Susan Davis

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I have a few questions for my colleagues across the aisle--what can we do with 1.6 billion dollars? How many highways and roads could we fix? How many Americans could we train for good paying jobs, for that amount of money? And didn't the President promise that Americans wouldn't have to pay for a wall? Now in one big bill that's out of regular order we are being asked to waste 1.6 billion dollars on a wall that would be ineffective and offensive to our neighbors? In my district, we know that our border is our strength, not our weakness. San Diego and Tijuana are two regions, but we are one community. We have worked for years to create an efficient border that allows thousands of people to safely cross into our country every day; spending money in our stores, paying taxes that support our infrastructure, and bringing economic stability to our region. We cannot allow fear and uncertainty to isolate us from the rest of the world, and building a wall along our expansive southern border would do just that.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, as representatives of the people, our job is to protect working families. So let's be clear, we should be protecting consumers, including members of our military who sacrifice so much for us. When a predatory lender forces arbitration, it puts consumers into a system where their grievances don't get the fair treatment of a court. Instead, a law firm handpicked by the corporation will decide the outcome, putting the consumer at an extreme disadvantage from the start. The CFPB issued a long, overdue role to prohibit this unfair practice that benefits wealthy special interests at the expense of the American people. So why would we take a step back? Even worse, these predatory lenders often prey on our military, so we should be protecting our military to have transparent and just legal options. Forced arbitration is just the opposite. Mr. Speaker, we need a process that works for consumers. This resolution will only bring us back to a broken system. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in striking down this resolution.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the all-girls robotics team from Afghanistan for taking home the silver medal at this weekend's FIRST Global Challenge. I speak on behalf of my colleagues who travel on our annual bipartisan trip to Afghanistan when I say that these girls are the embodiment of our hopes and dreams for the future of their country. We have learned on our trips that nothing is more important for global security than the development of human capital, and what better example could there be than these remarkable girls. I want to echo the sentiments of Afghanistan's First Lady and say to the girls, ``Saar Bolan demoom kar deen,'' literally, ``You make us hold our heads up high.'' We are proud of you. Mr. Speaker, it is important to remember that, when these girls were born, women were not allowed to get an education in Afghanistan. Now, because of the bravery of these girls and the tireless efforts of their teachers, the rest of the world can now see how remarkable Afghan women truly are. Congratulations on your remarkable achievement.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize someone who has made a lasting impact in my Congressional District and the community. Two years ago, Mark Zambon joined my office as part of the Wounded Warrior Fellowship program through the House of Representatives. He will be leaving my San Diego office in July of 2017. While he was my primary liaison with our veterans community, Mark also served as a community representative to neighborhoods and managed a number of issues critical to my district. Mark always has a ``can do'' attitude. lf you needed something yesterday, you got it yesterday. Mark marvelously represented Mission Hills, El Cajon, Mission Valley, University Heights, and Uptown. His passion and work with the Veterans and Active Duty communities in San Diego has not gone unnoticed by my constituents. In the closing days of his service to the 53rd, communities have been honoring and thanking him for his work. Mark hails from Marquette, Michigan. After graduating from Marquette Senior High School, he enlisted in the Marine Corps. Mark deployed to both Iraq and Afghanistan with six combat tours and two Purple Hearts. Serving as an explosive ordnance disposal technician in Afghanistan, he lost both legs from an explosion during a mission in Sangin, a town in Afghanistan's Helmand province. Despite this, it's not uncommon to find Mark scaling up a rock face or racing cars. In fact, Mount Kilimanjaro was a recent conquest. When he is not going the extra mile to help veterans in the 53rd Congressional District, Mark is probably traveling, tracking down a quality craft brewery, or hanging with his cat Frankly. Mr. Speaker, I cannot say enough about how Mark has taken on the role of providing support for his fellow warriors injured in the line of duty and honoring those who have given their lives in defense of our country. I am proud to recognize Mark and thank him for all of his outstanding contributions to our local communities, our constituents, and our country.