Susan Davis

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce the U.S.-China Language Engagement Act of 2009--a bill to close the knowledge deficit when it comes to our relationship with China. It is little news to anyone that China is on the rise. With a population of over 1.3 billion people and the second largest economy in the world when measured by domestic purchasing power parity, China is poised to become a world power, economically, diplomatically, and militarily. Yet at a time when China's influence on the world stage is increasing, our national understanding of the ``Middle Kingdom'' has not kept pace. While an estimated 200 million Chinese school children are studying our language and culture, less than 50,000 American elementary and secondary students are studying Chinese. The goal of the U.S.-China Language Engagement Act is to provide our schools with the resources they need to offer Chinese language instruction and cultural studies classes. This important legislation would instruct the Department of Education to offer competitive grants to Local Education Agencies (LEAs) to develop and implement innovative Chinese language and cultural studies programs. LEAs, in collaboration with institutions of higher education, may use grant funds to carry out intensive summer Chinese language instruction, link bilingual Chinese and English speakers with students and conduct virtual cultural exchanges with educational institutions in China. This bill is part of a broader legislative package seeking to improve our competitive edge and relationship with China. Some may view China's resurgence as a threat. But today, Madam Speaker, I ask you to turn China's rise into an opportunity for United States citizens. Through careful diplomacy, I believe China can become not only a competitor but also a partner. But we cannot have this dialogue if we cannot understand the Chinese people. This is why I come before you today: to ask for your help in ensuring that the lines of communication between the United States and China stay open. Please support the U.S.-China Language Engagement Act and help bridge the language barrier and cross the cultural gap between future generations of Americans and the Chinese.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of military Family Readiness Volunteers and Ombudsmen. This resolution honors the work of the Army's Family Readiness Volunteers, Air Force Key Spouse Volunteers, Navy Ombudsmen, Marine Corps Key Volunteers and Coast Guard Ombudsmen. Each day, thousands of men and women volunteer their time and efforts to help improve the quality of life for military families by serving as a channel between deployed units and their loved ones at home. Frequently, these important volunteers are spouses themselves. Family Readiness Volunteers and Ombudsmen help our families solve a variety of problems, and successfully meet the challenges service members and their families face before, during, and after deployments. I firmly believe that the outstanding performance of our service members is a testament to their efforts, and with today's high operational tempo, their services are as important as ever. They could not do their jobs and execute the missions at hand if they were constantly worried about their loved ones back home. As a proud San Diegan, I am fortunate enough to be able to meet with Navy Ombudsman several times a year to discuss these important issues. These Ombudsmen provide invaluable insight into the struggles and challenges our military families face every day. They truly serve as the voice and as an advocate of those who serve our country and provide emotional support to spouses of deployed service members. Specifically, the Navy Ombudsmen I have met with in San Diego have reiterated the importance of ensuring our military families have a smooth deployment cycle, from when a family is preparing for a deployment to adjusting to life once the service member has returned home. Family Readiness Volunteers and Ombudsmen can assist newly enlisted service members and spouses with a wide range of issues--from understanding their health and retirement benefits to serving as a conduit of information to the command. They can also provide resources and support to families who are seeking support services, such as employment training, mental health counseling or where to find affordable day care services for their young children. These men and women volunteer their time to selflessly take on the responsibility of helping other military families while they themselves are often coping with the deployment of a loved one. Madam Speaker, since 2001, nearly two million members of the active duty and reserve force and the National Guard have deployed in support of overseas contingencies in Iraq and Afghanistan. As we all know, deployments are a difficult time for service members and their families. Inadequate communication between units abroad and families at home cause unnecessary stress on our service members and their families and can harm the overall readiness of our force. Family readiness equals mission readiness. I have heard time and time again that when deployed service members know their families are being taken care of, that they can focus on the task at hand. Family Readiness Volunteers and Ombudsmen help reduce the uncertainty and ease anxiety around deployments by keeping families informed and our service members focused on their mission. I hope you will help me recognize their important role to our national defense.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the time, and I certainly want to respond to my colleagues. It's always possible to raise those kinds of concerns over fraud, and this is not intended to do that on the face of it, but we're willing to work with you, because the reality is that, if fraud is being committed, then these kinds of agreements wouldn't hold anyway, and the banks would certainly have a way of dealing with this. The real concern here is letting consumers know what's going on with their accounts. If they have been in an experience--and we know there are many consumers who have been--where card accounts that are not being used very often are closed and where they don't know about it, then their credit scores are affected. That's one of those surprises that comes along that people aren't expecting. This is an attempt to be transparent about it and to give people, really, the opportunity to be able to respond and to work out whatever problem exists and to move on. So we appreciate the opportunity to put this in what I think is some very important legislation. Mr. Chairman, today Mr. Gutierrez, as my designee, offered a common sense amendment to H.R. 627--The Credit Card Bill of Rights Act. This amendment warns consumers of possible reductions to their credit scores. Currently, credit card companies are not required to notify a consumer when they decide to close an account. Often, consumers do not know that their accounts are being closed until after the fact. Because of the way credit scores are calculated, account closures can lower a consumer's credit score, sometimes significantly. A reduction in a consumer's credit score can hamper his or her ability to buy a car or home, start a business, or pay for college. Especially in today's tight credit market, a solid credit score is more important than ever. A large number of consumers have no idea