Lizzie Fletcher

Mrs. FLETCHER

Mrs. FLETCHER. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 21. My colleagues on both sides of the aisle know that, as a Representative for the energy capital of the world in Houston, I support domestic energy production. We produce oil and gas better. We have better environmental standards, better worker safety standards, and better emission reduction efforts and opportunities. We know it is important to produce energy domestically for our economy and for our national security. We also know that domestic production of oil and gas is a complicated system, from upstream exploration and production to downstream refining and transportation along the way. That is why I oppose this bill. It doesn't reflect the reality of how oil and gas production works or solve the problem I think it seeks to solve. Oil and gas production is a long and expensive process. Leases are executed many years before production begins if it begins at all. When we are talking about the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, we are talking about crude oil that has been produced and stored for emergency use. If what we are trying to do is make sure that the SPR is full and available, we should pass legislation to require the government to replenish it after sales are made, to buy when the price is low. If what we are trying to do is increase domestic production, we should be working on permitting reform and addressing issues in the capital markets that are making investments more difficult. If operators can't make the investments, build the infrastructure, and move the product, what good is a lease sale? Today, we have heard a lot of complaints about President Biden's strategic use of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which has successfully lowered the prices at the pump for Americans and weakened Russia's ability to fund its unprovoked, unconscionable war against Ukraine. It has been a vital tool, as we just heard, for responding to natural disasters and energy supply shocks and mitigating hostile foreign actors at other times. We should support all of these efforts. The response to this effort certainly should not be to make it harder to do what we have just successfully done. That is what this bill does, placing new burdensome requirements to offer vast sums of public lands for leasing at any time mandatory sales are dictated by Congress or exchanges are implemented by the Department of Energy. It is not the solution that my friends on the other side of the aisle seem to think that it is, and I would be glad to work with anyone here to address the real barriers to domestic energy production and support smart energy policy.

Mrs. FLETCHER

Mrs. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, energy security is a key component of our national security. Our energy exports have a security impact around the world as they do here at home. That is why I am disappointed this morning to hear many of my friends across the aisle criticizing and blaming President Biden for taking action to lower gas prices for American consumers and to weaken Russia's ability to fund its unconscionable and unjustified war that is unprovoked against Ukraine by selling oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The SPR is a critical foreign policy tool and energy security tool, and it has been for more than 40 years. The SPR was created for this precise purpose for this moment that we are living in, and these recent sales--like every sale of crude in the U.S.--are made on the open market to any entity wishing to purchase it. The effective utilization of the SPR has successfully lowered costs at the pump for Americans over the last year. In December, The Wall Street Journal reported that U.S. Government made roughly $4 billion in profits last year from the sale of crude oil out of the SPR. This is an important point to remember because it is the direct work of this body. In 2015, the Energy and Commerce Committee under Republican leadership lifted the 40-year ban on crude oil exports. I wasn't here at the time, but if I had been, I would have supported my Republican colleagues in that effort to acknowledge the global free market for the commodity and the importance of ensuring America's energy security and leadership. But it isn't right to complain now for those who support free trade in oil and for those who voted for it then to complain that the system worked as it was intended to. The oil from the SPR was put on the global market which increased supply and brought prices down here at home. Some of the oil sold by design onto the global market made its way to China. This was not an unforeseen consequence. The then-majority on the Energy and Commerce Committee explicitly rejected a proposal by a Democratic member of the committee at the time, Mr. Green from Houston, to license the export of crude oil the way we license LNG exports which requires the Department of Energy to approve the sales. Requiring DOE approval on crude sales could have prevented the sales that are now of concern. That said, I appreciate that this is a step toward addressing those concerns. But I am also concerned that this alone is insufficient, and we need a more robust mechanism to address any sales of concern. Certainly, my colleagues on both sides of the aisle would be concerned about sales to North Korea or Iran or other adversaries. That is why in the last Congress I supported my colleague from Pennsylvania, Chrissy Houlahan's, bipartisan bill that would have closed the loophole to allow the sale or export of oil from the SPR to foreign adversaries. There is still work to do here, and I hope that moving forward we can work together to craft smart energy policy that enhances our energy security and best serves the American people.

Mrs. FLETCHER

Mrs. FLETCHER. Madam Speaker, I join my Democratic colleagues in opposing, on the strongest terms, all forms of political violence. That is something that this resolution fails to do. This resolution fails to acknowledge decades of well-documented violence against reproductive healthcare providers in this country. In failing to do so, it fails us all. I have seen that violence firsthand. More than 30 years ago, when I was a teenager, I stood in defense of our local Planned Parenthood as anti-abortion protesters tried to chain themselves to the doors to prevent women from going in not only to get abortion care but to get their Pap smears, their birth control, HIV tests, and other services. A few years later, a well-known anti-abortion activist drove a van through the same door of that same Planned Parenthood. Like I said, I welcome the opportunity to vote on legislation that condemns all forms of political violence, but the resolution's purposeful omission of abortion providers and patients, and what that suggests, is why I am voting ``no'' today, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mrs. FLETCHER