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise to commend the dedicated bipartisan work of the House Armed Services Committee in recognizing our subcommittee chairs, members, and the staff as well in bringing this critical bill to the floor. But as it has been stated earlier, the budget numbers that we are talking about contained in the bill are, unfortunately, aspirational. We have not passed a budget resolution, and the Budget Control Act is still the law of the land. While it is true that the BCA was a bipartisan failing--we can all take credit for that--pointing fingers does not solve the problems. We are on an uncertain and dangerous path, one where we have not been honest with ourselves on many levels and where we continue to play games with our men and women serving in the military. We must recognize that the only path to solving these issues is bipartisan collaboration and legislation to repeal the BCA. Continuing resolutions and unrealistic, deeply partisan budgets amount to nothing more than professional malpractice. I have to say, Mr. Chairman, that I was encouraged to see that the Senate included a proposal similar to the one I introduced during markup to continue paying the widows of servicemembers who died in defense of our Nation. Their personal compensation is not just a small gesture but our fundamental responsibility. I am also encouraged by the promise our chairman made regarding this issue. He said that the issue ``has to be fixed and will be,'' but there are, as he acknowledged as well, ``difficult tradeoffs that have to be made.'' I completely agree. We will all have to contribute to the solutions. I am prepared to do that, and I know that my colleagues are as well. We all have to hope together that we move forward and be prepared to do that.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues, Chris Smith and Karen Bass, for spearheading this important bill and for really putting tremendous energy into it. Mr. Speaker, far too often, it is our children who fall victim to the horror of human trafficking. As you have heard this afternoon, we must do everything that we can to stop this injustice. Often it has been said of human trafficking that it is hiding in plain sight. Advocates and survivors are always telling me that it is important to punish traffickers, but we also need to focus on prevention. The reauthorization of the Frederick Douglass Trafficking Victims Prevention and Protection Reauthorization Act strengthens what we need in this holistic approach. It includes my bill, the Empowering Educators to Prevent Trafficking Act. This language in the bill creates a training program that I think you have heard about that empowers educators to spot the signs of trafficking and, in turn, teach their students how to protect themselves from becoming victims. With the passage of this bill, our schools can join the resistance in the fight against trafficking. Armed with knowledge, students and teachers can join the battle lines against the injustice of modern-day slavery. I want to thank all those who have participated in this bill, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, many people think of human trafficking as a problem that is happening abroad, but what they don't realize is that hundreds of thousands of victims are being trafficked within our own borders. It is hard to imagine such an injustice occurring in your own neighborhood. When I learned that my city of San Diego is considered a high-intensity region for child trafficking, I knew I needed to take action. In San Diego, we have an incredible community antitrafficking task force. They told me that a gap in the fight against trafficking is in our schools. This is why I wrote the Empowering Educators to Prevent Trafficking Act. I am proud to see it included in the Frederick Douglass Trafficking Victims Protection Act that is before us today. My bill will fund programs to train teachers across the country to recognize and respond to signs of trafficking so that they can identify victims and get them the help they need. Teachers, in turn, can teach their students how to protect themselves from becoming victims. With this training, our Nation's schools can be an important line of defense against this terrible injustice.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chair, I am proud to support this amendment which would align the TANF program and the federal work study program. TANF, or the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, was created to help struggling families become self sufficient. We know that the best way to achieve this goal is to give people the resources they need to find quality jobs. This amendment would allow states to align employment efforts by coordinating with schools to help more students access work-study opportunities. And we know that these students are not the 18 year olds of decades past--they are older students with children, dependent parents, and more financial responsibilities. Helping these students elevates entire families; helping these families elevates entire communities. I hope we can come together to support this amendment and support more working Americans.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor a widely respected public servant who is set to retire on June 30th. Through his inspirational leadership he has touched the lives of thousands of students in San Diego County. It is fitting that at this time, as we celebrate the graduation of thousands of students across the nation, that I should rise to speak of Superintendent Ernest (Ernie) Anastos. Ernie is a graduate of Brandeis University, and holds a master's degree in Special Education from Bridgewater State College. He has been a dedicated educator for over 45 years. Ernie's life of public service began in 1972, as an elementary school teacher. His years of experience lent to a successful transition into school administration. He served Sweetwater Union High School District for 20 years, working at Chula Vista High School, Hill Top High School, and Mar Vista High School. Ernie was named principal to National City Middle School in 1992, and to Rancho del Rey Middle School in 1997. Under his direction, both schools achieved the title of California Distinguished Schools. His time at Sweetwater Union High School District also included a term as the Area Superintendent in charge of Instructional Support Services and Student Support Services from 2002 to 2005. Ernie was named the Superintendent of Lemon Grove School District in 2005. On April 28th, 2017, the Association of California School Administrators named Ernie as Superintendent of the Year in the San Diego and Imperial Counties. Under his leadership, Lemon Grove School District