that the mere closure of a credit card can adversely impact their credit scores. Imagine saving for a home only to discover your credit score is too low for a mortgage because of an account closure. Consumers do not get a chance to prepare and plan their finances accordingly. This is an issue that affects all consumers and not just the elderly retiree in San Diego who first brought this to my attention. It affects teachers, firefighters, doctors, and our men and women in uniform. I ask unanimous consent to enter into the Record a recent article in the Wall Street Journal detailing this problem for consumers across the country. The amendment Mr. Gutierrez offered on my behalf would require credit card companies to give consumers a 30-days advance notice that their accounts are being closed. Within this notice, the card issuer must also include: The reason why the account is being closed; Options the consumer has to keep the account open; Programs available for the consumer to repay their account balance over time; And the fact that an account closure may impact the cardholder's credit score. This amendment is really about informing consumers so they are not caught by surprise. We believe that consumers have a right to know when their credit scores may be lowered so they can plan their finances accordingly. This amendment has been endorsed by a broad coalition of consumer groups including the Center for Responsible Lending, Consumer Federation of America, and U.S. PIRG. I thank Congressman Carney for all the hard work he has put into this amendment. It has been a pleasure working-With you and your office in this effort. I urge the adoption of this amendment. [From the Wall Street Journal, Mar. 11, 2009] Credit Card Issuers: Buy Something or Else! (By Kelli B. Grant) One of the biggest causes of the financial crisis was that Americans were borrowing (and spending) more money than they could afford to pay back. So how are credit-card issuers reacting to consumers' attempts to live a more financially responsible lifestyle? They're threatening to cut their credit cards off if they don't spend enough. Loretta Maxwell of Troy, Mich., thought her credit score of 790 buffered her against most of the fallout of the credit crunch. When Chase closed her $6,000-limit card in December without warning after two years of inactivity, she called to fight it. She was unsuccessful. ``If you're not using it, they entice you to do so, and then the moment you don't spend enough, they cut your limit,'' she says. (Chase says it is standard practice is to review inactive accounts. ``Inactive cards with large open credit lines present a real risk of fraudulent use and large potential liabilities for Chase,'' says spokeswoman Stephanie Jacobson.) Maxwell's experience is far from an isolated incident. Most major issuers, including Chase, Bank of America, American Express and Citibank have been slashing credit lines and closing the accounts of those who don't spend on their card regularly. While these issuers are required to notify you in writing of an account closing, there's no requirement that they do so in advance. Even when they do give early notice, the only way a cardholder can stop their account from getting shut down is to start spending again. In December, Discover reported that it closed three million accounts during 2008 due to inactivity, and plans to cull up to two million more. A Discover spokeswoman says the issuer is constantly reevaluating cardholder's credit and assessing whether they have the most appropriate credit line and product. Capital One is suspending accounts that have been inactive for at least a year, warning account holders they only have 60 days to redeem their rewards. ``Some of these accounts had literally never been used,'' says spokeswoman Pamela Girardo. A spokeswoman for Bank of America, meanwhile, says the bad economy prompted it to close accounts with zero balances that have been inactive for more than a year. American Express spokeswoman Lisa Gonzalez says it periodically reviews inactive accounts for cancellation. Citibank did not respond to requests for comment. From a business perspective, cutting off certain customers is a smart financial move, says Sanjay Sakhrani, an analyst with investment bank Keefe, Bruyette & Woods. Closing rarely- used accounts lowers a card issuer's risk profile by keeping their potential liabilities (i.e., the amount of credit available they extend to cardholders) from outweighing their assets. Inactive accounts also cost the issuer money to maintain, without providing the benefit of income from interest or merchant fees, he says. For consumers, however, closing accounts can be devastating--especially to their credit score. Your credit utilization ratio the amount of your debt in relation to the amount of your available credit--comprises 30% of your score, says Craig Watts, a spokesman for Fair Isaac Corporation, the company that calculates and issues the FICO credit score that most lenders use. So when an account is closed, you have less credit available to you--and the ratio immediately jumps higher. A person with a solid credit score of 720 or so, whose utilization ratio jumps from 35% to 75% after one of their accounts is closed is likely see their score drop by ``several dozen points,'' to somewhere in the 600s, he says. That's a far cry from the 760 (or higher) consumers need to get the best rates from lenders. One thing that somewhat softens the blow is that FICO factors in closed accounts when calculating the longevity of your credit history, which accounts for 15% of your score. While lenders may make a note on your report indicating whether the account was closed by them or you, the information isn't used in the scoring formula, says Watts. Ironically, an excellent credit score can actually serve as more of a bulls-eye than a shield, says Dennis Moroney, a research director and senior analyst for consulting firm Tower Group. He says banks figure they can limit cardholder backlash by targeting consumers with few debts and plenty of other accounts. That way, a closed account won't have as much of a detrimental effect on their creditworthiness. Even years of loyalty and regular spending won't spare some cardholders. David Good of Houston, used to be devoted to American Express, with which he had two credit cards: an unlimited charge account and a $7,500 revolving account. Yet a solid credit score, eight years of on-time payments and fairly frequent purchases on the cards--including more than $100,000 last year alone--weren't enough to save his accounts. In December, Good received a written notice that the issuer had closed both due to ``low activity in the past six months.'' ``I was shocked,'' he says. ``They lost my trust, totally.'' (American Express declined to comment on Good's or any other individual's accounts.) New Yorker Veronica Eady Famira was vacationing in Germany when she discovered that her $1,500-limit Delta SkyMiles card from American Express had been shut down. ``I must have spent $300 in cellphone charges calling banks,'' she says. ``I was pretty stranded.'' Adding insult to injury, Famira had just earned a free companion ticket on the card valued at up to $400 for a domestic flight--now she can't redeem the ticket.