Susan Davis

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, March 8, 2011, I missed the following votes due to illness. Had I been present, I would have voted: ``Yea'' on rollcall No. 163. ``Yea'' on rollcall No. 164.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, it's hard not to get angry when watching the news or reading the newspaper about Wisconsin. We are trying to recover from the biggest financial crisis since the Depression, and who is getting the blame for our Nation's fiscal problems? Teachers. Teachers certainly aren't the people who caused the Great Recession. It was a group of Wall Street executives who brought about the financial crisis which led to the budget shortfalls in the States. Blaming teachers or cutting their pay is wrong. Working to strip them of the basic American right to collectively bargain because some greedy Wall Street executives made huge mistakes and went too far, well, that's absolutely also wrong. Of course, Wall Street executives have gone back to collecting big bonuses while teachers and public workers are collecting the ridicule. It's time to quit blaming hardworking and dedicated teachers and let them get back to focusing on their students.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Veterans Home Loan Refinance Opportunity Act of 2011. This bipartisan legislation improves the federal Qualified Veterans Mortgage Bonds (QVMB) program to allow eligible states to use tax-free bond proceeds to refinance the home mortgages of our military veterans. This legislation is necessary during our troubled economic times. QVMB home loan financing was not available to newly discharged veterans returning home from Iraq and Afghanistan until passage of the Heroes Earning Assistance Relief Tax Act of 2008 (H.R. 6081) in the 110th Congress. Prior to 2008, some veterans may have taken out adjustable-rate mortgages (ARM) to purchase a home during the real estate boom earlier in the decade. It is only fair to them that they have the same opportunity as newly discharged veterans to take advantage of the low- interest, fixed rate mortgages available through QVMB financing. For some veterans with a costly ARM or interest-only mortgage, this legislation could prevent a foreclosure. Finally, Mr. Speaker, this legislation includes an inflation index to ensure the QVMB veterans home loan program remains viable in the future. I urge passage of the Veterans Home Loan Refinance Opportunity Act.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chair, I strongly oppose this bill's elimination of funding for Title X family planning services. This extremely successful program helps both men and women access lifesaving preventative healthcare, including breast exams, cancer screenings, and HIV tests. The proposed cuts in H.R. 1 would eliminate these, which is unconscionable. If my colleagues across the aisle really want to reduce the number of abortions in this country, they should support Title X funding which helps prevent unintended pregnancies through education and access to contraception. In my home state of California, Title X helps more than 200,000 women avoid unintended pregnancies. The birth rate among California teenagers has decreased by more than half since 1992. Without Title X funding it would be 37 percent higher! Eliminating the $2.2 million in Title X funds that San Diego County receives every year will mean taking away care in a state already struggling with limited resources. I will not let San Diego families lose these valuable health services. When women have better access to family planning, it leads to healthier outcomes for both mother and child. Leadership proposes these cuts under the guise of being ``fiscally responsible,'' but that is far from reality, particularly for states that are in budget crises like California. The contraceptive and other reproductive health services provided at Title X--supported centers in my state saved $581,890,000 in public funds in 2008 alone. Cutting family planning is fiscally irresponsible. Eliminating it doesn't save taxpayers any money; in fact, it puts their health and potentially their lives at risk. That is a cost we cannot afford.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chair, I respect the gentleman's interest in the issues before NOAA. But I will have to oppose this effort. Representative Hall's amendment sends the wrong message about the need to meet the growing demands of our nation's businesses and communities for reliable and relevant climate information. Some of us might disagree on the extent climate change is taking place. But to discourage research is a big mistake. Regardless of your opinion, timely and relevant climate information benefits communities, local governments, and businesses. A significant portion of the success of the U.S. economy depends on accurate weather and climate information. Local governments in my home region of San Diego are planning for future trends or changes to sea levels--and NOAA' s research is critical to their work. This amendment also sets poor precedent and policy. NOAA is implementing an internal, budget-neutral organizational structure with the Climate Service office. Using a budget CR to restructure an agency without input or sufficient debate is questionable. Major restructuring efforts should be well thought out and involve study. Let the scientists and the researchers decide what's worthy of their attention. I ask my colleagues to oppose this amendment.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I'll bet the American people are really surprised tonight because we are debating a continuing resolution when they are facing tremendous challenges. We should be thinking about them and about the challenges they face. We should be talking, as my colleague has said, about how to save money and about how to create jobs. Instead, we are debating an amendment that will do neither. It will undermine women's health. This amendment denies women access to reproductive care, and it attacks the health providers that they rely on in their communities. These are health providers that are serving the underserved, and we are spending the evening attacking them. Planned Parenthood plays a critical role in our Nation's health care system. We know that. These clinics help over 3 million Americans every year. More than 90 percent of the care they provide is preventative. ``Preventative.'' What does that mean? We have many physicians here. What does that mean, ``preventative care''? ``Preventative care'' means that men and women do not have to go through more costly procedures and even that their lives can be saved. One in five American women has been to a Planned Parenthood health center for services like breast cancer screenings and cervical cancer screenings. We talked about all of that this evening. I cannot let San Diego families lose these valuable services. I will not let that happen, because I know that, when women have better access to these services, it leads to healthier outcomes for both the women and their children. But this amendment proposes to cut these services under the guise somehow of being fiscally responsible. That's not true. What I know about my State of California is that title X-supported centers saved $581,890,000 in public funds in 2008 alone. So let's talk about saving money. Let's talk about creating jobs. Let's not talk about constricting women's access to health care. Vote ``no'' on the Pence amendment.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, America has always been at the forefront of medical innovation--with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) making us the leader at creating life-saving technology. Millions of Americans live healthier, more productive lives as a result of our medical research funding The innovative and cutting-edge research funded by the NIH has also given the United States thousands of good jobs and contributed to creating a strong middle class. Now we're voting on a budget that will cut over $1.5 billion from one of the key engines of American innovation. H.R. 1 is a set back to medical research and a set back to our economic recovery. Vote for amendment number 213 to preserve critical NIH funding.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, my mother always told me that if you have your health, you have everything, which is why I have always believed every American should have access to the care they need to be healthy. Now my colleagues want to repeal health care without an alternative. Well, it is easy to say you are against something, but it is much harder to come up with solutions. Americans deserve to know how my colleagues' plan will protect patients. Specifically, women shouldn't get denied care based on gender or have to pay hundreds more in insurance premiums than men, nor should they need a permission slip to see an OB-GYN. The 32 million Americans without insurance need access to coverage. Insurers shouldn't deny children coverage because they have been sick. Medicare must be kept solvent over the long term, and seniors should have access to affordable prescriptions. Americans shouldn't face outrageous annual premium hikes, such as the 59 percent increase many of my own constituents are looking at today. The health care reform bill addresses each of these problems and many more. It is irresponsible to repeal without a plan to fix the issues in our health care system. Further, thanks to Governor Schwarzenegger's efforts before leaving office, California is leading the way in implementing reforms already authorizing health insurance exchange marketplaces to buy affordable insurance. Repeal will cripple health reform efforts in my State and leave it without direction going forward. I can't support legislation that does not offer solutions and goes backward. Let's focus on creating jobs and not taking away health care from patients.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support this concurrent resolution to allow for the use of the rotunda in recognition of the 50th anniversary of President Kennedy's inaugural address. You may have read this morning's Washington Post front page story, declaring that 82 percent of Americans think the tone of our Nation's political discourse is negative. At a time when the majority of Americans holds our political discourse in such low regard, there couldn't be a more timely or necessary opportunity to revisit the inaugural address that inspired our country 50 years ago. The speech called for unity, for respect of opposing views and for commitment to public service, all at a time of great change and challenge for the United States. It was a call for everyone to work together, to do their part in making America and the world a better place. The words that were spoken on January 20, 1961, still ring true to this day. In the words of President Kennedy: ``So let us begin anew, remembering on both sides that civility is not a sign of weakness, and sincerity is always subject to proof. ``Let us never negotiate out of fear, but let us never fear to negotiate. ``Let both sides explore what problems unite us instead of belaboring those problems which divide us.'' Mr. Speaker, 50 years ago, the President's inaugural address sought to challenge our country and its leaders, and it set standards that still must guide our political discourse and ourselves, particularly with its closing lines: ``Ask of us here the same high standards of strength and sacrifice which we ask of you. ``With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love.'' I hope all of my colleagues will continue to work together to answer President Kennedy's call, and I urge all Members to support this resolution.

