Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the memory of Ira Sharp, a beloved member of the greater San Diego community who passed away this month.

Ira was a native of St. Louis, where he came of age organizing sit- ins at segregated restaurants, activating students in support of civil rights, and eventually practicing law.

He later lived here in Washington, D.C., where he and his wife Rose Ann ran a successful small business in legal services and court reporting, and in Naples, Florida, until they retired for good in San Diego.

After their grandson was born and after the Parkland shooting, Ira and Rose Ann cofounded NeverAgainCA, and Ira served on the national board of the Brady Campaign. His fingerprints are on nearly every piece of gun safety legislation in San Diego County and California in the past decade.

Beyond his immense advocacy, Ira was a good friend. If he was proud of you, he would tell you. If you had a cause for him to support, he was there.

May his legacy live on as we continue the work to end gun violence, and may his memory be a blessing.

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

Mr. Chair, I rise today to protect public safety and honor the original intent of this bill through a simple, commonsense amendment.

Many of us on both sides of the aisle agree with the goal of H.R. 3091, to allow Federal law enforcement officers to buy retired handguns, many of which are already required to be destroyed.

However, an oversight could enable domestic abusers, including those subject to restraining orders, to get firearms, which we all know can have deadly consequences.

Police officers are human. They aren't immune from mental illness, domestic and family conflict, and other stressors that can lead to tragedies. We can and should have guardrails to prevent those tragedies.

That is why my amendment simply ensures that each Federal law enforcement agency has procedures for determining whether an officer is in good standing to buy a firearm. Agencies would have the flexibility to tailor those determinations based on the qualifications of each agency, but these guidelines should be clear and concise.

Existing Federal law already carves out special treatment for law enforcement officers by allowing them to have a gun even if they have a domestic violence restraining order. That is dangerous.

All gun owners should meet the same standard, and law enforcement agencies shouldn't consider an officer who is perpetrating violence against a family or household member to be in good standing and able to buy a handgun.

While I am thankful that the Committee on Rules supported my amendment, I am disappointed that they rejected my other amendment and several of my colleagues' amendments to provide additional guardrails for this buyback program.

With this amendment, we have an opportunity to improve this legislation. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment to save lives, protect public safety, and honor those who put their lives on the line for our communities.

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

Mr. Chair, I will just note that there is a loophole where law enforcement officers can keep a gun even when they have a domestic violence restraining order.

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

Mr. Chair, I would just like to add that by requiring agencies to have procedures to determine whether an officer is in good standing, this amendment would ensure that officers are treated fairly and only denied the purchase of their handgun for good and objective reasons.

By establishing a deadline for Federal law enforcement agencies to establish these procedures, this amendment will ensure that an agency is not caught off guard when an officer who may have issues related to performance or behavior requests to purchase a weapon.

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

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chair, Dr. Maya Angelou once said: ``When people show you who they are, believe them the first time.'' Well, House Republicans have shown us over and over again who they are, and it is time we believe them.

They have introduced a national abortion ban. They oppose paid family leave. They blocked the ERA. They fought against universal childcare. Now they are using the false guise of protecting women to blatantly discriminate against the trans community and threaten the privacy of all women and girls.

House Republicans make trans kids' participation in sports seem sinister and conniving, and that couldn't be further from the truth. Trans kids are kids. They should be able to live full lives with unlimited opportunities, including playing sports.

Despite what some of my colleagues have falsely claimed, trans girls and women do not have an overwhelming physical advantage compared to others. Just like all athletes, sometimes trans athletes win and sometimes they lose, but we know this isn't about facts. This is about discrimination and scoring political points.

To my colleagues who haven't been exposed to the LGBTQ+ community or met someone who is trans or may not understand all of the different terms, you still know this is wrong. You know it is wrong to isolate and stigmatize and shame kids.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this legislation.

