Judy Chu

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, a 2017 report from the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services found that about 70,000 seniors on Medicare received prescriptions for what the report described as an extreme amount of opioids during a single year. This means that these seniors were receiving 2.5 times the level the Centers for Disease Control recommends for patients with chronic pain. Another 22,000 beneficiaries were identified as doctor shopping, which means that they received a high number of opioids from multiple prescribers and pharmacies. The opioid crisis is not exclusive to young people. That same OIG report found that one-third of Medicare part D beneficiaries received an opioid prescription in 2016, which is about 79.4 million prescriptions. While there are certainly individuals who have a legitimate need for these drugs, H.R. 5676 will help Medicare part D plans crack down on the bad actors who are flooding our communities with excessive opioid pills. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support H.R. 5723, the Expanding Oversight of Opioid Prescribing and Payment Act. As I mentioned earlier, 80 percent of low-risk surgery patients receive an opioid prescription to treat their postsurgical pain. These prescriptions are certainly necessary for many patients, but with such a high percentage, we must examine if Medicare payment policies are ultimately discouraging the use of nonopioid alternatives. This bill, introduced by Representatives Suzan DelBene and Claudia Tenney, would require the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, or MedPAC, to submit a report to Congress detailing how Medicare reimburses pain management treatments in a hospital setting. This report will also examine what incentives exist in the inpatient prospective payment system and outpatient prospective payment system for overprescribing and how prescribing data is tracked and monitored in Medicare claims. This crisis was not created in a vacuum, and it will take efforts from all aspects of the healthcare system to find a solution, including examining how our hospital payment policies have pushed providers towards prescribing such addictive medications. I support H.R. 5723 and efforts to determine which policies within Medicare, if any, have contributed to this opioid epidemic. I am also strongly supportive of the directive within this report to realign payment policies to increase access to nonopioid alternatives for pain management. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I must reiterate that while I support the efforts of this bill to direct MedPAC to examine which structural policies within Medicare are contributing to this opioid crisis, I believe that we need to do more than study the problem. We need to dedicate resources to fixing it. We need to invest in longer treatment programs and comprehensive recovery programs that provide safe housing, peer support, and mental health services. And while we should absolutely examine the policies that brought us to this crisis in the first place, we need to do more to find long-lasting solutions. So I implore my colleagues today to ensure that this package of bills is not the end of the discussion. I hope to see more hearings, more proposals, and more testimony from experts on how we can enact Federal policies that will save lives. I hope that instead of attacking our existing healthcare system, Republicans work with Democrats to improve the Affordable Care Act, increase access to coverage, work to bring down premiums, and invest in the public health of our Nation. Addiction is a disease, not a choice. I look forward to working with my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to eradicate this disease from our communities. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge support for H.R. 4684, the Ensuring Access to Quality Sober Living Act. As we work to address our Nation's opioid crisis, it is important that we address recovery, in addition to treatment and prevention. Addiction is a lifelong condition. After seeking treatment, individuals suffering from addiction need stable living environments, mental health services, and peer support to maintain their sobriety. Recovery is what this bill seeks to address. I introduced this bill because of my constituent, Ryan Hampton. Ryan was once a promising White House intern who was succeeding in college and who had his whole life ahead of him. But in his early twenties, he broke his knee hiking and was prescribed opiates for the pain. He soon became dependent on prescription drugs. He was labeled a drug seeker and was discharged from medical care. Unfortunately, this did nothing to address his addiction. Without seeing any other options, he turned to heroin. Within a few months, Ryan was homeless and living on the streets. It wasn't until after he overdosed that Ryan got the help he needed. After he recovered, Ryan eventually was able to be in a treatment center. He told me that he considered himself one of the lucky ones. By the time I met Ryan, he was a year and a half sober and an active advocate for the recovery community. He used his second chance to speak on behalf of others battling this devastating addiction--people like his friend, Tyler. Tyler was living in a sober living home, or a recovery residence, when he died of a heroin overdose. Sober homes are great a resource for those newly out of treatment. They provide a safe and stable living environment to help people transition back into their lives without