Mrs. FLETCHER. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 26 and to its very name because it is not about what House Republicans claim it is about, because what they claim it is about isn't a thing. What this bill is about is an assault on the health, rights, equality, and dignity of American women and the people who provide their reproductive healthcare. It is an assault we have seen in my home State of Texas where women having miscarriages are being turned away from the hospitals and told to come back when they are closer to dying, where doctors fear, and are told, that they cannot meet the standard of care for their patients. Providers and patients are afraid of misleading bills like this one criminalizing healthcare. But, of course, that is the point, isn't it? I stand here today, and I will stand here every day, to oppose this bill and others like it, to talk about the real healthcare crisis facing women today, and to urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Mrs. FLETCHER

Mrs. FLETCHER. Madam Speaker, today is a historic day. Today, we will vote on the question of whether to allow Medicare to negotiate the price of prescription drugs and cap out-of-pocket costs for seniors; lower the cost of healthcare; implement smart energy policy to reduce emissions, fight climate change, and spur energy innovation; invest in American manufacturing; and reduce our deficit spending by $300 billion. We answer these questions ``yes'' by voting for the Inflation Reduction Act. As the representative of the energy capital of the world, where we lead in energy technology and investment, I want to respond to some of the things that we have just heard. I am particularly proud of the work that we have done here to ensure that the historic methane emissions reduction program will actually reduce greenhouse gas emissions, make it possible for energy companies of all sizes to reduce their emissions through a grant program, and ensure that the United States remains the global leader in energy production and in energy innovation and technology. We do this by voting together for this historic bill today.

Mrs. FLETCHER

Mrs. FLETCHER. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the Right to Contraception Act as an original cosponsor. I thank Representative Manning for her leadership--and her co-leads, Representatives Craig, Jacobs, and Williams--on this important bill, which responds to the very real threats to access to reproductive healthcare and to bodily autonomy that we face today. We saw this threat in Justice Thomas' concurring opinion in the Dobbs case, suggesting the landmark case of Griswold v. Connecticut, which gave married couples the right to use birth control, should be revisited and overturned. We see these threats from some in this body and legislatures across the country. We certainly see it in Texas. We also see that this effort does not represent the desires of the vast majority of people I represent who rely on contraception of all kinds every single day and have for more than 50 years. Yet, we see these efforts to block women from accessing contraception that works for them, including IUDs. Once again, I am proud to protect the health, privacy, dignity, and autonomy of women and families across this country by voting ``yes'' on this bill, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mrs. FLETCHER

Mrs. FLETCHER. Madam Speaker, in my beloved home State of Texas, we are in a crisis, a healthcare crisis, a humanitarian crisis. Since last September, access to abortion has been severely limited. Since last month, it has been eliminated. In response, Texans who can do so have been traveling out of State to obtain abortion care, first to Oklahoma, Louisiana, and New Mexico. As some of these States have banned abortion, they are now traveling even farther. Now, in response to this exercise of their constitutional right to travel between the States, lawmakers in Texas and in other States across the country are threatening to take away that right, too. This is not hypothetical, it is not hyperbole, and it is nothing like what we just heard from the minority in response to this bill. Just last week, a group of lawmakers in Texas publicized a letter that they sent to at least one law firm in Texas threatening the firm and each of its partners with felony criminal prosecution and disbarment because of the firm's policy to reimburse employees for travel costs associated with out-of-State travel for abortion care. It is not just Texas. Lawmakers in Missouri have already considered legislation to prohibit its residents from traveling outside of the State for abortion care to States where it is legal, and groups are working on model legislation to introduce in States across the country as we speak. Not only do these threats fail to reflect the will of the majority of people in this country who favor a legislative framework that takes into account the complex circumstances of pregnancy that we have discussed this morning, these threats fail to reflect the fundamental rights guaranteed in our Constitution. Congress has the authority and the responsibility to protect people from these unconstitutional efforts to prevent, restrict, impede, or otherwise punish a person traveling to another State to obtain a legal abortion and to protect those providers and others who are helping them. This morning, we are doing exactly that in passing the Ensuring Women's Right to Reproductive Freedom Act. I thank the chairman, the Speaker, original cosponsors Representative Strickland and Representative Raskin, and all of our cosponsors for, once again, responding with urgency to the cruel efforts to deprive my fellow Texans and our fellow Americans of their constitutional right to travel by bringing this bill to the floor today, and I urge everyone in this body to vote ``yes.''