Madam Speaker, I rise today as an incredibly proud San Diegan and the proud daughter of an SDSU alum to congratulate San Diego State University for making it to the Final Four for the first time in program history.

After the tournament was canceled in 2020 during one of SDSU's best seasons, our dreams of a championship appearance were dashed.

This team has risen to the challenge, and this year's tournament has been electric for SDSU, defying the odds and expectations set against them.

Led by Coach Brian Dutcher, they have been focused, steady, and resilient. They beat No. 1 seed Alabama 71-64 in the Sweet 16. They beat Creighton 57-56 after senior Darrion Trammell sank a free throw with 1.2 seconds left in the game.

Out of 363 Division I men's basketball teams, SDSU has outlasted all but three. They will face off against Florida Atlantic this weekend.

With more than 400,000 alumni, our entire community and all of California are behind you and rooting for you.

Let's go, San Diego State.

Mr. Chair, I have amendment No. 12 at the desk.

Mr. Chair, I rise today to fight for kids, parents and guardians, and educators in San Diego and across the country.

All parents and guardians want for their kids is for them to grow up safe, healthy, and happy, and have the tools needed to confidently and successfully go out into the world. Obviously, they should be involved in their kids' education and shaping their minds and lives, but H.R. 5 is not the solution.

I think we can all agree that educators can be some of the most influential people in our kids' lives. They have the power to inspire lifelong learning. They can help foster creativity and curiosity and teach children new information and perspectives, but H.R. 5 fails to value educators.

It fails to acknowledge or even address that teachers are overworked and underpaid, fueling the burnout that has created a nationwide teacher shortage that was exponentially worsened by the pandemic.

H.R. 5 fails to address school safety. There have been 322 school shootings this year alone. Just yesterday, there was a shooting at a Denver high school. By failing to act on gun violence in schools, we are allowing an entire generation to grow up with so much trauma: The trauma of school shooting drills, of growing up watching school shootings on the news, wearing bulletproof backpacks to school and knowing that one day it could save your life.

However, H.R. 5 does not even attempt to proactively end the gun violence epidemic at schools. It only permits parents and guardians the right to a notification when violence at a school occurs.

My colleagues glaze over the causes of real violence at our Nation's schools, like proper investments in school-based mental health programs, social, emotional, and cultural competency professional development for educators and administrators, disciplinary measures that eradicate the cradle-to-prison pipeline, and, more importantly, gun control measures to ensure that our youth are safe from school shootings.

We need parents and guardians to be involved in the classroom because too often it is all on teachers to make up for emotional support, learning, and care in the classroom that should also be provided at home.

H.R. 5 doesn't give all parents and guardians the tools for constructive involvement and unfairly empowers a very narrow set to dictate what all students learn about.

It will open the door to book bans and censorship to control what students learn and read about, neglecting important parts of history like the civil rights movement and learning about people's identities.

It would also mandate schools to out LGBTQ+ students to their parents, violating students' privacy and potentially exposing them to harm in the process.

While I am thankful that the Rules Committee supported two of my amendments, it is shameful that they rejected my amendment to ensure that teaching about the Holocaust and anti-Semitism in schools should be taught with the acknowledgement that those actions were immoral.

Amid skyrocketing anti-Semitic rhetoric, especially from some of my colleagues in this body, and growing violence targeting the Jewish community, Congress needs to use its power to end hatred and discrimination against Jews.

That work starts with our actions and ensuring that ``Never Again'' is a reality by teaching about the Holocaust and the lingering hate that still exists today.

In the height of irony, this bill even includes a sense of Congress that all public elementary and secondary schools should have opportunities to learn the history of the Holocaust and anti-Semitism, but that means very little if we are unwilling to mandate how wrong and immoral those actions were.

This bill is a disservice to our kids, parents and guardians, teachers, and to our future by not providing kids the tools to be engaged, thoughtful citizens. So we should take the opportunity to improve this bill.