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 339. This resolution honors the incredible work of the United States Navy SEALs, and the crews of the USS Bainbridge, USS Boxer, USS Halyburton and Patrol Squadron (VP) 8. H. Res. 339 also recognizes the crew of the Maersk Alabama and the courage of Captain Richard Phillips. The Maersk Alabama and her crew returned safely due to the remarkable service of the men and women of the U.S. Navy. In fact, this event has shown the importance of having a fleet capable of maintaining a global maritime presence that allows the Navy to respond to emergencies around the world. We must also commend the actions of our remarkable Navy SEAL snipers. The special operations community rarely receives the recognition they deserve, nor do they seek it. While they do not look for notoriety, this resolution honors their service and recognizes their contributions to U.S. national security. The success of the Navy SEAL snipers who saved Captain Phillips is a prime example of the superior training our SEALs receive; training that begins at Naval Amphibious Base Coronado and reinforced through multiple tours of duty in Iraq, Afghanistan, and now off the coast of Somalia. Mr. Speaker, I know I join all Americans in welcoming this crew home with both great pride and great relief and in honoring our brave service members for a job well done. I hope all of my colleagues vote in favor of this important measured.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Inactive Account Closure Notification Act, which protects consumers from having their credit cards closed and their credit scores lowered against their will. Under current law, credit card companies can close an inactive account without providing any prior notification to the customer. Often, the customer does not know his or her credit card account is being closed until after the fact. Because of the way credit scores are calculated, unilateral account closures can lower the credit scores of consumers. In addition, because credit card companies are only closing inactive accounts that do not carry a balance and do not incur fees or finance charges, the consumers that are seeing their credit scores penalized are likely to be the most responsible borrowers. Just the other day, I heard from a woman in my district who recently had her credit card terminated for inactivity. She had never missed a payment on her card and had excellent credit prior to her account being closed. Her credit card company gave her no early warning that it was planning to terminate her account. Had she received notification that the company was planning to close her account due to inactivity, she would have been more than happy to use the card again. She even called the company to see if it would be willing to reopen her account if she used her card, but was told no. These stories are not unique to my home district of San Diego. Consumers all over the country are going through the same exact experience. I request permission to enter into the Record an article from the Wall Street Journal from March 11 of this year detailing the havoc these account closures are wreaking on the credit scores of consumers across our nation. The bill I am introducing today--the Inactive Account Closure Notification Act--will protect consumers by requiring credit card companies to provide customers with a 60-day notification before they can close their accounts for inactivity. During this 60-day period, customers can use their credit cards to prevent their accounts from being closed. If an account has been closed for inactivity, a customer will still have 30 days to contact the credit card company requesting that his or her account be reopened. With lenders dramatically tightening their standards in the current economic climate, even a small dent in a consumer's credit score can severely impact his or her ability to take out a mortgage, start a small business, buy a car, or pay for college. Responsible consumers deserve to have advance warning that their credit cards will be closed and their credit scores will be lowered. Help me protect our consumers. I urge the adoption of the Inactive Account Closure Notification Act and yield back my time. [From the Wall Street Journal, Mar. 11, 2009] Credit Card Issuers: Buy Something or Else! (By Kelli B. Grant) One of the biggest causes of the financial crisis was that Americans were borrowing (and spending) more money than they could afford to pay back. So how are credit-card issuers reacting to consumers' attempts to live a more financially responsible lifestyle? They're threatening to cut their credit cards off if they don't spend enough. Loretta Maxwell of Troy, Mich., thought her credit score of 790 buffered her against most of the fallout of the credit crunch. When Chase closed her $6,000-limit card in December without warning after two years of inactivity, she called to fight it. She was unsuccessful. ``If you're not using it, they entice you to do so, and then the moment you don't spend enough, they cut your limit,'' she says. (Chase says it is standard practice is to review inactive accounts. ``Inactive cards with large open credit lines present a real risk of fraudulent use and large potential liabilities for Chase,'' says spokeswoman Stephanie Jacobson.) Maxwell's experience is far from an isolated incident. Most major issuers, including Chase, Bank of America, American Express and Citibank have been slashing credit lines and closing the accounts of those who don't spend on their card regularly. While these issuers are required to notify you in writing of an account closing, there's no requirement that they do so in advance. Even when they do give early notice, the only way a cardholder can stop their account from getting shut down is to start spending again. In December, Discover reported that it closed three million accounts during 2008 due to inactivity, and plans to cull up to two million more. A Discover spokeswoman says the issuer is constantly reevaluating cardholder's credit and assessing whether they have the most appropriate credit line and product. Capital One is suspending accounts that have been inactive for at least a year, warning account holders they only have 60 days to redeem their rewards. ``Some of these accounts had literally never been used,'' says spokeswoman Pamela Girardo. A spokeswoman for Bank of America, meanwhile, says the bad economy prompted it to close accounts with zero balances that have been inactive for more than a year. American Express spokeswoman Lisa Gonzalez says it periodically reviews inactive accounts for cancellation. Citibank did not respond to requests for comment. From a business perspective, cutting off certain customers is a smart financial move, says Sanjay Sakhrani, an analyst with investment bank Keefe, Bruyette & Woods. Closing rarely- used accounts lowers a card issuer's risk profile by keeping their potential liabilities (i.e., the amount of credit available they extend to cardholders) from outweighing their assets. Inactive accounts also cost the issuer money to maintain, without providing the benefit of income from interest or merchant fees, he says. For consumers, however, closing accounts can be devastating--especially to their credit score. Your credit utilization ratio--the amount of your debt in relation to the amount of your available credit--comprises 30% of your score, says Craig Watts, a spokesman for Fair Isaac Corporation, the company that calculates and issues the FICO credit score that most lenders