Mrs. FLETCHER

Mrs. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for his leadership and support and making it possible for us to be here today to pass the Restoring Hope for Mental Health and Well-Being Act of 2022. It is an important effort, and I am so glad that the bipartisan bill that I introduced last year with Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler, the Collaborate in an Orderly and Cohesive Manner Act, H.R. 5218, is included in it. Many people first display symptoms of a mental health condition or substance use disorder in the primary care setting. Often they can't access the necessary follow-up treatment, it is either too expensive or too difficult for them to find the necessary mental health professional or overcome other obstacles, including stigma. That is why enabling patients to access behavioral health treatment at their first point of care is critical, and that is what this bill does. The collaborative care model addresses obstacles including stigma, a shortage of mental health professionals, and cost by integrating behavioral healthcare within the primary care setting, with their trusted family doctors, which allows patients to access the care they need in a setting where they feel most comfortable. The collaborative care model is a measurement-based model featuring a primary care physician, a psychiatric consultant, and care manager all working together to provide mental health care for patients and ensuring that that care is delivered effectively. There are more than 90 published trials demonstrating its success in different settings for both adults and children. It extends the reach of our psychiatrists, which is essential as we work to address demand in the face of workforce shortages. It is covered by Medicare, most private insurers, and many State Medicaid programs, alleviating the huge financial burden that can often be associated with accessing mental health care. Despite its proven effectiveness, implementation of the collaborative care model remains low because of the upfront costs and lack of technical assistance for providers. This bill addresses this roadblock by providing grant funding for States to work with primary care physicians and practices looking to adopt this model. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues, Congresswomen Herrera Beutler and Eshoo and Chairman Pallone for addressing the mental health crisis in this country.

Mrs. FLETCHER

Mrs. FLETCHER. Like women across the country, from New Hampshire to North Carolina to Florida to Michigan to California, all of whom spoke this evening, Texas women have fought and will continue to fight for the right to safe, legal, accessible abortion care, to reproductive healthcare, and to reproductive justice. I am proud to be one of them. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. FLETCHER. Madam Speaker, I thank Representative Frankel for sharing her stories from Florida. At this time, it is a pleasure to yield to the gentleman from the great State of Texas (Mr. Green).