Mr. Chair, my amendment eliminates the ``at no cost'' unfunded mandate embedded within the bill that would require schools--that are already underfunded and under-resourced--to be burdened with printing out professional development and curriculum materials at zero cost.

I agree that parents should have access to school curriculums, most of which are already published online.

However, if my colleagues believe parents should have this right so strongly, then they should provide additional funding for school systems to be able to comply. We want all parents and guardians to be involved in the classroom.

This is a simple, commonsense solution that removes a potentially costly barrier for school systems that are already struggling to maintain their budgets.

I urge my colleagues to support my amendment to remove the ``at no cost'' provisions in H.R. 5 to bring all parents and guardians to the table for their kids' learning.

Parents and guardians should be active participants in kids' education, but that doesn't mean we should lose sight of school safety, ending discrimination, supporting teachers, and ensuring a well-rounded curriculum that prepares kids for the future.

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

Mr. Chair, I completely agree that parents should have access to curriculum and know what their kids are learning. Schools publish curriculums online already. Most of the information that they would need is already publicly available.

Frankly, if we want to make sure that parents are able to access this with no cost, we shouldn't be burdening the parents, and we also shouldn't be burdening the already overburdened school districts. We should be funding it. Right now, this is an unfunded mandate, which I urge my colleagues not to support.

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

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

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

Mr. Chair, we all know that our educators and school districts are overburdened and overworked, as well as undervalued and underpaid. H.R. 5 worsens these systemic problems.

My amendment removes an unnecessary and burdensome provision permitting parents and guardians to review professional development materials for educators. This would impact educators' and school districts' already limited time and resources without any positive gain for parents, guardians, and students.

My colleagues have failed to define what constitutes professional development, which ultimately may limit the types of professional development available to educators.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment so that we can ensure that educators' time is directed at enriching our kids' education and not fulfilling onerous requirements.

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

Mr. Chair, I agree that parents deserve to see some professional development. That is why I want the majority to define ``professional development'' so we can make sure that we are actually doing what we intend to do.

As the bill is written, it includes specialized instructional support personnel such as speech-language pathologists and audiologists who have specific continuing education requirements that are sometimes accessed through continuing education courses that have copyright restrictions that limit use and distribution of materials and content.

My amendment would ensure that all teachers and specialized instructional support personnel are able to access the professional development courses they need to maintain their skills and even their licenses and certifications, which this bill, as written, would get in the way of.

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

Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Madam Speaker, as a 34-year-old woman, I can tell you that affordable and accessible childcare is a top priority for my generation, but the problem isn't that millennials can't budget or that we are eating too much avocado toast; it is that the cost of childcare has skyrocketed, if you can even find it.

In San Diego, the average annual cost for childcare for one infant in a licensed center is more than $19,000, which is out of reach for most middle- and low-income families.

And it is not any easier for providers who are in one of the lowest paid professions in the country and struggle to make ends meet and keep their doors open.

The free market hasn't fixed the childcare crisis, and small or temporary fixes just aren't good enough.

That is why I am proud to introduce the Child Care for Every Community Act today with Senator Elizabeth Warren and Congresswoman Mikie Sherrill.

Our bicameral legislation would guarantee access to childcare that is affordable for every family, and it would support childcare workers in their incredibly important work.

We need big, wholesale changes to our social safety net to support kids and families starting with the Child Care for Every Community Act.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Ranking Member Pallone for his leadership on this issue and for yielding me time.

Vaccinating healthcare workers against COVID-19 is a simple and effective way to save lives. It helped protect our healthcare workers and the most vulnerable from serious illness, hospitalization, and death. It has prevented our healthcare workforce shortage from getting worse by keeping our workers healthy and able to continue their essential work.

H.R. 497 is nonsense and would expose patients to unnecessary risk, all because Republicans are trying to score political points.

That is why my motion to recommit would strike this bill and insert the Women's Health Protection Act, legislation that would actually keep the American people safe and healthy.