use. So when an account is closed, you have less credit available to you--and the ratio immediately jumps higher. A person with a solid credit score of 720 or so, whose utilization ratio jumps from 35% to 75% after one of their accounts is closed is likely to see their score drop by ``several dozen points,'' to somewhere in the 600s, he says. That's a far cry from the 760 (or higher) consumers need to get the best rates from lenders. One thing that somewhat softens the blow is that FICO factors in closed accounts when calculating the longevity of your credit history, which accounts for 15% of your score. While lenders may make a note on your report indicating whether the account was closed by them or you, the information isn't used in the scoring formula, says Watts. Ironically, an excellent credit score can actually serve as more of a bulls-eye than a shield, says Dennis Moroney, a research director and senior analyst for consulting firm Tower Group. He says banks figure they can limit cardholder backlash by targeting consumers with few debts and plenty of other accounts. That way, a closed account won't have as much of a detrimental effect on their creditworthiness. Even years of loyalty and regular spending won't spare some cardholders. David Good of Houston, used to be devoted to American Express, with which he had two credit cards: an unlimited charge account and a $7,500 revolving account. Yet a solid credit score, eight years of on-time payments and fairly frequent purchases on the cards--including more than $100,000 last year alone--weren't enough to save his accounts. In December, Good received a written notice that the issuer had closed both due to ``low activity in the past six months.'' ``I was shocked,'' he says. ``They lost my trust, totally.'' (American Express declined to comment on Good's or any other individual's accounts.) New Yorker Veronica Eady Famira was vacationing in Germany when she discovered that her $1,500-limit Delta SkyMiles card from American Express had been shut down. ``I must have spent $300 in cellphone charges calling banks,'' she says. ``I was pretty stranded.'' Adding insult to injury, Famira had just earned a free companion ticket on the card valued at up to $400 for a domestic flight--now she can't redeem the ticket.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1804. Earlier this year, spouses of servicemembers from current and past wars stood up during a Military Personnel Subcommittee hearing to share their stories about how the SBP/DIC offset has impacted their lives. Their stories, I can assure you, were compelling and demonstrated why the goal of eliminating this offset is so important. While the enhancement of the monthly benefits under the Special Survivor Indemnity Allowance provided in this bill does not end the so- called widow's tax, it is a strong step in the right direction. We have done the best we could with this bill given the resources available, and strong support for H.R. 1804 from the military associations has confirmed the value of our effort. However, I do believe that more needs to be done, and I intend to keep searching for opportunities to make improvements with the hope that someday we can find a permanent solution. I want to thank Chairman Towns for sponsoring a bill that provides so many benefits to our civilian and military workforce, and Mr. Ortiz for his leadership on the SBP/DIC issue. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 1804.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor a great man who stood up for justice and fair treatment for all Americans. During his life, Cesar E. Chavez was committed to providing fair wages, better working conditions, decent housing, and quality education for all. Mr. Chavez also served the United States proudly in the Navy during World War II. His spirit and his vision are still alive today and I am determined to celebrate what he stood for and his great accomplishments. Madam Speaker, today, I introduce legislation to rename the post office located at 2777 Logan Avenue in the Barrio Logan section of San Diego as the ``Cesar E. Chavez Post Office.'' This is the least we can do to honor such a great but humble man dedicated to justice. Please join me in giving Mr. Chavez his rightful place in American history.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall votes No. 157 through 162, I was on a leave of absence due to the funeral of a very close friend. Had I been present for rollcall vote No. 157 on the Perlmutter amendment to H.R. 1404, to clarify that authorized suppression activities for the Flame Fund include containment activities in response to crisis insect infestations to reduce the likelihood of wildfires, I would have voted ``aye.'' Had I been present for rollcall vote No. 158 on the Hastings amendment to H.R. 1404, to require advance notice, in writing, to adjacent landowners whenever the Department of Agriculture sets a prescribed fire on National Forest System land, I would have voted ``aye.'' Had I been present for rollcall vote No. 159 on the Minnick amendment to H.R. 1404, to require that the Secretaries, in considering severity of and threat posed by a fire for the purposes of determining whether to declare that a wildland fire suppression activity is eligible for funding from the flame Fund, take into account areas where insect infestation has created an extreme risk for wildfire, I would have voted ``aye.'' Had I been present for rollcall vote No. 160 on the Kirkpatrick amendment to H.R. 1404, to amend the definition of ``fire-ready community'' in the bill to provide that a community satisfies the definition if it is located within a priority area identified by the fire risk maps required by the bill, and meets two of the other four criteria listed in the bill for ``fire-ready communities,'' I would have voted ``aye.'' Had I been present for rollcall vote No. 161 on the Goodlatte amendment to H.R. 1404, to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to enter into sole source contracts with States to prepare and implement ``good neighbor'' projects on National Forest System lands, I would have voted ``no.'' Had I been present for rollcall vote No. 162 on final passage of H.R. 1404, the Federal Land Assistance, Management and Enhancement Act, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Universal Right to Vote by Mail Act of 2009--a bill to allow any eligible voter to vote by mail in a federal election if he or she chooses to do so. In my home state of California, voters already have this right. California is one of the twenty-eight states that already provide this convenient alternative to voters. While I love the ritual of going to the polls to vote, I know that getting to the polls on Election Day is often difficult. For some, it's impossible. That is why I have introduced a bill that builds upon the growing trend of states to bring the polls to the voters. I believe we should try to meet our constituents halfway by increasing access to the electoral process. What I am proposing is not new or even untested. States ranging from my home state of California, to Wisconsin, to North Carolina, to Maine have already adopted this voter-friendly policy. With mail voting, citizens can vote from the convenience of their own homes. They will have more time to mull over their choices and make informed decisions, and they will be able to do so on their own