Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for making sure this bill could come to the floor so swiftly. I thank my friend, Congresswoman Manning, for her partnership on co-leading this bill with me. And I thank Speaker Pelosi for her continued leadership in this post-Roe reality.

Madam Speaker, this bill could not be more important because, for me and for tens of millions of Americans, these threats from Justice Thomas and the Supreme Court to take away our right to contraception are not abstract.

I have lived my entire life with this constitutional right to contraception, and it is a right I have exercised for decades, whether it was the birth control pills I used when I was a teenager to address debilitating cramps, the IUD I have relied on for years, or the Plan B I have used at times that was, thankfully, available over the counter when I needed it.

I am probably the first person ever to speak about using Plan B on the House floor, and I know I am the first person in at least 35 years to talk about my period here. But you know what? We should be talking about it.

We should be talking about periods and birth control and the healthcare that millions of Americans need for our everyday lives because this is not a side issue that only affects some people. This is a kitchen-table issue.

The decision of how, if, and when to grow a family are decisions that are personal and private and should never be decided by the Supreme Court or Congress. It is a decision that is fundamental to our autonomy, our agency, and our ability to control our own lives.

As a young woman, reproductive healthcare is my healthcare, and I am so grateful that, today, we will take a step to codifying that access into law.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Ms. Lee for offering this incredibly important amendment.

It is simply wild that at the same time that our Republican colleagues are complaining about runaway inflation, we would increase Federal spending on things the Pentagon itself has said it doesn't need.

The initial defense budget request was already more than $750 billion. With this plus-up, it will be over $800 billion. That is $800 billion on outdated and expensive legacy platforms, while we are still failing to meet the needs of our servicemembers and their families.

San Diego, the community I am proud to represent, is home to the largest concentration of military personnel in the country. Yet, even after spending hundreds of billions of dollars on defense in recent years, we have more than 39,000 members of military families who visit the San Diego food bank every month.

Even after spending over $800 billion, there will still be thousands of military families on waitlists for childcare in San Diego. So I reject that we need to continue to invest more than even the Pentagon is asking for on outdated systems and things we don't need.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Lee-Pocan amendment.

Mr. Speaker, right now, as we meet in this Chamber, the Supreme Court is releasing a new slate of opinions. And like millions of people across the country, I have been waiting with dread for what is coming. As we wait, we are texting, messaging our friends and loved ones, providing support, looking for more information, and it is all taking place on our devices. That is how we live in 2022.

I am determined to make sure that as we continue to fight for our rights, we do so with policies that reflect today's world. That is why I am proud to have introduced the My Body, My Data Act, new legislation to protect our personal reproductive health data. I am proud that Senator Hirono and Senator Wyden have introduced a companion bill in the Senate and that we have 43 cosponsors from across the ideological spectrum here in the House.

When the Supreme Court's draft decision on Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization leaked, the decision that would undo decades of precedent and overturn the landmark opinion of Roe v. Wade, I immediately started hearing from friends and constituents, panicked that their reproductive health data could fall into the wrong hands, panicked that the personal information on their phones, on their computers could be used against them in a post-Roe world where abortion is criminalized and where laws, like the Texas bounty hunter law, give extremists a financial incentive to target vulnerable people.

Shortly after, experts started sounding the alarm that our personal reproductive health data--from search engines to menstruation and pregnancy-tracking apps--would be used to target people if abortion is criminalized. Right now, there are no protections from that happening.

Mr. Speaker, as a young woman, reproductive healthcare is my healthcare. And like tens of millions of Americans, I have used apps to track my period. When the draft decision leaked, I knew we couldn't wait for the final opinion. We couldn't just wait for Roe to be overturned so I got to work, because it is unconscionable that our personal reproductive information could be sold to the highest bidder and weaponized against us--and especially against low-income people and people of color, who would be the most impacted if Roe is overturned.

To protect access, Congress must codify the right to an abortion, and I am proud to be an original cosponsor of the Women's Health Protection Act. Alongside strong protections for abortion access, we need strong privacy protections. That is why I introduced the My Body, My Data Act. Our personal reproductive and sexual health information is our most sensitive and personal data, and it deserves the highest level of privacy protection that the government can provide.