Since the Supreme Court overturned the constitutional right to abortion access, 24 States have banned abortion or are likely to do so. Without Roe, Americans are now facing a confusing patchwork of State laws dictating who can make decisions about their healthcare and when.

Without Roe, State governments are forcing pregnancy on people. Maternal and infant healthcare outcomes are worsening. It is harder for people to access medications to treat arthritis, cancer, lupus, and more, all because they are also used for medical abortion.

This is deeply personal for me. As a 33-year-old woman, reproductive healthcare is my healthcare, as it is for millions of Americans. I want the freedom to be able to make the best choices for my body and my life, and so do other Americans.

That is why Congress needs to pass the Women's Health Protection Act to guarantee a pregnant person's right to access an abortion and a provider's ability to deliver these services, regardless of State laws.

Whether we admit it or not, we all know that conversations about reproductive healthcare in the House Chamber aren't reflective of America. In real America, whether you are living in a red State or a blue State or a purple State, the average American wants the freedom and the ability to make their own healthcare decisions, including if, when, and how to have a family.

We saw that clearly reflected in the midterms, with Americans mobilizing to defend abortion rights in places as disparate as California, Vermont, Michigan, Montana, and Kentucky.

The American people want the Women's Health Protection Act, and the House should pass it again today.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the Record immediately prior to the vote on the motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Offered By: Ms. Jacobs

Amendment No. 22: Page 3, line 9, strike the closing

quotation mark and the final period.

Page 3, after line 9, insert the following:

``(4) Economic exclusion.--The plan required by paragraph

(1) shall not provide for oil and gas leasing in any tract on

the Outer Continental Shelf where oil and gas leasing would

adversely impact the tourism economy and coastal communities

and businesses of California.''.

Mr. Speaker, this summer I officiated my brother's wedding, and it was one of the proudest moments of my life.

The love that Dylan and Kay share is incredibly special and deserves to be celebrated, recognized, and protected.

That is why I am so grateful to have voted for the Respect for Marriage Act, to honor their marriage and so many other marriages that have been created and affirmed in the 7 years since the landmark Obergefell ruling. This means so much not only to my family, but to the LGBTQ+ communities in San Diego and across the country.

This bill will take the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act off the books, so it no longer poses an existential threat to LGBTQ+ families.

It will protect marriage equality so that a valid marriage in one State is recognized by all other States. Importantly, it will protect kids from discriminatory State laws and ensure that LGBTQ+ families can stay together.

With the passage of this bill, our government is finally catching up to the American people. This is long overdue, but it is no less meaningful for my brother and sister-in-law and hundreds of thousands of other LGBTQ+ marriages across the country.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 922) condemning the use of hunger as a weapon of war and recognizing the effect of conflict on global food security and famine, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Res. 922, as amended.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 922 to condemn the use of hunger as a weapon of war and recognize the effect of conflict on global food security.

I thank Chair Meeks for his support and my colleagues, Representatives Peter Meijer, Bobby Rush, and Tracey Mann, for co- leading this with me.

Even before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, we have seen how climate change, the pandemic, and conflict fuel food crises around the world in Yemen, Syria, Ethiopia, and South Sudan, and now this war has exacerbated all of these crises.

In Ukraine, Russia's unprovoked war has left one in three families without enough food and disrupted critical supply chains in the country and around the world.

But we also have to recognize that we shouldn't only sound the alarm and mobilize aid and attention when and where humanitarian crises affect people who look like us. Around the world, especially in some of the poorest countries, millions of people are hungry and suffering as a direct result of Putin's relentless crusade for power.

In the Horn of Africa, the combined effects of climate change, conflict, and rising food prices from Russia's invasion of Ukraine have all exacerbated the rising food crisis, with more than 37 million people, including 7 million children, on the verge of famine as the region endures the longest drought in more than 40 years.

Afghanistan continues to face an acute humanitarian crisis this upcoming winter, where over 95 percent of the population cannot afford to feed themselves or their families.