terms. Not surprisingly, studies have shown that some of the biggest supporters of voting by mail are parents, who must schedule time to go to the polls around so many other obligations. Studies have also indicated that adding the option to vote by mail does not create a partisan advantage for one political party over the other. Republicans and Democrats both benefit from similar increases in voter turnout when voters are given the choice to mail in their ballots. In fact, overwhelming support for voting by mail is consistent across nearly every demographic--including age, income level, race, education, employment status and ideology. It is a win-win for all Americans. After adopting a universal right to vote by mail system in 1978, California saw a thirty percent increase in the use of mail-in ballots. Other states that have implemented this policy have seen the same degree of support from voters, which is why it is hardly surprising that States offering the option of mail-in ballots often experience greater voter participation. There is also an extremely low incidence of fraud with voting by mail when compared to other methods of voting. As the former President of the League of Women Voters of San Diego, I care deeply about the integrity of our electoral system. Twenty-eight states have already proven this option works, and it is safe. It is time to give voters in the remaining states this convenient, secure and affordable alternative. While I am proud to be from a state where citizens already have this right, I believe democracy works best when all citizens have an equal opportunity to have their voices heard. Right now, an uneven playing field exists between states that already offer the option of mail-in ballots and states that do not. When the same election is more accessible to voters in California than it is to voters in other states, the system is unfair. States that fail to offer this choice stand to compromise their leverage in federal elections by curbing the greatest level of voter participation. We should follow the lead of over half of our nation's states and ensure a uniformity of rights for all voters. I ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in supporting this effort to strengthen the democratic process and give American voters the choices they deserve.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of urging the President to designate 2009 as the ``Year of the Military Family.'' Our military's ability to perform its mission abroad is directly related to the strength of our families at home. Without families willing to sign up for military life alongside their soldier, sailor, airman or marine, we would not have the tremendous all-volunteer force we have today. Our military has been at war for nearly eight years against persistent and determined enemies thousands of miles away. And in many ways, so have our military families. With loved ones deployed to theatres of combat, our families have lived with the enormous uncertainty brought by every ring of the phone and every knock on the door. For far too many, that unexpected phone call or visitor announced the tragic loss of a spouse or parent. For thousands more, injuries sustained in battle require a spouse or child to take on the responsibility of caretaker. I am continually amazed at their resilience and ability to continue with their lives under such difficult circumstances. Every family signed up knowing the requirements of duty. However, regular assignments to theatres of war will challenge even the strongest families. Like many of my colleagues, I hear the frustration and sense the pain that frequent, dangerous and unpredictable deployments are having on military communities. We know that these deployments are often measured not by weeks or months, but by anniversaries, birthdays and important life moments. Describing the length of her husband's deployment, one of my constituents told me how her husband ``missed his older son's graduation from college, and his youngest son's graduation from High School.'' Her frustration was clear. As Chairman Skelton mentioned earlier, over a million children have not had a mom or dad or both home for life's important events. We have tried to take steps to lessen the strain on our families, but high operational tempo and policies like stop-loss still have a significant impact. As a Navy wife recently told me, ``We are resigned to the necessity of deployment.'' Mr. Speaker, our first commander in chief, President Washington, said, ``The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional to how they perceive veterans of early wars were treated and appreciated by our nation.'' Today, President Washington's statement should probably read, ``The willingness with which our ``families are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional to how they perceive families of early wars were treated and appreciated by our nation.'' That is why the Military Personnel Subcommittee will hold a hearing later this year focusing on military families and topics that are unique to military life. . . . But it will take more than a series of hearings to address the very real concerns felt by families and men and women in uniform. Just as we must ensure that service members have the equipment they need in the field, so too must we guarantee that families have the support they need at home. I urge President Obama to honor the commitment of those who ``serve'' behind our men and women in uniform and designate 2009 the Year of the Military Family. I hope all my colleagues will support this resolution.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Speaker, I wish to pay tribute today to the University of San Diego, which celebrates its 60th anniversary this year. The University of San Diego (USD) can trace its roots back to 1496 and the Spanish town of Alcala de Henares, home and resting place of Saint Didacus (or San Diego). However, it was in 1949 that the Most Reverend Charles Francis Buddy, first Bishop of the Diocese of San Diego, and Reverend Mother Rosalie Clifton Hill, Vicar Superior of the U.S. Western Vicariate of the Society of the Religious of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, obtained charters from the State of California to establish San Diego University and the San Diego College for Women, respectively. The San Diego College for Women opened its doors in February 1952 with 33 students, seven faculty members and 16 courses on a campus still under construction. Shortly after, the College for Men welcomed 39 students and the School of Law enrolled a co-ed class of 30. In 1972, the two colleges and the School of Law merged to form a single, Catholic coeducational University of San Diego. Today, the 180-acre campus enrolls nearly 7,500 undergraduate, graduate and law students and is known for its commitment to teaching, the liberal arts, the formation of values and community service. The addition of the Joan B. Kroc School of Peace Studies now brings the university's total number of schools and colleges to six. Other academic divisions include the College of Arts and Sciences and the schools of Business Administration, Leadership and Education, Law, and Nursing and Health Science. On May 2, 2009, USD will recognize several of its alumni by bestowing the Mother Rosalie Clifton Hill Service Award on L. Douglas Robert, the Bishop Charles Francis Buddy Humanitarian Award to Sandy M. Cassell Farrell. Zuzana Lesenarova, four-time NCAA All-American and 1999 Division I NCAA National Singles Champion of Women's Tennis, will also enter the Pagni Athletic Hall of Fame. In addition, seven outstanding alumni will receive the Author E. Hughes Career Achievement Awards in recognition of their outstanding humanitarian and professional achievements. These honorees are Heather Raffo (College of Arts & Sciences), Denise M. Boren (Hahn School of Nursing & Health Science), Judy Ann Kamanyi (Kroc School of Peace Studies), John M. Cappetta (School of Business Administration), Richard M. Bartell (School of Law), and Leona Makokis and Patricia A. Makokis (School of Leadership & Education Sciences). Please join me, Madam Speaker, in wishing these alumni, as well as the students and administration, continued success and academic promise during USD's diamond anniversary and in the decades to come.