I am proud to say that is what the My Body, My Data Act accomplishes. It is endorsed by Planned Parenthood, NARAL, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and many others. This bill restricts businesses and nongovernmental organizations from collecting, using, retaining, or disclosing reproductive health information beyond what is strictly necessary to provide a product or service.

The bill provides everyday people with the right to access or delete their personal reproductive health information, if they choose to, and it requires organizations to publish their privacy policies.

Importantly, the My Body, My Data Act includes strong enforcement mechanisms, including a private right of action that allows individuals to bring a lawsuit if their privacy is violated.

With 26 States likely or certain to ban abortion if Roe is overturned, this legislation is more urgent than ever. I am proud to lead this legislation, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, Representative Manning, for yielding time; to Chairman Meeks for advancing this legislation in committee; and to Chairwoman Bass; and my friend Congresswoman Kim, for partnering with me on this important effort.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my resolution on Mozambique, which calls for stability and the cessation of violence in northern Mozambique and condemns the attacks and violence by ISIS-Mozambique.

It calls for a new strategy and a new approach for how the U.S. engages with Mozambique to address conflict and violent extremism. And part of why passing this resolution today is so important, is because we need to raise awareness in this body and in this country about the dire humanitarian situation in Mozambique.

Since 2017, ISIS-Mozambique, also known as Ahlu al Sunnah wal Jamaah, has inflicted violence on communities in Mozambique. These insurgents have brutalized people and targeted civilians through mass beheadings of men and boys, abductions of children, and attacks against key civilian infrastructure.

This violence, combined with the government response to it, has killed over 1,700 civilians in Cabo Delgado Province alone.

The international community, particularly the Southern African Development Community forces and Rwanda's forces, have responded with troop deployment to secure areas and shield civilians from continued violence. But let's be clear. We know that a military-led response will not be enough.

That is why I was so supportive of the Biden administration's recent designation of Mozambique as a priority country under the Global Fragility Act, so that we can better align resources among the interagency and work to address the key drivers of this violence and other forms of instability in the country.

And as we craft our strategy for Mozambique, we must be clear-eyed about the underlying grievance and what it will really take to make a difference in preventing new violence from occurring. We know that terrorism and violent extremism are also fueled by perceptions of state repression, human rights abuses, and socioeconomic and political marginalization. We know that these factors exist in Mozambique and in the state response to ISIS-Mozambique. We need to be honest about the challenges impacting the Mozambican people in order to get serious about preventing future terrorist recruitment.

We also need to ensure that we are helping the Mozambican Government support development goals of Cabo Delgado and northern Mozambique that will allow all sectors of society to thrive.

That is why I am looking forward to the United States' partnership with the Mozambique Government and the Mozambican people and to ensuring our strategy is shaped by lessons learned from our counterterrorism missions across the world that have consistently fallen short.

This resolution has strong support from across the ideological spectrum. I am proud to lead the passage of this important resolution, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Madam 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 the subject of my Special Order.

Madam Speaker, I am proud to be here during Children's Week, alongside a number of my colleagues, to elevate the ongoing need to invest in and support kids.

This year, Children's Week comes at a time when we are facing critically important policy decisions that could lift millions of kids out of poverty. Over the last 2 years, Congress made the most significant investment in kids in decades. Legislation passed during the pandemic, including the expanded and improved child tax credit, which I was proud to for vote in the American Rescue Plan, increased the share of Federal spending on children by nearly 50 percent.

But as emergency measures expire, children are experiencing a backslide. More than 3 million children have been pushed back into poverty since the expiration of the child tax credit. More than 6 million children are poised to lose Medicaid or CHIP coverage when the public health emergency is revoked. Thousands of school meal providers could be forced to shut down if child nutrition waivers expire at the end of this month, leaving millions of kids without healthy meals this summer.

The expiration of these provisions comes at a time when children are navigating incredible challenges, including an epidemic of gun violence, a wave of anti-LGBTQ-plus legislation, and a mental health crisis. These examples serve as a reminder that every issue is a kids issue.

As a member of the Select Committee on Economic Disparity and Fairness in Growth, ending child poverty has been one of my top priorities. Children are currently the poorest demographic group in the United States, and our child poverty rate remains shockingly high compared to our economic peers. Even in some of our

wealthiest States, like California, which I am proud to represent, and in some of our wealthiest areas, like my district in San Diego, more than 40 percent of kids were in families experiencing poverty before the pandemic.