Haiti imports 70 percent of its food, mainly from Russia and Canada, and is experiencing catastrophic hunger levels, with 4.7 million of the population facing acute hunger.

In Ethiopia, over 20 million people in Tigray, Amhara, and Afar are in dire need of humanitarian assistance and rely on wheat imports from Ukraine and Russia.

In South Sudan, where I traveled earlier this year, 8.3 million people are experiencing severe food insecurity, the most extreme level of food insecurity in the country since it became independent in 2011.

But we have also seen the power of the U.N., diplomacy, and global cooperation in alleviating this crisis. The historic Black Sea Grain Initiative, which was recently extended, has facilitated the export of millions of tons of agricultural exports from Ukraine's Black Sea ports.

I commend Ukraine's new humanitarian initiative, Grain from Ukraine, that came out of the first International Summit on Food Security. It will ship grain to African countries most in need. Governments around the world have already contributed $150 million, with hopefully more to come.

The crisis in Ukraine has made clear why it is so important that we, as a body, recognize the consequences of war on food security, condemn starvation of civilians as a weapon of war, and call on the United States Government--here in Congress and in the administration--to continue addressing these crises and hold perpetrators accountable.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to lead this important resolution today, and I urge my colleagues to support it. I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 922 is an important piece of legislation to put this body on record as condemning the weaponization of hunger around the world and the impact conflict has on global food security.

As the world works together to alleviate multiple crises, this resolution serves as an important reminder of the cost of war and the need to hold perpetrators of starvation accountable.

Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues will join me and support this resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 744) condemning the Government of Iran's state-sponsored persecution of its Baha'i minority and its continued violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Res. 744, as amended.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 744.

I thank Ted Deutch, an esteemed former Member of this House and the former chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee's Middle East, North Africa, and Global Counterterrorism Subcommittee, for reintroducing this important legislation that has passed the House multiple times.

I know that every member of our committee hopes the Iranian Government will immediately cease the abuse of its own people and specifically end its longtime persecution of the Baha'i people.

The last several years have been especially difficult for Iran's Baha'i community, as the regime in Tehran has ramped up its persecution of the community.

The resolution before us today calls on the Iranian Government to release all Baha'i prisoners, end its campaign of state-sponsored persecution, and stop discriminatory policies against the Baha'i community.

As many of us know, those who practice the Baha'i faith have been persecuted in Iran since the religion's founding but have suffered the most acute harassment since the Iranian revolution in 1979.

Hundreds of Baha'is have been executed and tortured. To this day, Iran denies Baha'is access to higher education, government jobs, and permits to work in 25 professions, and Iran subjects them to arbitrary harassment, arrest, and imprisonment.

Mr. Speaker, it is long past time for this religious persecution to end, so I strongly urge all Members to vote in support of this critical resolution.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, the Baha'i people of Iran have suffered enough at the hands of Iran's regime since the revolution. The brutality of Iran's Government has unfortunately been on display now for weeks for the entire world to see.

This body will always defend human rights in Iran and around the world, and we stand in solidarity with the people of Iran who are calling for justice, dignity, and respect. Women, Life, Freedom.

Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues will join me and support this resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4785) to support the human rights of Uyghurs and members of other minority groups residing in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region and safeguard their distinct identity, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 4785.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4785, the Uyghur Policy Act of 2021, sponsored by my committee colleague, Representative Young Kim.

The world has watched in horror as the People's Republic of China has continued its genocide and crimes against humanity against Uyghurs and members of other religious and ethnic minorities in the Xinjiang region.

The size and scale of the PRC's human rights abuses is horrific. As many as 1.8 million people have been arbitrarily detained in mass internment camps, prisons, and detention centers. They have shown no limits to their cruelty and depravity--subjecting people to forced labor, torture, political indoctrination, suppression of religious practices, forced sterilizations and abortions, family separation, sexual abuse, and so much more.