Mrs. FLETCHER. Madam Speaker, I thank Representative Green. Madam Speaker, I have worked closely with my colleagues in the Pro- Choice Caucus to identify stories that need to be told during this Special Order hour this evening. I am grateful to my colleagues who have taken to the floor this evening to share with us the stories of their constituents, to share with us the stories of those who they know have been fighters for reproductive rights, for reproductive justice, for choice. One of our Pro-Choice Caucus leaders could not be with us tonight but has submitted a statement for the record that I would like to read now. From Representative Judy Chu: ``I rise today to honor the women of the abortion rights movement who have come before us. I remember what it was like before the days of Roe. So today, I am helping to remember and honor those who gave their lives, who put their own bodies in harm's way so that we might have the ability to decide what to do with ours. ``Women like Pam, who lives in my district in Pasadena, California-- Pam is in her seventies, retired, and spends her time volunteering in her community. But Pam told me about a time when she was 22 years old. It was 1969, and even though she and her partner had been using birth control, Pam found out she was pregnant. ``This happened in the days before Roe v. Wade, which meant that her options were limited. That is how Pam found herself standing on the curb of an airport in Mexico City, waiting for someone to pick her up. Finally, a large black car came up and rolled down the window. `Are you Pam?' the driver asked. `Yes,' she replied, and got in the car, forced to trust and hope for the best. Thankfully, Pam wasn't hurt during this experience, but she told me she has never forgotten the fear and uncertainty of putting her life in the hands of a stranger who could have hurt her and abused her, especially when we know that this is a procedure that is safe and can be done in a doctor's office, not someplace unknown and unsafe. ``That is why, now, Pam is determined to ensure that no one ever feels as scared and alone as she did that day. Pam volunteers at the Planned Parenthood Pasadena and San Gabriel Valley, serving as a support system to women who need a hand to hold or a shoulder to lean on. Pam is an abortion advocate in her community because she believes, like I do, that everyone, no matter where they grew up, what language they speak, or how much money they make, deserves to have a say in what happens to their bodies. ``I rise today, as part of Women's History Month, to honor Pam and so many others like her who were forced to make history so that others could have the choices that they were denied. The fight for reproductive rights would not be where it is today without advocates like Pam who stand up, time and time again, and demand that women have the right to decide.'' Madam Speaker, this evening, the Pro-Choice Caucus and I also want to recognize the women who launched and built the groundbreaking reproductive justice movement. While women of color have long fought for these principles, ``reproductive justice'' as a term was coined in 1994 when a group of Black women gathered in Chicago ahead of the International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo. Loretta Ross is one of a number of women who built the reproductive justice movement. She was part of the 1994 meeting and went on to co- found the organization SisterSong, which defines ``reproductive justice'' as the human right to maintain personal bodily autonomy; to have children, not have children; and to parent the children we have in safe and sustainable communities. A scholar who teaches both at Smith College and who has published extensively on reproductive justice, she recently testified at the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform in this legislative session. Dorothy Roberts is another pioneer of the reproductive justice movement. From Pennsylvania, she is also considered one of the leaders. There have been many leaders in our government and in our communities who we celebrate tonight. We, in the Pro-Choice Caucus, have identified a few women who we want to highlight this evening. I will start with some of the lawmakers and legislators who helped pave the way, including Shirley Chisholm, the first Black woman elected to Congress in 1968. She was also the first Black woman to run for President. Throughout her trailblazing career, she was a strong supporter of reproductive rights. In 1969, she was named honorary president of the National Abortion Rights Action League, NARAL. In 1970, she supported legalized abortion in her home State of New York. In 1970, she described abortion as an issue of economic and racial justice. Louise Slaughter, a longtime Member from New York and chairwoman of the Rules Committee, during her long tenure in Congress, served as a founder and co-chair of the Pro-Choice Caucus. In addition to championing legislation to protect and expand access to abortion and contraception, Representative Slaughter condemned efforts to expand the so-called conscience protections at the expense of healthcare access and was an early leader on marriage equality. First elected in 1972, Pat Schroeder was one of only 14 women in the House at the time of the January 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. When a male colleague asked her how she could be a mother of two small children and a Member of Congress at the same time, she famously replied: ``I have a brain and a uterus, and I use both.'' Other figures who are large in the women's reproductive rights movement, of course, must include Ellen Malcolm, who, in 1985, led a group of friends in creating an organization dedicated to electing pro- choice Democratic women, giving them the credibility and resources that they needed through her organization, EMILY's List. We began this evening talking about Sarah Weddington, and there are many lawyers and judges who have been a part of this movement at some time in their careers, including, famously, of course, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Kathryn Kolbert, Priscilla Smith, and Linda Coffee. Of course, we heard from several people tonight, several of our Members, about the work done in their local communities at Planned Parenthood health centers across the country. As we touch on some of these important women leaders in our community and our country, we certainly recognize the leadership that we have seen at Planned Parenthood health centers, including Faye Wattleton, who was the first Black woman to serve as the president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, as well as the youngest; Cecile Richards, who was president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America and the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, and she is the daughter of the late Texas Governor, another champion for reproductive rights, women's rights, and women's equality, Ann Richards. Alexis McGill Johnson, the current president and CEO of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America and the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, is in charge of and oversees Planned Parenthood's vital health services to 2.4 million people each year through more than 600 health centers across the country. She is a champion for social and racial justice, a respected political and cultural organizer, and a tireless advocate for reproductive freedom. The National Abortion Rights Action League, which I mentioned earlier, has always had an incredible role to play in the fight for reproductive rights. Its leaders--Karen Mulhauser, Nanette Falkenberg, Kate Michelman, Nancy Keenan, Ilyse Hogue, and, today, Mini Timmaraju-- have left an incredible mark. The Guttmacher Institute and its current leadership under Dr. Herminia Palacio--the Guttmacher Institute's mission is to advance sexual and reproductive health and rights in the United States and across the globe. There are so many people, so many women, who have come together around these issues, who have come together to protect the health, the equality, the autonomy, and the dignity of women across this country. Whether named or not this evening on the floor, those are the people who we celebrate tonight. Madam Speaker, we began this hour with a celebration of trailblazing, fearless women from my home State of Texas. I am so grateful to my colleagues from Texas who joined me this evening and to my colleagues from across the country who spoke out tonight. Today in Texas, and across the country, reproductive rights are under attack. The passage of the draconian Senate Bill 8 in Texas, which Representative Stevens discussed, which Representative Veasey discussed, has created a healthcare crisis for women and healthcare providers across our State. Sadly, but not surprisingly, other States are quickly following suit. As we have seen, and as we have heard from some of our colleagues this evening, it is not merely abortion. Advocates with cases pending before the United States Supreme Court today, including Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, are arguing that the protections recognized in Roe v. Wade and Griswold v. Connecticut, which gave married couples the right to use birth control, that those principles should be rejected. This is alarming. This is terrifying. This is not what the majority of Americans want. It is not what people have fought so hard for so long to achieve. That is why it is so important that this evening we remember and honor the work that people have done to ensure reproductive rights, reproductive health, and reproductive justice. It is also important that we recommit ourselves to continuing that work. As my colleagues noted, in September, thanks to the leadership of Representative Judy Chu and the Pro-Choice Caucus, the House passed the Women's Health Protection Act to protect the right to access abortion care against restrictions and bans in every State in our Union. Passing this legislation is a critical step toward creating a world where every person, whoever they are, wherever they live, whatever their circumstances, is free to make the best healthcare and personal decisions for themselves, their families, and their futures. We must continue to defend and protect the fundamental rights essential to our autonomy, our dignity, and our equality that are represented in the case of Roe v. Wade and the Women's Health Protection Act. In times like these, it is important to me to remember, and it is important for all of us to remember, that Texas gave us S.B. 8, but it also gave us Sarah Weddington, Loretta Ross, Cecile Richards, and so many other people who we talked about this evening and who we know have been champions for women's health, women's reproductive rights, and reproductive justice.

Mrs. FLETCHER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to give all members 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of my Special Order.