America's kids deserve better, and the good news is that we know what works. The expanded child tax credit showed how much progress we can make when families have the cash they need to make ends meet. Child poverty fell by nearly 30 percent, and families overwhelmingly used these funds to pay for food and other basic needs.

Since the start of the pandemic, the number of kids receiving vital health coverage has soared, and over 10 million more students have received free school lunches, saving families from completing complicated applications that can isolate children from their peers.

There is so much more to do to support children and their families, including expanding access to affordable, accessible childcare. I am proud to be leading a letter, alongside Representatives Bonamici, Castro, Houlahan, Himes, and McEachin, in support of including childcare in any future reconciliation package.

As a country, we also need a clear national goal to reduce child poverty, and we need data to inform our decisions and make sure no child is falling through the cracks. That is why I am proud to be an original cosponsor of the Child Poverty Reduction Act and why I was proud to lead a letter, alongside Congresswoman DelBene and Congresswoman Jayapal, calling for funding in the 2023 appropriations bill to improve our measures on child poverty and family material hardship.

Investing in children isn't just the right thing to do to give kids and families a strong start. It is also the fiscally responsible thing to do.

Child poverty costs our economy up to $1.1 trillion a year in lost economic output, increased healthcare spending, and more. The investments we make in kids pay off across a lifetime.

A study from Harvard's Opportunity Insights found that the investments we make in kids consistently have the highest returns. For every $1 we invest in high-quality early childhood education, we save $6 down the road.

While some of my colleagues might say we can't afford to invest in kids, the fact of the matter is, we can't afford not to. The case for prioritizing kids is so strong, and I look forward to working with my colleagues not just this week but every week to improve outcomes for kids and build a better future.

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Foster).

Madam Speaker, I congratulate the gentleman on the birth of his grandchild.

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

Madam Speaker, Congressman Vargas and I rise today to celebrate the incredible life of Francine Maigue and the indelible mark she left on San Diego.

Francine was an artist, an advocate, a journalist, a motivational speaker, and, as so many in San Diego knew her, a public servant.

As district director in the California State Assembly, Francine made sure that San Diegans had equitable access to the resources they needed and deserved.

Even after her cancer diagnosis in 2019, Francine kept working to serve our community while also becoming a powerful advocate for cancer research.

Francine was a proud advocate for San Diego's Filipino and Asian- American communities. She served as the president of the Filipino- American Chamber of Commerce of San Diego County and proudly highlighted the Filipino experience across the country and around the world.

Last month, Francine passed away after her battle with cancer.

Congressman Vargas and I join so many from across San Diego in sending our condolences to Francine's family, friends, and loved ones. May her memory be a blessing.

Madam Speaker, our constituents sent us here to deliver for them, and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is delivering for San Diego.

Recently, the Department of Transportation announced that $24 million has been allocated to the San Diego International Airport, supporting tourism for our international city and helping our economy recover.

But it is not just the airport. $4.8 billion in highway funding has been allocated to California already, the first of more than $29 billion in road and bridge funding coming to our State.

Last week, I visited sites in my district, in El Cerrito, Kensington, and Talmadge, where neighborhood roads were cracked, crumbling, and in need of repair.

I have spoken with constituents, local officials, and small business owners in La Mesa and El Cajon about the importance of transit, walkability, and broadband because this may be the largest infrastructure bill since Eisenhower, but it is also one that is focused on the needs of the 21st century.

Connecting people by roads, transit, and high-speed internet can help us cross divides and expand opportunity. And it makes our society fairer, more sustainable, and more equitable.

Madam Speaker, I thank Congresswoman Newman for yielding and thanks to the Equality Caucus for organizing this Special Order.

As the gentlewoman mentioned, I am the proud sister of a trans brother and a gender nonconforming sibling. I am also the proud Representative of Hillcrest, the heart of San Diego's LGBTQ-plus community, so this issue is deeply personal to me and to the people whom I love.

Every time that we hear about another trans person being murdered, I think about my siblings and my constituents, and my heart breaks because this epidemic of violence has gone on for too long.