While we have seen graphic images and heard testimony revealing the truth of these camps, the PRC continues to hide behind disinformation.

We know that the PRC is actively trying to stamp out the unique ethnic, cultural, religious, and linguistic traditions of minorities in the Xinjiang region.

Despite outrage from the global community, these gross atrocities have only increased in their severity and cruelty.

Evidence collected from journalists, human rights defenders, and scholars, as well as harrowing firsthand accounts from survivors and their families, point to the continued oppression of Uyghurs and Muslims.

During this Congress, this body has taken multiple steps to condemn these atrocities and hold the PRC accountable for perpetrating these heinous crimes. But we need to do more to protect the millions of Uyghurs and their way of life.

By passing this important bipartisan legislation, we would strengthen U.S. Government efforts to protect and promote the distinct ethnic, religious, cultural, and linguistic identity of the Uyghur people.

This legislation furthers a whole-of-government approach to combat the PRC's egregious human rights violations. It also takes steps to bolster international support towards promoting greater respect for human rights in the Xinjiang region.

Most importantly, this legislation signals that the U.S. Congress unequivocally stands with the Uyghur people and will continue speaking out until this genocide and crimes against humanity ends.

I thank Representative Kim for authoring this important bipartisan legislation, which I was proud to vote for in the Foreign Affairs committee.

I support swift passage of this timely and urgent bill, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the distinguished Speaker of the House.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume for the purpose of closing.

Mr. Speaker, passing H.R. 4785, the Uyghur Policy Act of 2021, would send a message loud and clear that the PRC's inhumane policies to dilute and destroy the identity of the Uyghur people have no place in today's world.

The United States stands firmly with the Uyghur people and we will continue pushing to end the PRC's horrific and inhumane behavior.

We need to show strong bipartisan House support to the administration to use its tools to help protect the Uyghur culture and identity and promote respect for human rights and religious freedom of Uyghurs and members of other minority groups in China.

The House also stands in strong solidarity with the Chinese people protesting all over China in recent days.

Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I thank the chairwoman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I am honored to rise to recognize my friend, mentor, and predecessor, Congresswoman Susan Davis, and her decades of public service to Rolando and the San Diego community.

From serving on the San Diego Unified Board of Education to the California State Assembly to the Halls of Congress, Congresswoman Davis worked tirelessly to advocate and deliver for her constituents.

As chairwoman and ranking member of the Subcommittee on Military Personnel, she championed our servicemembers, leading the repeal of the discriminatory Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy, increasing military pay and benefits, expanding access to mental health care, and shining a light on military sexual assault. She didn't forget about military families. She fought to ensure they had housing that was safe and affordable and quality healthcare.

Everyone who knows Susan knows that she doesn't give up. Term after term, she re-introduced legislation to expand women's access to healthcare. Because of her unwavering dedication, women across the country no longer need prior approval or a referral to receive OB/GYN care. For young women like me, that is essential because for years, my OB/GYN was the only doctor I saw.

Susan cared so deeply about our Nation's children and introduced many bills to protect children and ensure they have every door open to them, so they have a successful, thriving future.

She pushed to address child hunger, expand access to childcare and early learning opportunities, and strengthened our education programs. Through her work on the Education and Labor Committee, she advocated for more registered apprenticeships and for making college more affordable and accessible.

For me, Susan has been one of my biggest cheerleaders. When I wasn't sure I was ready to run for Congress, she called me every day to convince me that I was. She has always strived to bring more people to the leadership table and make way for people with new voices and experiences to lead.

For all these reasons and so many more, I am proud to honor Congresswoman Susan Davis' decades of service to the Rolando community and all of San Diego by naming the Rolando post office after her.

I am so grateful to have the support of all of my California colleagues and many more who served with Susan. This is the culmination of a community-led effort, powered by the people of Rolando and Council President Sean Elo-Rivera's office.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Congresswoman Davis for all she has done for San Diego and all she continues to do. Her kindness, selflessness, leadership, and service continue to be an inspiration to all of us.