has created a number of highly successful, specialized schools including the Dual Immersion Academy at Mount Vernon Elementary, the San Miguel Arts Academy, and the Lemon Grove Academy of Sciences and Humanities. Ernie has been a stalwart in the push for quality public education. The Lemon Grove Academy campus is an example of the success that arose as a result of Ernie's inventiveness. Ernie sought to create schools that could serve as community centers. Through a partnership with UC San Diego, and the Lemon Grove Library, a joint-use facility was created which featured medical and dental clinics to serve students and their families. As I reflect on Ernie's career, I am inspired by his dedication to promoting student achievement. I am truly encouraged by his commitment to bettering the lives of those around him. Ernie's dedication to students, commitment to excellence, and ingenuity truly made him a remarkable leader. Under his guidance, Lemon Grove School District has emerged as a mecca for innovative education. I wish him congratulations on his upcoming retirement.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, May 25, 2017, my vote was not recorded due to a technical error. I intended to vote YES on H.R. 1761 the Protecting Against Child Exploitation Act.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for bringing this forward. The Marines United website was a disgusting breach of trust, and I immediately called for the perpetrators to be prosecuted. I appreciate General Neller coming to Congress earlier this year, taking ownership of the problem, immediately establishing a task force, and conducting multimedia and personal engagements across the Marine Corps. He said he would deal with this immediately and decisively, and we demand nothing less. I take him at his word, and he was clear in asking to be held accountable. While the Navy and Marine Corps have updated policies regarding social media and established no-tolerance policies for nonconsensual pornography, these still need to apply across all the services and must be codified into law. For this reason, I support the PRIVATE Act, and I hope that we continue to work together with my colleagues to ensure that this bill becomes law. Mr. Speaker, as the scandal unfolded, it became clear to me that, even from initial recruitment, servicemembers must be held to the highest ethical standard online, and prevented from joining the military should their behavior fail to meet that standard. Our children live their lives online, and the laws need to be updated to reflect that. The issue of nonconsensual pornography, unfortunately, is prevalent across our society. It has no place anywhere, but especially not in our military ranks.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, every day men and women in the police force put their lives on the line to keep us safe. Let me tell you about one of these extraordinary heroes: San Diego Police Department Officer Jonathan De Guzman, or JD, as his friends knew him. JD dedicated his life to protecting the San Diego community he loved. His bravery shows the kind of unique selflessness found in police officers. After suffering a brutal stabbing from a suspect, JD went back to the force, and that same year he won the San Diego Police Department Purple Heart award for bravery in the line of duty. Tragically, on July 28, 2016, Officer De Guzman, a 16-year veteran of the force, was shot and killed, a hero taken from us too early. There is a special honor in representing those who serve us every single day, those like San Diego's own JD, Officer De Guzman. Thank you to the brave men and women of our police force. Your sacrifice and your strength keep us safe.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, recently I met with leaders of the San Diego medical research community who had a unified message: We need to end the cuts in research that have slowed medical innovation for the last decade. This year I was proud to lead the bipartisan effort, along with over 200 of my colleagues, to push for an additional $2 billion in funding for the National Institutes of Health. This is a very personal issue. Almost all of us know someone who is struggling with a disease where NIH funding is used to find a cure. That person could be a mother, father, family friend, or even more heart-wrenching, a child. I am thrilled that the spending bill before us this week avoids the cuts proposed by President Trump and actually increases NIH funding by $2 billion. We have seen what can happen when leadership takes a bipartisan approach: top priorities like medical research actually get funded. This isn't the bill that I would have written, but it is a compromise that I am very happy to vote for. Let's hope that Speaker Ryan has learned from this experience and will work with us on health care, on transportation, and other priorities moving forward.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 217.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, it looks like my colleagues have wasted no time moving back to familiar territory after their healthcare disaster last week. Instead of fighting over how many people should lose health coverage, they decided that it is easier to unite around the shared cause of climate denial. This week President Trump announced plans to gut President Obama's landmark Clean Power Plan, and the House will vote on legislation to block the EPA from reviewing peer reviewed scientific research when forming regulations. So think about that for a second--the majority couldn't agree on how many people should lose healthcare coverage; so they are united around the shared cause of climate denial. The President likes to claim that climate change is a hoax created by the Chinese. Well, I know that the President and his party have developed a disdain for fact-checkers, but silencing the scientific community takes things to a whole new level. Mr. Speaker, I have to ask: Can my colleagues handle the truth?