addiction. Sober homes have an added responsibility because the risk of overdose for those individuals can be the highest while in recovery. Unfortunately, some sober homes can be unequipped to handle at-risk patients or do not employ staff with specialty training for individuals in recovery. Sadly, some of these facilities are bad actors that do not encourage recovery, but exploit vulnerable individuals recently released from treatment in order to collect insurance payments. For example, Tyler's home didn't have naloxone on site, which is a drug that can counteract an overdose. Outraged and heartbroken, Ryan came to me to seek a solution. People like Tyler, who do everything right to get themselves sober, should know that they can trust the sober living homes and others on whom they rely for support. Together, we worked on a bill that I introduced to create best practices as well as standards for sober living facilities. I cannot express my pride enough when, just a few years after addiction forced him onto the streets, Ryan appeared before Congress this spring to testify in front of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health to share his story and to encourage investment in recovery the way that we are investing in prevention and treatment. That is exactly what H.R. 4684 would do. It would allow the Department of Health and Human Services to establish a set of best practices that sober homes could adopt so that individuals in treatment and their families can help differentiate the bad actors from the good. These benchmarks would take into account existing standards developed by the National Alliance for Recovery Residences, such as requiring that all fees and charges be explained to residents and that naloxone be available and accessible for use in emergency. As Ryan said in his congressional testimony, not having naloxone on hand is like not having lifeboats on a ship. H.R. 4684 would also provide technical assistance to States that wish to adopt or implement these standards so that the recovery community has the support it needs. Unfortunately, Tyler's story is not unique. I have heard from advocates in Arizona, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Ohio, and countless others who are concerned for their friends and neighbors living in unregulated sober living facilities. That is why I am so thrilled to have H.R. 4684 on the floor here today. We need to stand behind those who have done the difficult task of seeking and completing treatment and ensure that the homes in which they live are able to meet their needs. I would like to thank Representatives Ruiz, Walters, and Bilirakis for joining me as original cosponsors of this bill and for supporting it during their work on the Energy and Commerce Committee. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to Mr. Gallagher's amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act. This harmful amendment would add language to the NDAA that specifically targets Chinese foreign nationals who receive U.S. employment or student visas for extra scrutiny by our Federal Government. If this amendment were to confine itself to the serious issue of safeguarding American interests against foreign political influence, industrial acquisitions, and regional global capabilities, it might be supportable. But this amendment specifically targets an ethnic population in this country by singling out the Chinese who participate in student visa programs and who are receiving employment visas. While there is no doubt that we must take national security threats from foreign countries seriously, including Russia, this amendment assumes that there is widespread abuse of our visa program from China alone and attempts to paint all Chinese students, scholars, and employees, en masse, as potential spies for China. This underlying bill already includes elements to address interstate strategic competition and does so without creating a precedent for singling out individuals because of their country of origin. We have seen how our government's policies and actions towards foreign nationals have the ability to impact Americans of certain ethnic backgrounds. We need to look no further than the examples of Sherry Chen and Dr. Xioaxing Xi, two Chinese-American scientists who were wrongfully accused of being spies for China, only to have their charges dropped with no explanation. In fact, just this month, Sherry Chen was exonerated by a judge who said that her case was a case of gross miscarriage of justice. It is reckless to categorize an entire country of people as a threat to our national security, and I reject these overly broad and dangerous attempts to build a case that all Chinese students and employees should be viewed with more suspicion in this country than others.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Music Modernization Act. As co-chair of the Congressional Creative Rights Caucus, I am proud to stand with my colleagues to support this consensus bill that aims to modernize our copyright law. Music is at the heart of how we experience life. We count on the right song to help us express a moment better than we could ourselves. For music creators, their works help them support their families, keep a roof over their head, and food on the table. But, for far too long, I have heard from songwriters whose compensation was less than pennies in digital play for number one hits, and I have heard from music legends who are touring well into their seventies because their works created before 1972 are not eligible for royalties on digital broadcasts. This bill will help bring our copyright law into the digital era and address the gaps that prevent creators from receiving fair compensation for their work. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote for this bill. The lives of our most treasured creators depend on it.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, after years of irresponsibly adding to our national debt in order to make the rich richer, Republicans are now trying to con the American people with this insidious and insincere balanced budget amendment. I say insincere because Republicans have been the greatest contributors to our national debt. They eagerly supported and even extended President Bush's 2001 tax cuts, which added more than $5 trillion to the deficit over 10 years. And at the start of this Congress, they rushed headlong into another $2.3 trillion tax scam that the Congressional Budget Office says will put our deficit over $1 trillion within just 2 years. And what do the American people get for all of that? Very little, if you are not already rich, since 80 percent of that $2.3 trillion goes straight to the top 1 percent. Here is why I say this is insidious. First, they pass a Robin Hood tax scam that robs the coffers and gives it to the wealthiest, then they use that debt that they themselves created to justify draconian cuts to the vast majority of Americans who are not millionaires. In his budget, President Trump proposed cuts of $1.4 trillion from Medicaid, $500 billion from Medicare, $65 billion from Social Security. Fortunately, Democrats blocked these cuts, but if this amendment passes, look out, America. The programs you depend on will be pillaged to pay for the Republican tax cuts, despite our warnings that it would result in exactly this situation. In fact, the latest Center on Budget and Policy report said that the cuts mandated by this amendment would result in Social Security being cut by $325 billion in 2025 alone.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor and remember Pomona Police Officer Greggory Casillas, a constituent of mine who was struck down in the line of duty. It was Greggory's dream to be a police officer. He studied police reports after hours, and he always carried flashcards and books to prepare for the police officer exam. His hard work paid off. Friday, March 9 was the final day of Officer Casillas' ghost phase, the last day before he went out on his own. As one colleague said: ``I've never met someone so eager to become a police officer.'' Tragically, that was also the day Officer Casillas was shot, trying to make contact with a suspect who had fled the police. Officer Casillas put himself at risk so that we could be safer, and we can never thank him enough. I am so grateful for heroes like Officer Casillas, and I join the hundreds of others who have attended vigils in his honor when I say that he will never be forgotten for his sacrifice.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the long, full life of a political trailblazer, the Honorable March Fong Eu. After more than thirty years in public service, March Fong Eu leaves behind a legacy of respected leadership and broken barriers. Her success opened doors for immigrants and women throughout the state of California. A daughter of Chinese immigrants, her desire for equality can be traced back to her time in high school, when a school counselor discouraged her from pursuing a career in the sciences because she believed her Chinese ancestry would prevent anyone from hiring her. She was not deterred and she pursued education to the highest levels. After graduating from the University of California Berkeley in 1943 with a bachelor's degree in dental hygiene, she received her master's degree in education at Mills College. She then received a doctorate in education from Stanford University in 1954. Ambassador Fong Eu built a career that paved the way for women and Asian Americans who followed her. She first became interested in politics while serving as the first female president of the American Dental Hygienists Association from 1944 to 1947. Years later, she entered the world of politics as the first female Asian American to be elected to the Alameda County Board of Education, where she served from 1961 to 1966. She was also the first Asian American woman to be elected to the California State Assembly, where she represented the 15th District for four terms from 1966 to 1974. In 1974, she became the first female California Secretary of State, and the first Asian American to be elected to a California constitutional office. At the time, she was the recipient of the highest vote total for a statewide elected office, and won reelection to four more terms. In 1994, President Bill Clinton appointed her as U.S. Ambassador to the Federated States of Micronesia. Ambassador Fong Eu believed everyone should be treated equally regardless of their gender or ethnicity, and her accomplishments while in office reflect those beliefs. One of her most important campaigns was the successful ban on pay toilets in public buildings. She argued that while men's urinals were free, women were treated as second-class citizens because they were being unfairly charged for the use of public bathrooms. While serving as Secretary of State, she championed voting rights and dramatically expanded access to voting by implementing voter registration by mail, absentee ballots upon request, and allowing voters to register at the Department of Motor Vehicles and other state agencies. She is an inspiration and role model for all Californians. As more women and minorities are elected to public office, March Fong Eu's legacy will carry on as they continue the fight for equality and justice.