Mr. Speaker, the debate is officially over: abortion rights are a kitchen table issue.

Last week, abortion rights were on the ballot in five States. Abortion rights went five for five, not only in what are considered blue States, like California and Vermont, but in a battleground State like Michigan, and red States like Montana and Kentucky.

Abortion was one of the top issues that motivated people to vote. That is because, for me and for millions of women, reproductive healthcare is our healthcare. That is why women showed up at the ballot box to defend abortion rights. That is why we need to do the same in Congress.

The House has already passed legislation to protect the right to access an abortion and contraception and protect those who cross State lines to access an abortion.

We need to do more. The House needs to pass the My Body, My Data Act, to create a new national standard to protect reproductive and sexual health data. The Senate needs to step up and abolish the filibuster so we can finally protect abortion rights at the Federal level.

Mr. Speaker, the voters spoke loud and clear. It is time to hear them and to act.

Madam Speaker, I thank Chairwoman Speier for her leadership today and her leadership on this issue. It has been truly incredible to learn and serve under her.

I am so proud to represent San Diego's vibrant and diverse military community in Congress and on the House Committee on Armed Services.

When I go home and talk to my constituents, they ask me what I am doing to make sure their loved ones are taken care of, that they are going to be safe, not just when they are deployed abroad but when they are here at home.

I have to look these families in the eye and tell them that right now, their loved ones who do so much to serve and sacrifice for our country will not necessarily have safe housing, affordable childcare, and quality healthcare, including reproductive healthcare.

We owe our servicemembers so much more, because even though they volunteered to serve in our armed services, they didn't volunteer to give up their reproductive rights. Decisions about if, when, and how to have a family belong to our servicemembers, not the Supreme Court or elected officials. Taking away these fundamental rights doesn't just hurt these individuals. It hurts our military readiness, recruitment, retention, and morale, putting our national security in jeopardy.

With 40 percent of Active-Duty servicewomen having very limited or zero access to abortion services where they are stationed, our military's ability to adapt to evolving conflicts and challenges is severely compromised.

I am proud to be from California where abortion is currently safe and legal. But not everyone is lucky enough to be stationed in California. As of July, about 84,000 servicewomen were stationed at a base located in a State with a trigger law, and with new abortion bans going into effect, that number will only grow.

No matter where you live or are stationed, no matter how much money you make, you should have access to abortion.

The truth is, that none of us can take our existing State laws for granted, because a Republican majority in Congress or a Republican President will push for a national abortion ban. This isn't even a secret. They have literally already introduced it.

We also need to remember that even before the Supreme Court took away our constitutional right to abortion, servicemembers faced huge barriers to accessing necessary reproductive healthcare. The DOD already cannot provide or pay for abortions in most circumstances, and servicemembers looking for care off base were limited by restrictions on travel. After Dobbs, abortion access is even harder for servicemembers. They can't freely take off days from work, and many cannot afford to travel the thousands of miles

and pay out of pocket to receive the care they need and deserve.

This is unacceptable. We have a responsibility to ensure our servicemembers have access to the care they need. That is why I joined my friend, Congresswoman Speier, to introduce the MARCH for Servicemembers Act, which would allow military medical treatment facilities to provide abortion services and permit the military to cover the associated costs.

It is why I am proud to be an original cosponsor of the Access to Reproductive Care for Servicemembers Act, introduced this week by Congressman Crow and Congresswoman Speier. This crucial legislation would ensure leave requests to seek an abortion are confidential and approved without delay and push to have DOD provide travel reimbursement for those seeking abortion care.

None of these solutions are radical. They are not extreme. All they do is empower and support our servicemembers to make their own healthcare decisions. When we have already asked our servicemembers to put their lives on the line for our freedom, we cannot and should not take away theirs.