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Mentoring for All Act of 2009 to support and greatly enhance youth mentoring efforts in the United States. We currently face a mentoring deficit in our country. An estimated 15 million children could benefit from a healthy mentoring relationship, but no responsible adult mentor is available. We would see amazing results by reducing this deficit. In fact, studies show the benefits of youth mentoring on our children. Those who have a healthy mentoring relationship are more likely to graduate from high school and go to college. They are less likely to turn to drugs or substance abuse. Children who grow up with a caring mentor are more likely to live full and productive lives. The Mentoring for All Act will increase the number of children who will benefit from a responsible mentor and improve the quality of our mentoring programs nationwide. Specifically, ``Mentoring Partnerships'' are the central entity providing assistance and guidance to the youth mentoring organizations within a state or region. This legislation will strengthen mentoring programs on both the local and state levels by supporting Mentoring Partnerships. A Mentoring Partnership provides training and technical assistance, recruits mentors, engages statewide leadership, and advances research and knowledge for successful mentoring. That is, the partnerships support local organizations that operate mentoring programs and provide in most cases a state-wide infrastructure network to coordinate success. The partnerships have led to stronger mentoring programs and more children in healthy mentoring relationships. This legislation will provide grants to Mentoring Partnerships and sub-grants to local mentoring organizations to directly support youth mentoring. In addition, the legislation will connect individual state Mentoring Partnerships to a central location through the Corporation for National and Community Service, increasing communication and information sharing nationwide for successful outcomes. Madam Speaker, investing in youth mentoring programs is a worthy endeavor. It is time we acted to provide a mentor to our children in need of a responsible role model. Thank you very much for considering this legislation.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation to bring awareness to the link between animal cruelty and other forms of societal violence by designating the month of May 2009 as National Link Awareness Month. This resolution would highlight the need for more attention and resources to be focused on how violence toward animals is indicative of other violent tendencies. By investigating the link further, information could be gathered that will help mitigate societal violence. Psychological, sociological, and criminological studies have shown that violent offenders frequently had a history of abusing animals during their childhood and adolescence. The FBI has recognized the connection since the 1970s, when its analysis of the lives of serial killers suggested that most had killed or tortured animals as children. Research has also shown patterns of animal cruelty among perpetrators of child abuse, spousal abuse, and elder abuse. In fact, the American Psychiatric Association considers animal cruelty one of the diagnostic criteria of conduct disorder. The link between animal abuse and domestic violence is a recognized fact. Each year, defenseless pets face the sad and disturbing reality that they will be victims of cruelty and abuse. Domestic abusers commonly torture or kill family pets as a method of exerting control and ensuring submission. This causes victims, children and adults alike, to remain in violent households in order to ensure their beloved pets are not harmed further. Research indicates that children who are exposed to domestic violence are nearly three times more likely to mistreat animals than children who are not exposed to such violence. Tragically, this behavior is often symptomatic of future abuse toward other animals or human beings. Significant research documents a relationship between childhood histories of animal cruelty and patterns of chronic interpersonal aggression. Due to the correlation between animal abuse and other forms of family and community violence, animal abuse must be taken very seriously. Human services, animal services, and law enforcement agencies must share resources and expertise to address animal and human related violence in communities. By effectively and comprehensively addressing the link between violence toward animals and other forms of societal violence, we can learn information that will help stop violence in the home as well as the community at large. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the designation of May 2009 as National Link Awareness Month so that more awareness will be brought to the link between animal cruelty and other forms of violence in society.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce strengthening the link between high-quality mentoring and public education in the United States. The Mentoring America's Children Act of 2009 will improve upon the current efforts to match high-quality and responsible mentors with children in need of a strong role model. In 2002, the U.S. Department of Education began granting funding directly to community organizations and schools to establish or expand mentoring opportunities. Since then, we have seen a 20-percent increase in the number of children benefiting from a mentor. The Mentoring America's Children Act sets out to expand and build upon this success. By increasing the availability and quality of the grants available through the Department of Education, school-based mentoring programs will reach more children in need while enhancing quality. The bill will also tie mentoring programs' funding more closely with the important role mentors can play in improving a young person's academic standing and the learning environment. The legislation would broaden the reach of mentoring to include a number of specific populations of young people who could benefit from a strong role model. Finally, the legislation also authorizes the Department of Education to conduct high-quality research into successful school-based mentoring programs. Through this research, plus improved data collection and tracking, we will better understand the impact of mentoring and can continue to refine program practices to best meet the needs of children. Mentoring is a critical element in a child's social, cognitive and emotional development. When it comes to education, a healthy relationship with a mentor plays a key role in improving the learning environment for a young person. Students with a responsible mentor have better attendance and are more connected to their school, schoolwork, and teachers. They perform better in school and are more likely to graduate and go on to higher education. It is an honor to introduce this legislation with a number of my colleagues on the House Mentoring Caucus and others dedicated to the noble cause of mentoring. It was also an honor to work directly with the MENTOR/National Mentoring Partnership, Big Brothers Big Sisters of America and the National Collaboration for Youth to develop this legislation. Madam Speaker, I urge consideration of this legislation.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Federal Election Integrity Act of 2009. This legislation would take the long-overdue step of prohibiting chief state election officials from taking part in the political campaigns of Federal candidates in elections over which the officials have supervisory authority. As a former President of the League of Women Voters in San Diego and a proud American voter myself, I know that election officials are entrusted with a crucial responsibility for our democracy. Their only allegiance must be to the will of the voters, not to partisan political agendas. I think we can all agree that an inherent conflict of interest exists when a state's chief election official is responsible for monitoring and certifying the results of a Federal election while actively participating in the campaign of one of the candidates in that election. In recent years, multiple Secretaries of State have captured national attention and incited great controversy because of their political involvement in elections they were responsible for overseeing. Although such individuals may be honorable public servants with no improper intentions, it is of the utmost importance for the integrity of our democracy that we provide legal safeguards to ensure the public trust is never violated. This is not a partisan issue. The record shows that officials of both parties have in the past held these two types of positions simultaneously. Rather, this is an issue of preserving the American people's faith in the integrity of our democracy. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to offer this important legislation to protect the public's trust in the electoral process.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, mentoring impacts the lives of so many in our country. Three million people currently participate in a healthy, caring mentoring relationship. A quality mentoring program offers a young person the strength, confidence, and stability they need to mature and grow. Witnessing this growth is the unique reward for a mentor's invested time and energy. I believe the best part about mentoring, what makes it so successful, is its simplicity. There is a basic human need to have another's care, support, and trust. A mentor can provide that to a young person, and that gift often inspires a cycle of helping others. Unfortunately, there still exists a gaping deficit of mentors. Approximately 15 million new mentors are needed, which stems from the demand for our Nation's youth to have positive role models in their lives. I recently learned of a particularly touching mentoring relationship in my district in San Diego. As an infant, Anthony was in a car accident, sadly leaving him without a mother. Since his father was in jail, Anthony was left to his grandmother's care. During his childhood, Anthony was diagnosed with Aspberger's syndrome. His grandmother found him a mentor through Big Brothers Big Sisters of San Diego County and now, 11 years later, Anthony is one-half of a successful mentoring relationship. Before meeting his mentor, Anthony would never go outside and was frightened of loud noises. Spending time with his mentor every week has given Anthony the strength and self-confidence to experience things he might never have tried. At the basis of a mentoring relationship like Anthony's is a firm and unwavering commitment. Successful mentoring relies on a commitment to show up, to open up, to be vulnerable, to learn, to laugh, to grow . . . So, this month and always, let us recognize these millions of important commitments made by young and old across our country and offer our own commitment to continue to promote the goals and ideals of National Mentoring Month. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and I urge my colleagues to join us in celebrating National Mentoring Month, 2009.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of Israel's right to self-defense and a broader U.S. diplomatic role in the Middle East. The Israeli government has a right and a responsibility to defend Israeli citizens, and we have an obligation to support our ally in times of crisis. But this body also has an obligation to advance the dialogue beyond the conflict of today toward how we can achieve a stable peace in the future. This conflict shows that the United States cannot manage the situation from the sidelines. This approach only serves Iran and radical elements in the region. Rather, we must maintain a high diplomatic presence that allows responsible parties to capture every opportunity for peace. I believe that the new administration and the new Congress represent an opportunity to regain our position as an honest broker in the region. For this to happen, the tone coming from Washington must be in sharp contrast to the last 8 years. Congress helped set that tone, which is where I hope my colleagues will use this tragedy as an opportunity to call for an end to this conflict and a broader, American, diplomatic presence in the region.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce a resolution recognizing and honoring those who make a difference in the lives of our young people across the United States. I am honored to be joined by Congressman Mike Rogers of Michigan and Congresswoman Betty McCollum of Minnesota in introducing a resolution marking January of 2009 as National Mentoring Month as proclaimed by the President of the United States. National Mentoring Month celebrates and honors those who are mentors and draws attention to the great need for more mentors. Mentors make a tremendous difference in the lives of our children. When a responsible and reliable adult becomes a mentor, the benefits to the mentee can last a lifetime. Countless stories show the positive outcomes of a good role model. Quality mentoring relationships between reliable adults and our young people are invaluable. Millions of adults nationwide are acting as excellent role models while providing guidance and advice to our young people--many of whom face problems at home or difficulties at school. Without a good, solid role model, our kids are more likely to drop out of high school or to become involved with drugs or alcohol. Unfortunately, research shows that about 15 million children across the United States are in need of a mentor and a good role model. It is crucial that we begin to reach these children to give them a better future and hope. We are calling on more adults to rise to the occasion and to act as a role model to our children. Madam Speaker, thank you very much for the opportunity to offer a resolution honoring America's mentors on the occasion of National Mentoring Month, 2009. I urge its quick passage.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Congresswoman DeLauro and Chairman Miller for their hard work on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act. In my work on the Armed Services Committee, I have had the honor and privilege of working with many of our female servicemembers in the armed services. And although work still needs to be done in other areas, I am proud of the fact that our female servicemembers receive exactly the same pay as their male counterparts for doing the same work. In many ways, the military is a model of equal pay for equal work. We would never allow our female servicemembers to be paid differently for serving our country. Why then would we allow women in the civilian sector to get paid 78 percent of what their male coworkers are paid? I urge the passage of this these two bills.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Speaker, my constituents have every right to be angry about our economic situation. I am angry too. But I believe that going forward with this legislation enables us to begin to right our economy. It does not address all the requisite steps that should be taken. That is why I am urging the chairman and the Congress to work with the Treasury and the SEC to promulgate rules on accounting practices that reflect the true value of assets they will be working with. This bill is not a magic bullet but the cost of doing nothing may be far greater than the painful steps we take today. I thank the Chairman and all of my colleagues from both sides of the aisle. We may disagree but people have worked hard over the past week to listen to one another no matter where you come down on this issue.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of our troops by urging passage of H.R. 3174, the Equal Justice For Our Military Act, a bill giving our servicemembers equal access to the United States Supreme Court. We all know when American men and women decide to serve their Nation in the Armed Forces, they make many sacrifices, from lost time with their families to irreplaceable loss of lives. Servicemembers also sacrifice one of the fundamental legal rights that all civilian members enjoy. Members of the military convicted of offenses under the military justice system do not have the legal right to appeal their cases to the U.S. Supreme Court. After exhausting their appeals through the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, they have no recourse. In fact, the playing field is weighted in favor of the military, granting the automatic right of Supreme Court review to the Department of Defense when a servicemember wins a case. But servicemembers are denied the same right in nearly every case the government wins against them. It is unjust to deny the members of our Armed Forces access to our system of justice as they fight for our freedom around the world. They deserve better. As the chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Military Personnel, a long time advocate for servicemembers and a Representative from San Diego, one of the largest military communities in the Nation, I feel an obligation to fight to ensure that the members of our military are treated fairly. I introduced, along with Armed Services Chairman Ike Skelton, H.R. 3174 to correct this inequity. This bill has been endorsed by the American Bar Association, the Military Officers Association of America, and many other legal and military advocates. In addition, the Congressional Budget Office has stated that this bill does not affect direct spending. It is fundamentally unjust, Mr. Speaker, to deny those who serve on behalf of our country one of the basic rights afforded to all other Americans. I hope that all of my colleagues will stand with me in strong support of this legislation to attain equal treatment for those who fight for us.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009. I want to recognize the ranking member of the Military Personnel Subcommittee, Mr. McHugh, for his contributions to this bill. It provides significant personnel benefits and policies that are important to our men and women in uniform and their families, and I believe it merits full support. Some of the highlights of the military personnel area include the following: A 3.9 percent pay raise, an increase of .5 percent above the President's request; prohibition on increases in TRICARE copays and deductibles; preventing TRICARE pharmacy copay increases for a year; establishing a tuition assistance program for eligible military spouses; growing the end strength for the Army and the Marine Corps; increasing full-time manning for the Army National Guard. We also provided over $50 million for Impact Aid to local educational agencies; increased the use of preventive care services by TRICARE beneficiaries, including waiving copayments for preventive services and creating smoking cessation programs. Finally, this bill creates a Department of Defense task force on the prevention of suicide. Our Nation has been at war for 7 years. Repeated deployments continue to take a hard toll on our servicemembers and their families, and the bill before us recognizes their sacrifices and addresses the increasing support that they and their families need to be trained and equipped before, during and following a deployment. Mr. Speaker, we would not be here today without the leadership of Chairman Skelton and Ranking Member Hunter, and I want to wish my colleague from San Diego well as he leaves the Congress. Chairman Skelton and Ranking Member Hunter have gone through extraordinary lengths to ensure that this Congress will have a defense authorization bill. I also want to thank my subcommittee staff for all of their hard work over the past year. I urge my colleagues to support the bill.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, as everyone has said before, this bill is a victory. It may not be everything that everyone had hoped to get into this bill, but it is going in the right direction. It does ensure treatment, it does address the stigma associated with mental health disorders. I just wanted to point out that we have so many of our servicemembers who are coming home who have fought in Iraq and Afghanistan. And they are coming home and transitioning to civilian life. But they are going to find some barriers as well. The barriers to mental health care are really playing themselves out today because I just talked to a family just a little while ago, and they felt that even though we're starting to put in some of those services, there's great resistance to people seeking that kind of care. This bill begins to change that. It sends a very clear and a very direct message that mental health care is as important as physical care. We wouldn't stop people in the middle of their treatment for something of stomach ulcers. You cannot stop people in the middle of their treatment for mental health disorders. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased this bill is on the floor.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 642) to establish a demonstration incentive program within the Department of Education to promote installation of fire sprinkler systems, or other fire suppression or prevention technologies, in qualified student housing and dormitories, and for other purposes, as amended.