Mrs. FLETCHER. Madam Speaker, this night, and this Women's History Month, together with my colleagues in the Pro-Choice Caucus, I rise in support of the women of the reproductive rights movement. Women who stood up, spoke out, and reached out to protect the rights of women in this country to determine whether and when to become parents. Of course, this work required and requires to this day, a broad, bold coalition of people, people whose work has necessitated tremendous sacrifice and has resulted in tremendous progress. Some of them were denied access to contraception, abortion care, and healthcare, and agreed to become the face of legal challenges. Some of them were strategists who shaped the arguments that became the fabric of legal protections for reproductive rights. Some of them were healthcare providers who saw the tragic consequences of the denial of those rights. As a lawyer, I have known some of their names through the landmark cases that bear them--Griswold v. Connecticut, Roe v. Wade, and more. Tonight, we celebrate them, we celebrate their courage, their commitment, and their purpose in articulating, advocating, and ensuring the rights to equality, privacy, and dignity that their work represents. Before yielding to my colleagues who are here this evening in person and in spirit, I will start with one of them who holds a special place in this work and in my own life. As a woman from Texas, it has always been a source of great pride that some fearless Texas women have been leaders in this fight. In the late 1960s, a group of Texas women came together to challenge our State's ban on abortion. They found as their lawyer and lifelong advocate, a young woman named Sarah Weddington, who is pictured here behind me. A recent law school graduate, Sarah Weddington was working for the University of Texas at that time. Perhaps not surprisingly, although she had good grades and a law degree, she had a hard time finding a job in a law firm. But she was working to help people solve their problems in Austin, and this group knew she would be a good advocate. I heard her tell the story once that when the group came to see her, they told her that they thought the best way to deal with the law was to challenge the law itself. She said that she had a law degree, but she really hadn't practiced in Federal court before. She wasn't a courtroom lawyer, and she hadn't handled a case like this one. So she told them she thought they should get someone with more experience. She recalled to us they asked her, Well, what would you charge us to do this lawsuit? And she said, Oh, I will do it for free. And they said, You are our lawyer. And that is how she got the case. Sarah called her law school classmate, Linda Coffee, and they agreed to work on the case together. Many UT law students and professors helped Sarah and Linda with the case. They heard from women, of course, and from doctors who treated women who had had complications from illegal abortions and women who had died from illegal abortions. Through their work, the strategizing, the organizing, the lawyering, these trailblazing Texas women brought us the framework to protect the health, privacy, dignity, equality, and freedom of women and families across this country in the case of Roe v. Wade. And 26-year-old Sarah Weddington and this team of Texas women took that case all the way to the United States Supreme Court. On January 22, 1973, the Court ruled in one of the most consequential decisions in American history, the Texas State law banning abortions, except to save a woman's life, was unconstitutional. Sarah carried this fight with her for the rest of her life. She was elected to the Texas legislature. She served in the Carter administration where she helped get more women on the Federal bench. She worked for many years as a lecturer and professor teaching at schools, including the University of Texas. This year, 2022, was the first one that we marked the anniversary of Roe without Sarah Weddington. She left a legacy for us through her life's work, the rights and protections for the health, privacy, dignity, equality, and freedom of women and families enshrined in that decision that has shaped our country and our opportunities as women for the last 50 years. She was part of a generation of trailblazing Texas women who made it their life's work to make our world one of equality, opportunity, and possibility for women. It is fitting to remember, honor, and celebrate her tonight. Madam Speaker, several of my colleagues are here to remember and honor other women pioneers, trailblazers, and heroes of the reproductive rights movement. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Stevens).

Mrs. FLETCHER. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Veasey).

Mrs. FLETCHER. Madam Speaker, I thank Mr. Veasey and I join him in his remarks that we are so grateful to our State legislators and the Members of our Texas delegation as we face these challenges at home. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Manning).

Mrs. FLETCHER. Madam Speaker, I thank Representative Manning for the important points that she made, talking about the importance of access to safe abortions. Even today, the World Health Organization estimates that 47,000 women die from unsafe abortions each year. That is 13 percent of maternal deaths worldwide. Madam Speaker, at this time, I yield to the gentlewoman from New Hampshire (Ms. Kuster).

Mrs. FLETCHER. Madam Speaker, I thank Representative Kuster for her leadership and for her impactful story here tonight, one of the many women of this reproductive rights movement. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Lois Frankel).

Mrs. FLETCHER

Mrs. FLETCHER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 2954.

Mrs. FLETCHER

Mrs. FLETCHER. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the FAIR Act. I have heard some of the debate in this Chamber today, and as a litigator, I disagree. The FAIR Act is about restoring justice for the American people. It is for consumers, it for workers, it is for small business people, it is for people whose civil rights have been violated, it is for millions of Americans who are denied their right to seek justice and accountability because of forced arbitration. There is certainly a role for arbitration of disputes and other forms of alternative dispute resolution in our system of justice. I know this from my own experience representing individuals and organizations in the courts and before arbitrators. The FAIR Act is important because it recognizes the role arbitration can play in resolving disputes between willing parties while it recognizes the fundamental rights of the people who have been subjected to arbitration agreements without their true consent. The FAIR Act protects the freedom to contract, the freedom of choice, and the freedom granted in our Constitution, including the Seventh Amendment. Madam Speaker, for these reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes.''