For too long, trans voices have been silenced, ignored, and disrespected. Whether they are trying to access healthcare, trying to find housing, or even when they are just trying to go about their daily lives, our trans neighbors and friends face discrimination, harassment, and a pervasive lack of resources.

Even in this body, we have colleagues actively working to prevent equality for the trans community who continue to misgender and dehumanize our trans friends and family and continue denying them the support they need and are trying to keep them on the margins of our society.

This rhetoric and this anti-trans legislation making its way through the country has real-world consequences. With the recent news of the killing of Marquiisha Lawrence in South Carolina, 2021 just became the deadliest year on record for trans and nonbinary people. This year alone at least 45 trans people have been killed.

It is, at least, because all too often when trans people are killed, the details of their lives are misreported. They are misgendered or deadnamed in police reports and death certificates. So not only are their lives being taken from them, their authentic identity--who they really were and fought so hard to be--is also being erased. So we must continue to say the names of people like Poe Black and Natalia Smut who were killed this year in California.

Their lives are a reminder that we must continue to fight for trans equality especially for transwomen of color.

As important as it is for us to celebrate the lives of the trans people who were taken from us, we also need to celebrate trans people when they are still alive. So this Transgender Awareness Week, let us commit to uplifting trans people when they are still here not only after they are gone.

I honor the strength and resilience of the trans community. I will continue to make their voices heard in the Halls of Congress, and I will continue to advocate for the support that they have been denied for far too long.

I want any young person who is watching this to know that they are perfect, they are loved, and they are needed in this world exactly the way they are, and I will be here every day fighting for them.

Madam Speaker, I thank Chair Himes for organizing this Special Order, and I say thank you to the ranking member.

I welcome our Republican colleagues to the committee. I know we are going to have some strong debates on this committee, and we should because economic inequality is the central issue of our time. It deserves all the energy and attention we can give it because we are at a pivotal moment.

Right now, the bottom 50 percent of the population holds 2 percent of the wealth in the United States. The top 1 percent holds nearly a third of all wealth.

I have some experience with that. The most consequential day of my life, the day that would determine whether or not I grew up with opportunity and privilege, was the day that I was born. That is true for so many kids in America. But unlike the majority of kids who were born in 1989, I was lucky. While some were born into generational poverty, I was born into a family of wealth. That is what I did to earn my wealth and my opportunity in life--I was born.

For decades, our policies have benefited people like me, and that has to change because, in addition to being immoral, economic inequality represents a long-term threat to our international competitiveness, our national security, and the health of our democracy.

I know my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, some of whom served with me on Armed Services, are thinking deeply about how we remain competitive in the international landscape. But with 140 million Americans who live in households that are low income, low wealth, are one crisis away from economic ruin, that is more difficult.

I represent San Diego in Congress. We are one of the wealthiest counties in the country. We have Fortune 500 companies. We have mansions on the beach. Yet, more than 40 percent of our kids were living in families experiencing poverty before the pandemic. We have to do better.

That is why I am so grateful to be on this committee and that we are taking the time to debate and negotiate the Build Back Better Act, a bill that would make historic investments to rebalance our system, especially for children.

I know our disagreements are real, but I have faith that, together, we can work to find solutions like the earned income tax credit, the child tax credit, Head Start, all of these programs that, when they were passed, had wide bipartisan support.

Madam Speaker, I again thank Chair Himes and our Republican colleagues.

Madam Speaker, I rise to recognize the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the University of San Diego School of Law's free legal clinics.

Over the past half-century, the University of San Diego (USD) School of Law's free legal clinics have offered assistance to underserved members of society while providing opportunities for law students to learn first-hand from highly skilled attorneys and interact directly with actual clients. These pro bono services to the San Diego community have provided direct client legal services to thousands of San Diego residents in need.

USD School of Law's free legal clinics have developed a model program in the experiential training of law students in the practical application of their legal knowledge. This program has emphasized the principled practice of law, instilling in students the importance of just, ethical, and exemplary legal practice.

In recent years, USD School of Law's free legal clinics have expanded to distinct direct client services clinics.

The Appellate Clinic provides students the opportunity to litigate an appeal in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. This is a year-long clinic in which teams of students will handle appeals from start to finish.