Mrs. DAVIS of California. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I will support this bill in the form now before the House. It certainly bothers me to see multiple copies of bills in our office's recycling bins every day. Too many bill copies waste time, trees, and taxpayer dollars. The gentleman is right to examine this matter and try to effect a reduction if appropriate. This amended bill represents a vast improvement from the original version. Concerns were raised about the original bill's possible adverse effect on the Clerk's staff and others who labor in support positions inside the House and Senate, so I commend the gentleman for listening to concerns and making sensible changes. As we consider this bill, we must remember that our democracy doesn't work well without transparency in government. Nobody wants to disrupt the legislative process inadvertently or to make it harder for any Americans to read the bills. Although we can't forget that while many Americans still do not have adequate access to the Internet, all congressional offices certainly have the ability to obtain their own bill copies when they need to. So this bill rightly maintains public access to important documents while saving the people's money. Mr. Speaker, I urge an ``aye'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. She cares about their concerns, fears, and hopes and knows how to work with people from all political persuasions. My heart goes out to everyone affected by this massacre, and the shock from it reverberates throughout my community and our country. So I am listening to my constituents that hope that this tragedy will engage us anew in serious and civil discourse on how we can leave a better world for our children and our grandchildren. That is what Gabby strived to do daily. It is what she would want us to be doing right now.