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, it has been hard keeping up with all the changes over the last 24 hours. This process has been far from transparent. The CBO released a revised score last night that said that the changes made to appease the Freedom Caucus will cost about $200 billion more without doing or adding anything to increase coverage. So how is that possible? The latest edition to this healthcare disaster, the elimination of minimum essential benefits, is something that I want to focus on very briefly. This change hits women especially hard. Insurance companies will no longer have to cover maternity care, provide direct access to an OB/ GYN, or cover preventative services like cancer screening or birth control. Mr. Speaker, do we call this a mommy tax? Is this a mommy tax to finance a millionaire tax cut? I don't know. Earlier this week, I gave my colleagues the opportunity to demonstrate their commitment to women's health in a related bill, and, Mr. Speaker, they didn't even allow a vote. I hear my colleagues claiming that these changes are about choice. Forcing women to pay more for the care they need is a choice I think we could do without. Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to this healthcare disaster.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I understand that major laws often have winners and losers. Unfortunately, I am struggling to figure out who wins under this healthcare plan. We have seen who stands to lose: 24 million fewer people will have insurance; States will lose billions, forcing painful cuts to education and other services; California, alone, will lose $6 billion in 2020 and much more in the years that follow; hospitals and clinics will have to cut back on services and investments. So, who are the winners? It is hard to find any, except, of course, for insurance companies and millionaires who will get almost all of the tax relief included in this package. Do Americans really think that we should pass a bill that cuts coverage in order to give millionaires an average tax cut of $49,000? We can do better. I hope we will.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I missed votes because I was asked to give a eulogy for a leading Councilwoman and State Senator, who had been a dear friend and mentor. It was a significant tribute and event in my district and for my constituents. Had I been present, I would have voted NAY on Roll Call No. 138, NAY on Roll Call No. 139, YEA on Roll Call No. 140, YEA on Roll Call No. 141, YEA on Roll Call No. 142, YEA on Roll Call No. 143, YEA on Roll Call No. 144, YEA on Roll Call No. 145, YEA on Roll Call No. 146, YEA on Roll Call No. 147, NAY on Roll Call No. 148, YEA on Roll Call No. 149, YEA on Roll Call No. 150, YEA on Roll Call No. 151, NAY on Roll Call No. 152, YEA on Roll Call No. 153, YEA on Roll Call No. 154, YEA on Roll Call No. 155, YEA on Roll Call No. 156, YEA on Roll Call No. 157, and NAY on Roll Call No. 158.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor a beloved and widely respected public servant who died at the age of 94. Through her visionary and inspirational leadership she brought forward generations of leaders dedicated to the public good and the growth of the City of San Diego, and the State of California. It is fitting that at this time, as we celebrate the history of the contributions of women throughout the month of March that I should rise to speak of Senator Lucy Killea. Lucy's life of public service began during WWII, working as a military intelligence officer with the Central Intelligence Agency, and as an aide to First Lady, Eleanor Roosevelt, in 1946, during the first General Assembly of the United Nations. She and her husband John Killea, served ten years as U.S. diplomats in Mexico, which no doubt influenced Lucy's commitment to foster dialogue and collaboration between the United States and Mexico. After their diplomatic service Lucy, and her husband, moved to San Diego, where she completed a doctorate in Latin American History from the University of California, San Diego. Lucy had a full career prior to running for political office. In 1978, San Diego Mayor Pete Wilson, appointed Lucy, to an empty seat on the City Council. In 1982 she was elected to the California State Assembly, where she established the first bipartisan women's caucus in the legislature, and won election to the California State Senate in 1989. She championed the environment, women's health, and ethical governmental practices. She honored her constituents and placed their interests above her own. As I remember Lucy, I think of her not only as a dynamic and committed public servant but as a mentor, a role model and a friend. She worked tirelessly to support women and young people in their efforts to win public office. I count myself among the many Californians involved in public service, who, when confronted with tough political situations, often ask themselves, ``What would Lucy do?'' We recall how she left the Democratic Party and ran as an independent when she no longer believed that she could serve her constituents with a party label. The word trailblazer is often used to describe her political leadership and it is in many ways inadequate to describe how much she has contributed to San Diego, her adopted city, and the great State of California. Lucy's honesty, integrity and respect for civil discourse made her a remarkable leader and a dear friend to many. She truly represents the ``best of us,'' and is dearly missed.