The Civil Clinic assists in supplemental Social Security Income and Social Security disability, uninsured motorist defense and consumer issues.

Education and Disability Clinic represents clients at meetings with school district personnel and Regional Center Staff. Matters include school discipline (suspensions and expulsions), special education placement and services, Regional Center and Early Start services, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.

The Entrepreneurship Clinic provides comprehensive legal assistance to individuals who wish to start or expand a small business or not-for- profit organization, as well as for trademark and copyright issues.

Federal Income Tax Clinic represents taxpayers who have disputes with the Internal Revenue Service in matters such as collection actions or audits, earned income tax credits and offers in compromise.

The Immigration Clinic offers assistance for immigration-related problems such as asylum, immigrating family members, naturalization and deportation.

California State Income Tax Clinic represents low-income taxpayers who have disputes with the Franchise Tax Board in matters of state tax appeals.

California State Sales and Use Tax Clinic is a joint effort between USD Legal Clinics and the California State Board of Equalization. Under the supervision of an attorney from the California State Board of Equalization's Taxpayers' Rights Advocate Office, students will represent clients with Sales and Use Tax appeals before the Board of Equalization.

Veterans Clinic provides free legal assistance to veterans in disputes with for-profit institutions over the use of GI Bill funds and predatory lending associated with education loans. Legal services range from advice to identification of potential claims to representation of student veterans in litigation, arbitration and other forms of alternative dispute resolution.

Women's Legal Clinic will meet the legal needs of women, men, and families who are the victims of human trafficking and others by helping with domestic violence restraining orders, child custody and guardianship matters, and dissolution cases.

Workers' Rights Clinic assists lower-income workers with a variety of employment law issues including employee rights, discrimination, medical leave, workplace safety, unpaid wages, unemployment benefits, harassment and wrongful termination.

USD School of Law's free legal clinics have provided tens of millions of dollars of free legal services to low income and underserved residents in San Diego County.

USD School of Law's free legal clinics have trained many of San Diego's finest attorneys, who themselves have added to the reputation of the San Diego legal community.

Madam Speaker, for 50 years USD School of Law's legal clinics have made a tremendous difference in the lives of San Diego residents. The next 50 years promise to see outstanding benefits by continuing this fine tradition.

Mr. Speaker, the United States should not provide support to foreign military units that repeatedly commit human rights violations. That should be clear.

Yet, in Burkina Faso, Guinea, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, military units backed by the United States did just that; terrorizing civilians in the name of security.

Backing these units is supposed to be against U.S. law, but for decades there has been one big loophole, and it is called section 127E, one specific DOD authority that authorizes support for these units without any human rights vetting.

This loophole means that we have no assurances that our operatives aren't working with partners who are in direct conflict with our values. And if we are truly focused on countering violent extremism, we have to acknowledge that abuses by security forces often propel victims into violent extremist groups.

That is why I brought forward an amendment to the NDAA to close this loophole, and I am proud to say it was adopted with bipartisan support.

My amendment ensures that we aren't contributing to the very same problems we aim to solve, and it sends a clear message. When it comes to human rights, there cannot be loopholes, exemptions, or exceptions.

Mr. Speaker, I was in a classified briefing. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 281.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to offer amendment No. 41 as the designee of Ms. Lee of California.

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

Mr. Speaker, this amendment offered by my friend and colleague, Congresswoman Barbara Lee, restores the NDAA to the original funding level requested by the White House, the Pentagon, and the chair of the Armed Services Committee.

Specifically, it would remove the Rogers amendment which would increase the pending authorization by $23.9 billion. When Mr. Rogers' amendment was offered during committee markup, I voted against it, and nothing over the last few weeks has led me to change my mind.

Mr. Speaker, just 3 weeks ago we ended our military operations in Afghanistan--America's longest war and one that started when I was in middle school. Yet what some are concluding from that is that what we need is more war, more weapons, and billions of dollars more than even what the Pentagon themselves are asking for.

So many of my colleagues who supported Mr. Rogers' amendment note the emerging threat from China as their reason to support this increase, even though very little of this increase is even relevant to China and most national security experts agree that making needed domestic investments is far more important to our competitiveness with China. Instead, this inflated budget seeks to sugarcoat that for years we have been decreasing investments in diplomacy and the support of our servicemembers in favor of purchasing new, unproven, and un-needed weapons.