Mrs. DAVIS of California. I come here today shaken by an act of horrific proportions and yet heartened by bountiful acts of the human spirit. We are comforted that in these times, the pain and the shock can be lightened, if only temporarily, by knowing that the good overwhelms the bad. I think that is how Gabby would want us to reflect today. We grieve for the losses and the pain felt in the community of Tucson for ordinary people who we learned are quite extraordinary. We know the tireless efforts of our own staff who come to work every day with one goal in mind--to help people. That's why we mourn the loss of Gabe Zimmerman. But most of all, I come here today to send, in the most public way I can, my love and Mi Shebeirach--a Hebrew prayer for the sick which celebrates the spirit of healing to those recovering from their wounds, and particularly to my dear friend and colleague, Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. People beyond Gabby's district are learning about the political acumen of this talented and engaging leader. As public servants, we do our jobs by listening to the American people--by looking constituents in the eye, assuring them that we want to help, letting them know that we understand with a nod, a handshake, and most often a hug, as Gabby frequently was known to do. To have that important connection so shaken by the attempted assassination of our colleague and friend is devastating. But Gabby, of all people, was an example of what it means to be connected to your district. I know she wouldn't stand for this kind of violence, but she also wouldn't stand for allowing it to stop us from our service. Whenever she talked about her constituents, she prefaced it with, ``I really understand where they are coming from, and we need to solve this problem.'' Her constituents are fortunate to have such a representative with such energy and skill who cares about them so deeply.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. ``If any such bill shall not be returned by the President within 10 days, Sundays excepted, after it shall have been presented to him, the same shall be a law in like manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their adjournment prevent its return, in which case it shall not be a law.''

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on House Administration be discharged from further consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 1783) making a technical correction to a cross-reference in the final regulations issued by the Office of Compliance to implement the Veterans Employment Opportunities Act of 1998 that apply to the House of Representatives and employees of the House of Representatives, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, before I briefly summarize the Personnel Subcommittee portion of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act, I want to thank the bill's namesake. Chairman Skelton, as my colleagues on both sides of the aisle have said, has been a most extraordinary leader, and I am personally very grateful for his mentorship. Our country, Mr. Skelton, Ike, is better for your service, and you will be greatly missed. The bill before us improves the quality of life for our servicemembers, for their families and military survivors, and I am pleased that the chairman as well as my colleagues have spoken about how important these personnel issues are. In fact, we know our national security is embodied in our people who serve. There are many important elements to that bill. It allows a 1.4 percent pay raise to keep pace with the private sector; authorizes TRICARE beneficiaries to extend health coverage to children up to age 26 and bars increases in medical care premiums; improves access to mental health and other medical providers; and it puts in place recommendations for sexual assault prevention from the Defense Task Force on Sexual Assault in the Military Services. I urge my colleague to support the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, on Friday, December 17, 2010, I missed the following votes. Had I been present, I would have voted: ``yea'' on rollcall No. 652; ``yea'' on rollcall No. 653; and ``yea'' on rollcall No. 654.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. I yield 1 minute, Mr. Speaker, to the majority leader of the House of Representatives, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee). (Mr. INSLEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Al Green).

Mrs. DAVIS of California. I yield the gentleman 10 additional seconds.

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1764, I call up the bill (H.R. 2965) to amend the Small Business Act with respect to the Small Business Innovation Research Program and the Small Business Technology Transfer Program, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendment thereto, and I have a motion at the desk.

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from Wisconsin, Ms. Tammy Baldwin.

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murphy), who is the sponsor of the bill.

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and in which to insert extraneous material in the Record on the bill.