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise to suppose the ESEA title I protection amendment. We all know education, at its core, is a civil rights issue. We have a responsibility to ensure that every student has access to a world- class education, and this is especially true for children who come from families with limited means. For our working class families, a quality education can be--and actually is--the ladder which raises an entire family's prospects. The protections that we are debating today ensure that these students and their schools are not shortchanged from the resources they need in order to be successful. These are resources that they are entitled to by law. Last year's Every Student Succeeds Act was a very successful bipartisan compromise, so let's not gut the protections that are crucial for its effective implementation before it is even given a chance. A student's ZIP Code should not determine the quality of his or her education. A family's income should not determine their child's career prospects, and a school's location should not determine its resources. Let's come together to protect our most vulnerable students because, as we all know, today's investments in education will determine our future.

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise to protect student loan borrowers. Protecting our young people should be a priority for every single Member of this Chamber. A major way that we are able to defend our students is through the safeguards that are at stake today. These protections, like provisions which ensure students are able to find gainful employment or have recourse if a school misleads them, have been integral in the wake of unethical practices by certain schools. We have seen the damage that schools like ITT Tech and Ashford University have done in districts like mine. And as a military town, the students in San Diego are particularly vulnerable to bad actors in the for-profit education industry. I can tell you, Mr. Chair, I have heard from students who can't get the degrees they need to provide a better life for their families; veterans who write to me imploring us to protect the men and women who would have spent their lives protecting us; students who write to me frustrated by this Chamber's insistence on deregulation for deregulation's sake; and many more who write letters saying, education is important to us. And we believe it should be important to you as well. Let's prove them right, Mr. Chair. Let's show that education is important to us, and let's commit to keeping key provisions for students intact.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Speaker, it's been less than two months since the start of the 115th Congress and Republicans have already taken every opportunity to roll back progress made for women. They have pledged to tear down the Affordable Care Act and block access to Planned Parenthood. They passed a bill through the House that limits insurance coverage for comprehensive reproductive healthcare. Now they've turned their sights to title X, a family planning program that is crucial for women's health. There are serious consequences for scaling back title X: without the contraceptive services provided at these title X sites, pregnancy rates would be 30 percent higher among teens. We in government should be making it easier for young people to make smart and informed decisions, not depriving them of the ability to be responsible about their health. Please, Madam Speaker, think about those young women. Their lives and their health should be a concern to all of us

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, after the extraordinary events of this week, I certainly had hoped that the House would move forward with a swift investigation into White House dealings with Russia. But, not to be distracted, it looks like the majority would rather spend the day stripping retirement benefits from millions. We have known for a long time that workers who have access to retirement plans through their workplace are more likely to save for retirement than those who don't. It makes sense. We also know that nearly half of middle class workers will fall into poverty when they retire. Last year, the State of California did a great thing. It established a program to provide 7 million Californians with the tools to save for retirement. The Secure Choice program lets workers who do not have a retirement plan through their employer contribute a share of their income to an IRA account administered by the State. Under this voluntary program-- and I stress voluntary--countless Californians will get access to tax preferred retirement accounts for the very first time. That is extraordinary. In August, the Department of Labor cleared the way for Secure Choice by ruling that States could move forward with their own programs to help workers save for retirement. Seven other States are in the process of implementing similar laws, and dozens more are considering their options. The resolution in question today would undo the DOL's ruling, leaving States in a legal gray area that could put these programs in jeopardy. So I ask, Mr. Speaker, is this really how we should be spending our time? DOL spent months reviewing public comments and carefully crafting this rule. The House will vote to repeal it without a single hearing. Really? We should be doing everything we can to encourage savings across the board, certainly not voting to making savings harder for folks. In States across the country, this effort has been bipartisan. I wonder if we would be considering this resolution if the rule in question had not been issued by a Democratic administration? The word ``irresponsible'' does not even begin to do this for what would be justice in this area. So I urge, Mr. Speaker, a ``no'' vote on this. Let's move forward. Let's allow more States to experiment so they can decide for themselves whether or not this is something that the folks in their State want to do.