We need to have an honest conversation about the Pentagon budget and focus on what is achievable, what the real threats are, and what we actually need for our national security. For the last 20 years, we have been told that we need more, but I think it is time to recognize that there are simply not military solutions to every problem.

I thank Congresswoman Lee for offering this amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'', and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith), who is the esteemed chair of the Armed Services Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time I have remaining.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Ocasio-Cortez).

Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close.

Mr. Speaker, I hear my colleagues on the other side talk a lot about the needs from Afghanistan. What is interesting is that in the continuing resolution that this body passed just yesterday there was additional supplemental funding for Afghanistan, and yet my colleagues on the other side of the aisle decided to vote against it.

I also hear them talk about the threats and the briefings that supposedly we were not in. I sit on both the Foreign Affairs and Armed Services Committees, I assure you, Mr. Speaker, I have been to every single one of those classified briefings on the threats. I am very aware of the threats. But we need to dispel the notion that our ability to respond to the threats depends solely on the size of our military.

I am honored to represent San Diego, a proud military community. They don't need a larger budget. They need one that takes their needs into account, which means better wages and housing free of mold, childcare and job opportunities for their spouses, and they need a government that goes through every diplomatic channel before making the decision to send them to war.

Earlier this month vice chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General John Hyten asked: Do you think any taxpayer in this country would believe that for $700 billion a year we can't have a great defense?

Hyten said: We should be able to, and it is crazy that we can't.

He is right. It is crazy, and more of us need to be willing to say what everyone knows is true: we don't need to spend money even the Pentagon themselves are not asking for.

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

Madam Speaker, in San Diego County, which I am proud to represent, since the pandemic started, more than 500 childcare providers have closed their doors, and the families of more than 190,000 kids don't have access to the care they need.

Across the country, nearly 1.6 million moms of children under 17 are still missing from the labor force--an economic crisis decades in the making.

The Build Back Better Act is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to lower the cost of childcare, expand availability, and boost the wages of the essential childcare workers that make our country go.

It isn't just the right thing for our families, it is the right thing for our economy. According to a Nobel Prize-winning economist, we save $7 for every $1 we invest in quality early childhood programs. So while some of my colleagues may argue that we can't afford to do these things, the truth is we can't afford not to.

Madam Speaker, we have to meet this moment, and we have to build back better.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to oppose my colleague Congresswoman Claudia Tenney's amendment No. 34, which would maintain the arbitrary 25 percent cap on U.S. contributions to U.N. peacekeeping operations.

I recently introduced legislation, the U.S. Commitment to Peacekeeping Act that would, among other things, permanently repeal this cap and ensure that the United States is fulfilling its commitments to the United Nations.

As someone who used to work at the U.N. Department of Peace Operations, I know firsthand how the cap and resulting arrears have harmed our interests. It damages our standing and credibility at the U.N. making it difficult to effectively advocate for human rights.

It reduces our ability to conduct proper oversight and accountability through needed reforms, something my colleagues on both sides of the aisle agree is important.

It also impairs peacekeeping missions' ability to operate and delays funding to peacekeepers.

All of this makes it harder for the United States to advocate for and secure its interests. In order to fully lead on the global stage, we need to fully commit to our international obligations.

Tenney amendment No. 34 is counterproductive. I oppose it in the strongest terms, and urge my colleagues to join me in rejecting these efforts to weaken our standing at the U.N. and around the world.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this en bloc package and thank the gentlewoman for including my amendment today.

Madam Speaker, before coming to Congress, I served at the State Department working on countering and preventing violent extremism and addressing the real drivers behind it. What we know is that it is not possible to solely rely on security assistance and military tools to counter violent extremism. In fact, one of the common drivers of local recruitment into these extremist groups is abuses by state security forces.

When the United States provides security assistance to militaries tasked with countering violent groups, we need to acknowledge the possible consequences and ensure that the assistance we do provide is not going to people who will abuse their own citizens and, in turn, exacerbate the very problem we are seeking to address in the first place. We need to properly allocate resources to actually address the drivers of violence and conflict, which means more funding to efforts like the Global Fragility Act.

Madam Speaker, I look forward to working with my colleagues on these efforts.