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Lois Catherine Banks Richard, who passed away after a life of devotion to her family and service to her community. Born in Pasadena, California in 1931, Lois was instilled with the spirit of activism from a young age by her parents. She graduated from Pasadena High School at the age of 16 and went on to become the only African American student on the English Council, Red Cross Council and elected to the Pasadena City College Associated Student Body Cabinet. She transferred to UCLA, where she earned a Bachelor's Degree in Education. After graduating in 1952, Lois married her husband, Rodney Richard, Jr., at All Saints Church in Pasadena. She and Rod soon returned to Pasadena, where Lois pursued teaching and dedicated her career to the students and families of her hometown. Lois taught elementary school in the Pasadena Unified School District, where she was known for her positive and encouraging teaching style. In 1966, she spearheaded the development of the Pasadena Head Start Program, working to expand early education to underprivileged children and families in the community. Under her guidance, Pasadena saw the development of three new care centers, the Home Start Program, and the Head Start Enrichment Program--services that supported education, child care, and housing for those in need. Always looking for ways to further her own education, Lois earned a Master's Degree from Azusa Pacific University by taking night classes while working full-time and caring for her family. After completing graduate school, she went on to be elected as State President of the Association of Head Start Administrators and was appointed to the National Executive Board, where she served before retiring from Head Start after 13 years of service. Lois was a leader in her community and an activist for social progress throughout her life. In 1979, she ran for Pasadena's City Council, but despite winning a majority of her district's votes, she lost the ensuing citywide runoff election. Seeing how this system prevented fair representation for her community, Lois sought to make a difference. She was joined by organizations like the ACLU and the NAACP in a lawsuit that changed Pasadena's civic voting rules to allow district representation, a cause that sparked similar movements across the country. Lois made an impact in the lives of countless students, families, coworkers, and friends, and was recognized for her long career of service by the National Head Start Association and by the California State Assembly, which honored her as their 1988 Woman of the Year. On behalf of our community, it is my distinct honor to commemorate the life of Lois Catherine Banks Richard.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, we don't want to go to school in a prison. That was the message I heard today from five incredible students from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. As they get ready for their school to reopen, what kind of school will we be sending them and all of our children back to? It should not be one of armed teachers. They should be there to teach. What they need are real solutions. Military-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines are designed for the sole purpose of killing as many people as possible. They have no place on our streets. No matter what gun you are buying, nobody should be able to complete a purchase without clearing a background check. That is common sense. But Republicans are refusing to act because the NRA and gun manufacturers value profits over safety. That is not right. The students told me today that they want to make ending gun violence a priority for their generation, and that means acting today.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 4712. This bill would allow the Federal Government to override a doctor's medical judgment, without exception. It is motivated by politics, not science. First, this bill reiterates current law, which already protects all newborns from medical negligence. Second, the criminal penalties in this bill go above and beyond current law and are clearly intended to intimidate doctors. This isn't sound medical practice. This is politics impeding a doctor's medical judgment. And what is more, this intimidation would endanger newborns. This bill would require all newborn infants to be immediately transferred to the nearest hospital, but not all hospitals have neonatal units, or it might be harmful to move the infant immediately. Clearly, the intent is not to protect newborns but to stir outrage. This bill is a solution in search of a problem. It is unnecessary, redundant, and part of a broader attack on women's health and reproductive rights from this Chamber and the Trump administration. I strongly urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, less than 24 hours after it passed, we already have to come back to vote on fixes to the Republican tax scam. This bill was so needlessly rushed that there wasn't even time to proofread. I can only wonder what other mistakes we will discover in the coming days, weeks, and months. This was sloppy lawmaking and bad policymaking. In order to give massive tax cuts to corporate interests and the top 1 percent, Republicans have created trillions in new debt that will have to be paid for by, you guessed it, the rest of us. Republicans claim that everybody is getting a tax cut. But if you read it--something they clearly didn't do--you will see that 83 percent of the benefits go to the top 1 percent. The average savings for the lowest earners is just $60. My own constituents in California can actually expect to pay more in taxes thanks to the capping of the State and local tax deduction. Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to this tax scam, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, we were promised a middle class tax cut. This is not it. What we have instead are tax cuts for the wealthiest paid for by the rest. So what happened? Maybe Trump thinks multimillionaires are the middle class or maybe this all is just a tax scam. To see how working families will pay for corporate interest, all you have to do is read the bill, which is hard to do, because it was written overnight behind closed doors. Tax cuts: they reduce the tax rate for the wealthiest from 39.6 percent to 37 percent. State and local taxes: they cap the deduction to just $10,000. But in my State of California, the average deduction is $18,500, meaning families will be forced to pay taxes now on twice their income in order to give a staggering tax break to corporations. So hear this: 83 percent of the benefits of this bill goes to the top 1 percent. Who gets cut? Seniors, families, children. Is this the right thing to do? The answer is a resounding no.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, this tax scam is one of the greatest cons I have seen in my time in Congress, and Republicans know it. Why else would they rush to vote without giving the public time to review or understand legislation that impacts 100 percent of our economy? In the Senate, they even shattered regular order to pass this bill with handwritten, illegible changes in the dead of night on Saturday. Perhaps it is because they don't want anybody to see how far this bill strays from their promises. They promised historic tax cuts, but unless you are already rich or a corporation already seeing record profits, you are unlikely to benefit. Instead, you and your children will be paying to make the rich richer. Republicans don't even deny that individuals get less than corporations. But it is okay, they claim, because that money will get to you eventually. They keep citing these magical numbers of money that you will get, but we know these dollars won't come. Whether losing deductions for State and local taxes, paying more for student loans, or facing higher healthcare prices, thanks to the repeal of the mandate, the GOP tax scam will hurt millions.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, one thing is clear about the GOP tax scam: corporate interests get a huge giveaway. They get a windfall tax break. Who pays for it? The middle class. Who wins? Corporations, billionaires, millionaires, the Trump family. Who loses? Women, families, seniors, teachers, students. As a former Los Angeles Community College teacher of 20 years, I can't believe what Republicans are doing to students. They rip away critical benefits that help our students pay for their college education. They eliminate the student loan interest deductions and choose to tax graduate students on money they have never even received by taxing the tuition assistance they get for working for their schools. This bill even pinches students when they are still in elementary school by taxing their teachers who claim a deduction for the school supplies they pay for out of their own paycheck. One teacher in my area even pays for the ink in her classroom printer. They don't ask to be repaid, just to be able to deduct the expense. If corporations get to keep this deduction, why not our teachers? And then if that is not cruel enough, they eliminate the deduction for extraordinary medical expenses for those with Alzheimer's and cancer. And this week we learn that Republicans plan to pay for these corporate cuts by causing 13 million people to lose their health insurance, a move that will increase premiums by 10 percent and result in individuals with preexisting conditions losing access to lifesaving affordable coverage. Then Republicans eliminate the State and local ta deduction, which is used by over 6 million California households, to prevent their hard- earned dollars from being taxed twice. Of all the States, Californians will actually face the largest net tax increase from this bill of $12.1 billion in 2027 alone. California Republicans who vote for this bill ought to be ashamed of themselves, and the voters need to hold them accountable. Thirty-six million middle class families will be stuck holding the bag under this plan. For what? For tax cuts for corporate interests. This is unacceptable.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the GOP tax scam bill, H.R. 1, which, considering who it really helps, should be labeled ``H.R. 1 percent.'' As a member of the Ways and Means Committee, I offered amendments to ensure the middle class benefits, but Republicans rejected those proposals in order to give away tax cuts for corporate interests and the top 1 percent. Instead, H.R. 1 percent repeals the deductions for State and local taxes, raising taxes on California families who already pay more to the Federal Government than they receive back. In fact, the average middle class California family who owns a home will see an average tax increase of 26.4 percent, making California the hardest hit State in the country. It is outrageous. The SALT deduction enables communities to fund important services that improve our quality of life, like law enforcement, infrastructure, and education. But repealing it forces constituents in my State to either accept higher taxes or a lower standard of living, all to pay for tax cuts for corporations and the wealthiest few. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the GOP tax scam.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to the underlying rule that would allow for consideration of the Senate-passed Republican Budget. If passed, this budget would allow Republicans to fast-track their tax plan through Congress without Democratic support. Now, I stand in support of a tax plan to help the middle class, but that is not the tax plan we are seeing proposed by Republicans. Instead, we see that 80 percent of the benefits will go to the richest 1 percent in this country. The problem? Somebody has to pay for it, and it looks like it could be the middle class. I have heard from workers worried that cuts of contributions to their 401(k) plans will ruin their retirement. I have heard from seniors worried that losing homeowners' incentives will make it harder for them to stay in their homes. And I have heard from families worried that a repeal of the State and local tax deduction will increase their tax burden. In fact, we know that one-third of the middle class will see their taxes increase under this plan. And the numbers show that, as our constituents begin to learn more, they are realizing that this plan only cuts taxes for the wealthy and corporate interests and leaves middle class families behind. That is why a Reuters poll released yesterday found that fewer than a third of Americans support the Republican tax plan at all. This tax plan for the rich will increase the deficit by $2.2 trillion. And who will pay for it? Your children and their grandchildren. They will have to suffer from the cuts made down along the line to education, to Medicaid, to Medicare. And for what? To make the rich richer? To line the pockets of Washington special interests? That is not right. Reject this budget. Most importantly, reject this tax plan.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Chair, typically, a budget is a blueprint for how our government plans to meet our obligations to our people; but not this time. By including reconciliation instructions for their tax plan, the Republicans are using this budget as a blueprint to give tax cuts to the wealthiest few, without requiring bipartisan support. Under this bill, a family making $50,000 a year could see their tax burden go up, while millionaires will save $230,000. And who will pay to make the rich richer? Our working families, children, and seniors. This budget slashes priorities like education, infrastructure, and veterans' benefits, and even guts Medicare and Medicaid by $1.5 trillion. ``You can't make guarantees,'' is how Treasury Secretary Mnuchin responded when asked if the Republican tax plan would help the middle class. But the thing is, you can make guarantees. If this Republican budget moves forward, it will guarantee that inequality gets worse, while the rest of us pay to help make millionaires into billionaires. Mr. Chairman, I reject this budget and ask my colleagues to oppose it.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, today I rise for Dr. Jennifer and her patients. This is their story. Dr. Jennifer's patients come from my home State of California. They were a married couple on their second pregnancy. They were so excited to grow their family. But they discovered, at 22 weeks, that the fetus was severely growth-restricted, had no fluid around it, had a cardiac anomaly, and would not survive the pregnancy. Although this was a wanted pregnancy, they chose to terminate the pregnancy at 23 weeks rather than prolong the suffering of the mother and her fetus. Dr. Jennifer wants lawmakers to know that abortion restrictions would have forced her patient to carry this pregnancy until the fetus died in the womb, despite the medical advice that their baby would not survive to term. H.R. 36 and policies like it deny families their constitutional right to a choice about how they want to move forward with medical decisions that impact their bodies and their families. On behalf of Dr. Jennifer and her patients, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on H.R. 36. We must stop these bans.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, MIECHV Program is an effective evidence-based program that I am proud to support because I know it results in healthier families and stronger communities, but I am shocked at the way Republicans are choosing to pay for it. Instead of enacting commonsense tax changes that could easily raise the needed revenue, Republicans have reached to the bottom of the barrel to find vulnerable people to harm. In order to come up with a way to pay for this important bipartisan program, they are choosing to take Supplemental Security Income away from vulnerable seniors, low-income individuals, or those with disabilities; and they are doing it by maligning them as fugitives and felons just because they have an outstanding warrant. But the truth is a very different story. The people who will be hurt by this bill are not hardened criminals. They haven't even had their day in court yet. In fact, many may not even know about the warrant because the police have decided that it is not worth pursuing. That is because the warrants are for small issues like writing a bad check or failing to appear for a hearing many years ago. Worse, these individuals are elderly, poor, or sick. They deserve support and help, not to be treated as a piggybank. Actually, piggybanks generally indicate savings. This is a policy equivalent of reaching into a couch cushion for change. We are talking about individuals who have a warrant from when they were a teenager or somebody with a mental illness who may not even remember the incident in question. This is cruel and unbecoming of this Congress. I know because we have tried this before. The last time this penalty was used, it meant catastrophe for very low-income people with disabilities and for seniors. It hurt people like J.H., a Californian with an intellectual disability and other mental impairments. J.H. had his SSI benefits stopped because of an Ohio warrant issued when he was 12 years old and running away to escape an abusive stepfather. This 4- foot-7-inch-tall, 85-pound boy was charged with assault for kicking a staff member at a detention center where he was being held until his mother could pick him up. Many years later, he had no recollection of the incident or the charges, but his SSI benefits were stopped nonetheless. Is that really how we want to pay for home visitations: Impoverishing one person to help another? That is why I worked to curb this bill's negative effects, by offering amendments that would protect those with dementia or keep it from increasing homelessness. Unfortunately, Republicans rejected both my amendments on a party line basis, so now we are stuck with this overly broad punitive bill that I cannot support.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, it has been 3 weeks since President Trump announced he would be ending DACA; 3 weeks of fear in homes, classrooms, and offices where DREAMers wonder if they still have a future here in the only home they have ever known; 3 weeks for Congress to answer President Trump's request for a bill that would stop him from executing his own cruel order. Here is that bill. Members from both parties have said they want to do something to protect DREAMers. Here is that something. Over 80 percent of Americans believe DREAMers who live, work, contribute, and follow the law should stay here. Here is our chance to show we are listening. We must pass the Dream Act because of people like Jose Antonio Vargas, an immigrant from the Philippines, who never knew he was undocumented until he applied for his learner's permit. But being undocumented didn't stop his pursuit of the American Dream. He worked hard and became a journalist, ultimately winning the Pulitzer Prize for his articles. Let's act to bring DREAMers like Jose out of the shadows. Let act to encourage more to achieve what he did. Let's right this wrong, stop the cruel end of DACA, and finally pass the Dream Act today.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the 130th Anniversary of First African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church in Pasadena, California, for their proud history and countless contributions to our community. Established in 1887, just one year after the founding of the City of Pasadena, First AME Church was organized at the home of Joseph Holmes, the first black settler in the city. The church became one of the first places where African Americans in the area could come together as a community. This was not without its challenges, as the small church faced hostility and opposition from their neighbors, forcing the congregation to move frequently before finally finding a long-term home in 1913. With this stability, First AME became a mainstay in the community and a catalyst for social change in Pasadena throughout the 20th Century. As a leader in the African American community's fight for racial equality, First AME was instrumental in efforts to desegregate Pasadena public schools, integrate the city's public workforce and main public pool, and in founding the Pasadena chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). Today, First AME continues its proud tradition of service to the community--hosting events to feed the hungry, house the homeless, provide job training, and collect clothing for those in need, all while offering a safe place for congregants to come together in worship. On this momentous anniversary, I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating First AME Church of Pasadena and its congregants for 130 years of proud service to their congregants and community.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, Ana was an intern in my office. She is also an undocumented immigrant. When DACA was announced, Ana was ecstatic. She told me that DACA meant she could qualify for financial aid or be an intern at the State Department. All she saw were opportunities to contribute to our country, and that is exactly what she has done. Thanks to DACA, Ana earned her master's degree and got a job helping other immigrants to lay roots and contribute, like she did. She was able to get a driver's license to safely get to school and work. And today, she is attending law school. Ana represents the promise that if you come here, work here, and contribute here, you will have a future here. But Donald Trump is breaking that promise by ending DACA. And so it is up to us to fix it. The bipartisan Dream Act will protect these DREAMers who are American in every way but on paper. Mr. Speaker, let us vote to restore our values and give these DREAMers the opportunities they deserve.

Ms. JUDY CHU of California

Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R. 3440, the DREAM Act, to protect DREAMers like Alfonso, who is in his third year at Western State College of Law in Orange County.