Mrs. DAVIS of California

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. I think this has been a good discussion, and I think that the hearing that we had today was even an opening as well at looking at this issue. I think no matter what side of the aisle one was on, you couldn't necessarily distinguish the witnesses because it was important that we say that there is a smart way to do this and, frankly, there is kind of a stupid way to do it. Because we want to be sure that the consequences of our actions are not ones that would be impacting our children down the road. So we have to go about this in a measured way, in a smart way. I actually believe that we all have the capacity to do that. There is no question in my mind that we can't do that in a way that really asks the right questions: Why are those protections there? Why did they establish those regulations and protections? So that we can track and understand what is behind them. I really do remember that, as a school board member, now and then, there was some frustration over something within the special education arena. But when you went back and you looked at why that came about, it was because there was a child who represented a problem in the system because we didn't do the right thing. We realized that it wasn't just that child, but it was many children who could be affected in the same way. That is what we have to look at: Why are they there? How can we change them? How can we be smart about it and make sure that we don't do something that, in the end, will harm our education system and even impact those children who really are the most vulnerable that we would not want to impact under any circumstances? So, Mr. Speaker, let's work together on this. Unfortunately, what this does today is it takes away that ability to use, I think, the goodwill of our committee to do the right thing. I hope that my colleagues will agree with that. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. We are actually talking about two of these joint resolutions, both H.J. Res. 57 and H.J. Res. 58, and are looking at accountability measures. Sometimes I think people forget, actually, that the first time that Common Core was mentioned in Federal law was in ESSA, the most recently reauthorized legislation for elementary and secondary education. That was done because we agreed to do that, because we felt that it was important to call it out while, at the same time, being careful to look at our local and our State authorities and have them come together and make the decisions that they think are best for their students. That has been the tradition, and that is why it is important that we have those folks in place in our local school districts. As a former school board member, I know that those are where the real decisions are made for kids, but we need to see in which area and why we have a Federal role. I think, even at the hearing that we had in the Education and the Workforce Committee today, the Republicans' witnesses acknowledged that there is an importance of a Federal role. It is in accountability and responsibility and in acknowledging that sometimes it is important to give direction to States and to give direction to local school districts as well. That is really what we are trying to do here. We are trying to do it in a smart way, and we are trying to do it in a way so that we can realize, in the future, there may be changes that need to be made and that those changes may require Congresses of the future to look at particular protections and see if they are redundant, if they are necessary, or if, maybe, they take us in the wrong direction. What we are talking about today gives us no hope that we will be able to do that. We are basically writing in stone that we will never have to go back--that we can't go back--and look at some of those protections. That is the wrong thing to do. We all know that, with one protection or another, of course, there can be problems. We don't want to ignore that, but we want to be sure that, particularly when we are looking at teacher prep programs, for example, we are looking at the data that is coming together that suggests whether some programs are more beneficial for the achievement of young people in our schools than others. Boy, I sure hope as a school board member that we have the information that is available to people, because we can get that at a national level that we can't necessarily all get at the State level. It is important to know what processes are in place. Some of these protections that the Federal Government has created are giving direction to that. They are saying here are ways to look at your program and decide whether, in fact, they are doing exactly what you think they should be doing. The most important part is that we are getting feedback from our teachers. This is a process that is so critical, that of having people who are on the ground who know what they are talking about. We are responsive to that, and those were some of the processes that we used in the Department of Education as well. I am not going to tell you that each one is perfect. I just want us to have a way to look at them and to understand how they impact our teachers. I want all teachers who want to succeed with kids, who are not in teaching for financial reimbursement, to be there because they really believe in kids and because they believe in their ability to succeed, and they want to be sure that they have the tools, that they have the resources, to do that. Many of the protections that we are talking about provide that kind of help and assistance. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott), the ranking member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce.