their fair share, fair share, pay their fair share, and that we may have to address other ways to pay for the legislation by putting the responsibility on the high end, both whether it is corporate or individual, so that we can again make progress for the children without burdening them with the debt, some of which they got in 2017.

So it is a pretty exciting day. I congratulate all on the Rules Committee for going in time and again as we sought clarification on how we go forward. I thank Mr. McGovern, Mr. Neguse, and so many other members of that committee.

I thank all of our colleagues for their involvement in all of this. And I would hope that as we proceed, we could do so in the most transparent, bipartisan, and fair way for the children.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the recognition, and I acknowledge his tremendous leadership over time, including right now on the issue of voting rights in our country. I thank him for bringing this important legislation to the floor and to do so under the name of Congresswoman Terri Sewell, the author of the bill, who has been working on this for a long time, since the assault on the legislation, on these laws by the Supreme Court.

I also thank Mr. Clyburn, a champion from the civil rights era to now, always fighting for all of this; and Zoe Lofgren, the chair of the Committee on House Administration.

We have so many people to acknowledge; Mr. Butterfield for his work in establishing the constitutional record, as well as Marcia Fudge, now Secretary Fudge, for her work. So many people worked to build a constitutional basis to make it ironclad so that the Supreme Court of the United States cannot once again do violence as it did in Shelby County v. Holder and the most recent assault on section 2.

Madam Speaker, I think my colleagues will all agree that many wonderful honors are afforded us as Members of Congress. I can think of none that is more poignant than being here today to be able to speak on this important issue named for John Lewis. It is almost a religious experience because of the sanctity of the vote, which is greatly at risk.

Our colleagues have mentioned some of the assaults on voting that have taken place to undermine what we are, a democracy. We talk about the preamble where 230 years ago our Founders gave us guidance in the words, ``we the people'' establishing a government in which the people, not a king, would shape their own destiny.

Ever since, Americans have fought to make real that promise for all citizens while enshrining in the Constitution the 13th and 15th amendments and the 19th amendment, which we are celebrating this week to expand voting rights to women and to passing landmark civil and voting rights protections, including the Voting Rights Act.

Right here in this very Chamber the Voting Rights Act was passed. President Lyndon Johnson spoke in a beautiful speech, the ``We Shall Overcome'' speech, in which he called the VRA's passage, ``The history of this country, in large measure, is the history of the expansion of that right to all of our people.''

We all know that the story of America is a story of ever-expanding freedoms, yet today, that story and those rights are under threat from a targeted, brazen, and partisan campaign to deny Americans the ballot.

This campaign is anti-democratic, it is dangerous, and it demands action.

Today, the House will pass H.R. 4, the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to combat this anti-democratic tide. This bill restores the power of the Voting Rights Act, as President Johnson said, `` . . . one of the most monumental laws in the entire history of American freedom.''

Any diminishment of the Voting Rights Act is a diminishment of our democracy. In America, the right to vote must never be compromised.

Again, I thank Representatives Sewell, Mr. Butterfield, Marcia Fudge, Jerry Nadler, Zoe Lofgren, Mr. Clyburn, and so many who made this day possible.

And let me pause to salute our beloved conscience of the Congress, the late John Lewis, whose words guide us. ``The vote is precious,'' he said. ``It is almost sacred. It is the most powerful, nonviolent tool we have in a democracy.''

The previous speaker mentioned that he had been at the christening of the USNS John Lewis. We were all together in San Diego, and we were honored that the Congressman was there with us.

As he was saying those words, I was remembering that day. We were all very excited. It was the largest contingent of Members of Congress to go to the christening of a ship--and I have been to several, so I know--and what it was reminding me of is when we had gone a couple years ago in 2019 to Ghana; John Lewis led us there. It was the 400th anniversary. You were there, Madam Speaker. Mr. Clyburn and so many others were there. We were there with John Lewis, and we went to the door of no return, which now is the door of return as they were welcoming people back.

I have on this bracelet that I got from the President of Ghana when we were there as a remembrance of that trip, and I have it on now because what John Lewis said then, and apropos of the christening of a ship, We may have all come to this country on different ships, but now we're all in the same boat. That is what John Lewis said. He said it in Ghana. He said it many times.

We are all in the same boat. We all should have the right to vote. And that should not be diminished by anyone. It is unpatriotic to undermine the ability of people who have a right to vote to have access to the polls.

As John knew, this precious pillar of our democracy is under attack from what is the worst voter suppression campaign in America since Jim Crow. Unleashed by the dangerous Shelby v. Holder in 2013 and 2021, State lawmakers have introduced over 400 suppression bills.

I am very honored today, Madam Speaker, that we have legislators from the State of Texas who are fighting the fight for voting rights for people in their State and in our country. They are patriotic Americans. And let us hear applause for those Texans who have done so much.

Much has been said about preclearance and thousands of discriminatory voting changes. But let us just say that in the Shelby decision, the dissent was written by Justice Ginsburg, and she noted in her dissent the Court's reasoning in Shelby was nonsensical. ``Throwing out preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.''

Sadly, the Court has since continued that assault on the ballot.

So H.R. 4, the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, would be a remedy to this assault and to restore the preclearance provisions.

I have said earlier today on the rule on this vote, in 2006 we all came together in a bipartisan way to pass the Voting Rights Act. Nearly 400 votes in the House, unanimous in the Senate. We came together in the center of the Capitol, marched down the Capitol steps celebrating that.

The bill was signed by President George Bush proudly. He joined us in Selma, hosted by Congresswoman Sewell. He and President Obama joined us in Selma, and he came and spoke as the President who had signed the Voting Rights Act. As I say, more importantly, Mrs. Laura Bush was there, so their hearts were in all of this. It was bipartisan. I wish it could be today.

In our work to protect the ballot, let us recall John Lewis' final message published after his passing. ``Democracy is not a state. It is an act.'' With H.R. 4, his namesake, the Congress takes this action to build a future in which we all have equitable access to the ballot and to our democracy.

In memory of our beloved John, for whom this legislation is named, and in the interest of passing it and H.R. 1, of which he wrote the first 300 pages, let us honor our patriotic duty and make justice and equality there for everyone to vote.

Madam Speaker, I rise today, along with Bay Area Representatives Barbara Lee and Jackie Speier, to pay tribute to the late Janice Mirikitani: a gifted poet and a beacon of resilience for so many in America. Janice was a force for social justice, who overcame great adversity to empower and inspire so many in the Bay Area and beyond through her beautiful art and her leadership of the Glide Foundation. Her passing is a great loss to San Francisco and to our nation.

Janice's poetry turned personal pain into purpose. Indeed, she experienced a childhood marked by hardship: undergoing the national shame of internment as a young girl and then years of trauma as a young woman. Janice faced these challenges directly in her intimate and powerful poems. Her extraordinary courage and tenacity shine through in her writings on the horrors of war, the scourge of sexual abuse and the stain of institutional racism, moving and inspiring all who read them. And as co-founder and editor of the first Asian American literary magazine, Aion, she lifted up more voices like hers: women, people of color and underserved communities, who have too often been silenced.

Janice was deeply committed to her faith and to our Bay Area community. Alongside her beloved husband Reverend Cecil Williams, who was her partner not only in marriage but in service, she helped launch and lead the Glide Foundation. This faith-based social justice mission helped transform the lives of countless families in need, by providing essential health, nutrition and housing services. That the Foundation today, decades after its founding, embodies more strongly than ever Janice's powerful vision of ``a radically inclusive, just and loving community'' is a testament to her enduring legacy.

In a note sent to the Glide community announcing her passing, the Foundation's President and CEO wrote: ``She spoke her truth and inspired others to accept and celebrate themselves, each other, and all our differences.'' Indeed, Janice's leadership reflected the best of San Francisco: the vibrancy of our city, the pride in our diversity and the strength of our community.

Janice Mirikitani was a proud Californian: born in Stockton, educated at the University of California, Los Angeles and San Francisco State University, working in San Francisco's Tenderloin neighborhood for many years and calling the Bay Area home for nearly her entire life.

For her creativity and brilliance, Janice received the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce Lifetime Achievement Ebbie Award, an American Book Lifetime Achievement Award for Literature, and a Governor and First Lady's Conference on Women and Families Minerva Award. She also earned the privilege of serving as the second poet laureate of San Francisco.

May it be a comfort to her dear husband Cecil, her loving daughter Tianne and all their loved ones that so many San Franciscans--and Americans across the nation--join them in prayer during this sad time, and that the beauty, wisdom and courage of her art will endure for generations to come.