Mrs. FLETCHER

Mrs. FLETCHER. Madam Speaker, I am delighted to bring my bill, H.R. 1917, the Hazard Eligibility and Local Projects, or HELP Act, to the floor today, and I thank Congressman Pappas, and I thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee for agreeing to move this bill forward. I am so proud of the HELP Act and all that it represents. It is bipartisan, commonsense, meaningful legislation, that was born out of a real partnership with local officials in my district in Houston that will benefit all Americans. As many in this body will recall, Hurricane Harvey hit my district in Houston and the entire Texas Gulf Coast in August of 2017, causing great devastation, dropping nearly 60 inches of rain, claiming 68 lives, and causing an estimated $125 billion in damages. It was the second-most expensive hurricane in the United States' history. Members of this body responded to Harvey's devastation with the speed and purpose we needed for our recovery, passing three supplemental appropriations bills, sending billions of dollars in aid to Texas through different programs. But our recovery was and still is slow, slower than many expected, and slower than any can afford. Before I was sworn into Congress, I met with our local officials at home to talk about the impediments to our recovery. How could we speed it up? Where was recovery delayed? What could the Federal Government do? And one impediment that had significant impact on our recovery was the process for the award of mitigation project funding from FEMA. Here is why. As Mr. Pappas noted, section 404 of the Stafford Act provides that FEMA may grant up to 75 percent of funds for cost- effective mitigation projects through the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, HMGP. When States or municipalities apply through the HMGP program, projects, regardless of size or scope, require a comprehensive review to make sure all requirements of NEPA or other statutory requirements are met. Importantly, these hazard mitigation grants do not allow for the reimbursement of costs incurred before a grant is approved. As a result, many areas recovering from disaster must wait for the FEMA review before purchasing land or starting construction on a project designed to mitigate damage. This FEMA review can go on for months or years at a critical time for decisionmaking and recovering. In the case of natural disasters, local governments need to move quickly on projects like land acquisition; for example, buying land or buying out homes that have been damaged or other land acquisition projects. In Houston, this was true for us when we were looking to buy a golf course to create additional stormwater detention. The chief recovery officer for the city of Houston has told us that FEMA's pre- award cost policy--that is, not allowing reimbursement of costs incurred before grant approval--is a limiting factor in recovery, especially in cases of land acquisition. Homeowners simply cannot afford to wait the months or years to make decisions about whether to repair their homes or participate in a buyout. The result is not only inefficiency, but real hardship. For example, Harris County Flood Control District received $25 million from the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program to conduct buyouts to reduce flood damages in areas located deep in the floodplain where structural projects to reduce flooding aren't cost-effective. But that was nearly a year after Harvey. It took a year because of the review period required at FEMA for all HMGP applications. Most homeowners simply don't have the luxury of waiting a year or more to begin repairs or decide what to do. So the quicker local governments are able to move, the more people they can help and the more resources they can leverage. Having a one- size-fits-all approach to reviewing projects through the HMGP is not efficient or effective. It needlessly delays critical mitigation work. That is where the idea for the HELP Act came from. The HELP Act will allow land acquisition projects and simple construction projects that do not require an environmental impact statement under NEPA to commence immediately without the risk of losing potential Federal funds. This will allow State and local governments to respond more quickly to the needs of their communities and to plan disaster mitigation more efficiently and effectively by removing unnecessary delays and streamlining FEMA's Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. It is simple, it is straightforward, and it is needed. At home, I continue to hear a consistent concern that these Federal disaster recovery projects move at a very slow pace. This bill addresses that and will be a real improvement for communities across the country. I would like to thank my colleague, Mr. McCaul, for working with me on this bill. Disaster mitigation is not and should never be a partisan issue. There remains much work to do to prepare for future storms that we know will come, but I am hopeful that the HELP Act will aid State and local governments when they do. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation and help our families, businesses, and communities recover from disasters.

Mrs. FLETCHER

Mrs. FLETCHER. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the Women's Health Protection Act. As an original cosponsor of the bill, I thank Representative Chu for her leadership on this important bill. As a woman from Texas, I thank this body for responding with urgency to my beloved home State's cruel law, depriving Texans of their constitutional rights, by bringing this bill to the floor today. In this moment, it is a Texas law, a law quickly being copied across the country, that has brought us here. But let us remember that it was also Texas that brought us the framework for this bill that we will pass today to protect the health, privacy, dignity, and freedom of women and families across this country in the case of Roe v. Wade. It was a 26-year-old Texas woman named Sarah Weddington who took that case all the way to the Supreme Court. Texas women have fought and will continue to fight for the rights that we protect here today. I am proud to be one of them and to vote in favor of this bill. Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from NARAL Pro-Choice America. Statement of NARAL Pro-Choice America The Women's Health Protection Act (H.R. 3755)--september 24, 2021 Thank you for the opportunity to submit a statement to the U.S. House of Representatives on this critical legislation. NARAL Pro-Choice America (NARAL) is a national advocacy organization, dedicated to protecting and advancing reproductive freedom, including access to abortion, contraception, paid leave, and protection from pregnancy discrimination, as a fundamental right and value. Through education, organizing, and influencing public policy, NARAL and our 2.5 million members from every state and congressional district in the country work to guarantee every individual the freedom to make personal decisions about their lives, bodies, and futures, free from political interference. For this reason, we are submitting this statement to thank leadership for holding this vote and to call on Congress to pass the Women's Health Protection Act in order to safeguard the federal right to abortion against bans and medically unnecessary restrictions. The legal right to abortion faces its greatest threat in decades. Despite overwhelming public support, 8 in 10 Americans, for the legal right to abortion, we're in the midst of an all-out assault on reproductive freedom with Roe v. Wade hanging in the balance. The need to enshrine the legal right to abortion in federal statute is more urgent than ever. The fact that the U.S. Supreme Court will soon hear Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, and that it declined to block Texas's extreme abortion ban, allowing Roe to be rendered meaningless in the state, represent ominous signs for the future of abortion rights in this country. Earlier this month, the Supreme Court failed to intervene and subsequently rejected an emergency request to block Texas Senate Bill 8 (SB 8), a blatantly unconstitutional ban on abortion. This law bans abortion at approximately six weeks before many people even know they are pregnant. It also grants private citizens the power to sue abortion providers and anyone else who helps someone access abortion care; this includes clergy members or counselors, abortion funds that assist someone in paying for abortion care, and even someone who drives a patient to their appointment, like family members, friends, and rideshare drivers. An individual who successfully sues someone for assisting a pregnant person seeking abortion care would receive a financial reward of $10,000. The Supreme Court's decision to allow SB 8 to go into effect essentially gave Texas the green light to render Roe v. Wade meaningless in the state and empowered anti- choice lawmakers to use this law as a blueprint to roll back reproductive freedom in their own states. The pending Supreme Court case is set against a backdrop of increasingly cruel and draconian restrictions and bans as anti-choice politicians escalate their quest to end legal abortion. Even as Roe stands, though it has long not been a reality for many, the further evisceration of abortion access is ramping up. In addition to Texas's ban, state lawmakers seeking to advance their agenda of power and control have passed hundreds of state-level attacks on abortion access over the last decade that have made care extremely difficult, if not impossible, to access for many people across the country. Systematic attacks on reproductive freedom and abortion access, including bans on abortion coverage, intentionally push access out of reach and have rendered meaningless the protections and rights afforded by Roe v. Wade for many people across the country. The unprecedented threat to the right to abortion underscores the urgent need for Congress to pass the Women's Health Protection Act. Every day without congressional action to protect abortion rights and expand abortion access means that more and more people are denied the right to abortion and ability to access the care that they need--and we know that this disproportionately affects women, Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC), people working to make ends meet, immigrants, young people, people with disabilities, LGBTQ+ individuals, and those living in rural and other medically underserved areas. Attacks on abortion rights and access are rooted in racism, white supremacy, and other forms of discrimination. Ending these barriers and ensuring equal access to abortion care is central to the pursuit of reproductive freedom and racial and economic justice. The looming threat to the future of legal abortion across the country is the result of a decades-long far-right strategy to advance a radical and out-of-touch ideological agenda. In the late 1970s, radical conservatives weaponized the formerly non-political, back-burner issue of abortion rights as political cover for their efforts to maintain white patriarchal control amidst diminishing support for racist policies like school segregation, which had previously been the backbone of their movement. In the years immediately preceding and following Roe v. Wade, Evangelical Christians, who now form the backbone of the GOP, were overwhelmingly indifferent on the issue of abortion. But through the carefully crafted messages of Paul Weyrich, Jerry Falwell, and other architects of the Radical Right, abortion became the political tool of choice for a movement determined to maintain control in a changing world, and the trojan horse for a far-reaching array of ideologies meant to thwart social progress. In the intervening years, opposition to abortion has become a litmus test in far-right circles for a host of political and judicial positions. In order to advance their agenda--one that has always stood in direct opposition to the values of the majority of Americans--they developed and implemented a strategy for capturing and maintaining minority rule. This strategy included pushing regressive boilerplate legislation chipping away at access to abortion through state legislatures and Congress, as well as stacking the federal judiciary with anti-choice ideologues. Anti-choice activists have spent decades building their influence over the federal judiciary through well-funded, secretive networks like the Federalist Society. Conservative activists have never been shy about the fact that their takeover of the federal judiciary is part of a broad strategy to quell the majority and cement minority rule, but the election of Donald Trump took this tactic to new heights. In May 2016, Trump pledged to only nominate anti-choice judges, a promise he doubled down on in 2020. And with the help of Mitch McConnell, Trump installed anti-choice federal judges with lifetime appointments at a breakneck pace. More than a quarter of currently active federal judges are now Trump appointees, including Supreme Court justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett--tipping the balance of the Court to a supermajority unmistakably hostile to reproductive freedom. We have already seen this majority use the so-called ``shadow docket'' to undermine the right to abortion and abortion access. There is no denying that the threat to Roe v. Wade is real. Anti-choice lawmakers, emboldened by the anti-choice supermajority on the Court, have accelerated their push to pass blatantly unconstitutional bans and restrictions on abortion--introducing, advancing, or passing over 330 bills attacking abortion access this year alone, some going as far as criminalizing pregnant people and doctors who provide abortion care. Now, more than ever, the anti-choice movement is advancing its extremist agenda in plain sight. Already this year, at least eight states have enacted laws that criminalize doctors for providing abortion care. When abortion care is criminalized, lives are on the line. Ending legal abortion would roll back the clock for our rights, but it would not eliminate abortion. It would only isolate and endanger people trying to make the best decisions for their lives and their futures. The interrogation and punishment of people who are pregnant is not far-fetched--it is already happening. People across the country are already being charged or prosecuted for pregnancy outcomes including pregnancy loss, self-managing abortion care, or even the suspicion of it. Criminalizing people for having an abortion, experiencing a miscarriage or stillbirth, or any other pregnancy outcome only exacerbates racial inequities and is just one of the many ways that Black, Indigenous, and other people of color have been criminalized. NARAL Pro-Choice America strongly supports the Women's Health Protection Act, which was re-introduced this year by Representatives Judy Chu (D-CA), Lois Frankel (D-FL), Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), and Veronica Escobar (D-TX), and Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Tammy Baldwin (D-WI). Roe v. Wade and access to abortion care are on the line like never before and this moment requires urgent action from Congress. All people--no matter who they are or where they live--should have the freedom to make their own decisions about whether to start or grow a family, free from political interference. Enacting the Women's Health Protect Act is a critical step toward creating a world where every body is free to make the best decisions for themselves, their families, and their lives.

Mrs. FLETCHER

Mrs. FLETCHER. Madam Speaker, I rise today with a heavy heart to honor the life of one of my constituents, David Castro. Born and raised in Houston over the last 17 years, David was tragically killed in a road rage incident on his way home from an Astros game just earlier this month. He had a bright future ahead of him. A National Merit Scholar semifinalist, he excelled in math and physics. He was a percussionist in the Westside High School marching band. Today, as I extend my deep condolences to David's family and friends for their loss, I rise to share their wish that our community and our country remember David through random acts of kindness. What a beautiful way to memorialize him. David Castro will be missed but never forgotten and will live on in acts of kindness across this country.

Mrs. FLETCHER

Mrs. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer an amendment to the INVEST in America Act to provide local transit agencies the flexibility to develop large-scale transit improvement plans. As Congress discusses legislation to reimagine and rebuild our country's infrastructure and transit systems, the amendment I am offering today provides additional flexibility, as transit agencies group transit improvement projects together and allow more than one project to be developed and financed at a time. Specifically, if an agency pays more than the required 20 percent of local funds to pay for a federally qualified project, the extra funds they used on that project will be counted as a credit on another project. This will ensure that local agencies are able to maximize both the Federal and local funds available to them to deliver large-scale regional transit improvements. As we reimagine and rebuild our country's infrastructure, this is precisely the type of Federal-local partnership that will deliver the highest value for our investment as we work to build for our future.

Mrs. FLETCHER

Mrs. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Linda Lelia Susan Moroney, known to all of us as Muffie, who died recently in her home at the age of 77. Muffie was born here in Washington, D.C. during World War II, but she was raised in and around Houston, and she was a Texan through and through. A lawyer by training and an advocate at heart, she fought to make our community, our country, and our world, a better place. A mother, a lay leader, and a champion, Muffie worked for equality for all, dignity for all, and justice for all, especially for women; and she did so while treating everyone she met with respect, including those who saw things differently. Her spirit will live on in her sons, Justin and Robert, in her grandchildren, and in the work she did, the groups she organized, the causes she championed, and the things that she did for all of us in Texas and for all Americans.

Mrs. FLETCHER

Mrs. FLETCHER. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act. I thank my colleague from Houston, Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, for her leadership and her tireless efforts to get this critical legislation to this House floor. The Violence Against Women Act provides essential support for survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault, and its reauthorization now is vitally important, as many of my colleagues have shared. It is critical for organizations in my community that support survivors, like the Houston Area Women's Center, which has reported a dramatic rise in requests for their services through the coronavirus pandemic--more than 6,000 more calls responded to in 2020 alone. Madam Speaker, in 2020, the number of people the center sheltered tripled. Sadly, we have been reminded again today of the dangers that women face in our society. The Violence Against Women Act provides resources and services that are lifesaving. That is why I am proud to cosponsor this legislation and to vote in support of it today. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to do the same.