Ruben Gallego

Mr. GALLEGO

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Speaker, 19,000 and counting, that is the number of people with confirmed cases of Zika in America so far; 1,800 and counting, the number of pregnant women in the U.S. with confirmed cases of Zika so far; 17 and counting, the number of babies born with birth defects related to the Zika virus so far; 6 months and counting, that is how long ago President Obama asked Congress to do its job and provide supplemental funding to combat the virus. Mr. Speaker, how many more Americans must suffer before the House Republicans realize that the health of our families matters more than politics? How many more pregnant women must receive the devastating news they have contracted the virus before the GOP leadership stops playing games with American lives? Instead of heeding the pleas of the CDC, public health experts, and the medical community, House Republicans revealed their true priorities when they decided to hold Zika funding hostage over women's health care and the Confederate flag. That is just wrong, Mr. Speaker. Let's protect pregnant women. Let's save vulnerable infants. Let's pass a clean Zika funding bill.

Mr. GALLEGO

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and was not present for one roll call vote on July 13, 2016. Had I been present, I would have voted in this manner: Roll Call Vote Number 453--Amendment offered by Congressman Palmer of Alabama Number 76--NO.

Mr. GALLEGO

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment that will reaffirm Congress' support for the enforcement of grazing fees on public lands. Grazing on public lands is a privilege, not a right. Ranchers who use these lands should abide by the law and pay their fair share. My amendment simply confirms that grazing permits or leases should not be issued to anyone who does not comply with BLM regulations. Mr. Chairman, revenues from grazing fees go toward the management, maintenance, and improvement of public range land. The mass majority of ranchers are upstanding, responsible Americans. They understand the importance of these efforts and pay their fees on time. But some ranchers are outright refusing to pay their grazing fees. That is completely unacceptable. To be clear, my amendment does not penalize people for forgetting to repair a fence or neglecting to make a payment once or twice. Instead, this amendment will ensure that egregious violations of grazing regulations are not financed by the American taxpayer. One particular rancher, who is well known to the media, continues to be more than $1 million in arrears. He has ignored the executive and judicial branches of our government, expanding his herds further on to Federal lands. While continuing to violate the law, he put the lives of local and Federal officials at stake during a dangerous standoff, for which he was indicted by a grand jury on charges including assaulting and threatening Federal officers. We are only now beginning to see the full extent of the damage he has caused to public lands as a result of this confrontation and his unauthorized grazing. Mr. Chairman, my friends on the other side of the aisle talk a lot about upholding the law, yet they responded with silence, or even support, when this particular rancher and others brazenly broke our laws and put the lives of BLM officers at risk in an armed standoff. Mr. Chairman, I can't help but notice a double standard in Republicans' support for ranchers who refuse to pay their fair share and Republican criticism of Americans who refuse to accept injustice in their communities. This amendment offers my Republican friends the opportunity to stand up against those who have broken our laws with impunity. It sends a clear signal that egregious violations of grazing regulations will not be financed by the American taxpayer, and it projects a clear message of support to the BLM officers who demonstrated discretion and restraint in the handling of the ranchers' protests. Mr. Chairman, let's pass this amendment and uphold the basic principle that our laws should be applied fairly to everyone who lives in this country and uses its public lands.

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GALLEGO. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chair, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted: ``No'' on rollcall No. 453. Amendment No. 78 Offered by Mr. Gosar

Mr. GALLEGO

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank, first, my colleagues, Congresswoman Kirkpatrick and Congressmen Takano and Aguilar, for helping me with this amendment. We strongly believe that veterans who served our Nation in uniform deserve the chance to serve our Nation in the Federal Government. Unfortunately, a provision slipped unseen into this 1,700-page document, the Senate defense authorization bill, severely undermines these policies that have been helping veterans get jobs with the Federal Government. Specifically, it will prevent veterans from benefiting from the preference system if they are already employed by the Federal Government. Mr. Chairman, this misguided provision was never the subject of a public hearing, it was never the subject of a public debate, it was never the subject of a roll call vote, and it was never voted on in the committee or on the Senate floor. I am willing to bet the vast majority of my colleagues in the Senate do not know that this provision is in the National Defense Authorization Act. America's veterans deserve better. We deserve the chance to proudly and publicly make our case for veterans preference, a system which has done so much to help courageous Americans returning from war to find good jobs so they can provide for their families. That is why I am offering this amendment. I want to give the Members of this body the chance to go on record in support of our Nation's veterans. Mr. Chairman, this issue is deeply personal to me. After I got back from Iraq, I saw my friends and fellow veterans struggle to find employment and to get on with their lives. I personally witnessed the physical and emotional toll that joblessness can take on a veteran's life and on their families. Simply put, the Senate language is a step in the wrong direction. After years of painful progress in combating economic distress and homelessness among our veterans, now is not the time to dilute a system that is working, that has been proven highly successful in promoting veteran employment. The American people recognize that we owe an immense debt of gratitude to the brave men and women that have served our country. Many of them left civilian jobs, left their lives behind for months, or even years, to risk their lives to defend our Nation. The veterans preference system helps create a fair playing field for veterans by compensating them for the time they spent fighting overseas instead of working in government or the private sector. Instead of getting master's degrees, veterans were going door to door looking for insurgents. While other civilians were building their resume in civilian jobs, our men and women in uniform put in time away from their family, in dangerous situations, with little monetary compensation. Veterans are not asking for a handout. We have earned this preference through the blood, sweat, and tears we have given this country. Mr. Chairman, this provision sends the wrong message to our troops. It establishes the wrong policy for our government and for our country and sets the wrong precedent for our future. On behalf of America's veterans, I urge every Member of this House to support this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. GALLEGO

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the previous question so that the House can consider legislation to close an outrageous legal loophole that allows known terrorists to purchase deadly weapons. Mr. Speaker, I am a United States Marine. I carried an M16A4 in Iraq, and I know something about firearms. I know that marines go into battle armed with these weapons because they are an effective tool for killing people. I know that military-style weapons fire rounds at velocities exceeding 3,000 feet per second. And as a surgeon in Orlando said, ``the bullets have more energy to them--more speed--so they cause more tissue injury.'' I know that causing more tissue injury is the very point of these weapons. I know that high-capacity magazines enable shooters to kill more people before law enforcement can stop them. I also know that these magazines have no useful purpose for hunting or for sports shooting. I know that, despite all of this, House Republicans oppose keeping assault rifles and high-capacity magazines off our streets. Incredibly, they even oppose legislation that would prevent terrorists who want to kill Americans from purchasing military-style weapons. Finally, Mr. Speaker, I know that it is shameful and horrifying that children in America today conduct active-shooter drills in their classrooms. I know it is shameful and horrifying that, in the wake of Orlando, some of our LGBT brothers and sisters still live in fear in the 21st century. And I know that it's within our power to stop the carnage in our communities by passing commonsense gun violence legislation. Let's defeat the previous question, and let's finally get serious about ending the epidemic of gun violence in America.

Mr. GALLEGO

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Speaker, in the Iraq war, my unit fought door-to- door in some of the areas now controlled by ISIL, and we did it armed with an assault rifle called the M16A4. Why did the Marine Corps send us into battle with this weapon? At the risk of making anyone feel uncomfortable, the simple answer is this: Because the M16 is a machine designed to kill and maim people. It is not for target shooting, or hunting deer. The M16 was refined for the sole purpose of taking enemy lives in combat. That is why it defies explanation that Republicans believe assault rifles like the M16 or the SIG SAUER MCX used in Orlando should be carried in our communities. Weapons that Marines use to kill enemy combatants in Iraq don't belong on the streets of Phoenix. Mr. Speaker, it is even harder to understand why Republicans apparently think known terrorists should be allowed to purchase these firearms. They plan to bring a sham bill to the floor later this week that law enforcement leaders tell us will do nothing to prevent individuals on the terrorist watch list from obtaining these deadly weapons. That is unacceptable. Mr. Speaker, here is the bottom line. If you are too dangerous to fly on a plane, then you are too dangerous to buy the kind of weapon I carried in Iraq.

Mr. GALLEGO

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of a bill that, in a small but significant way, honors the legacy of a Latino trailblazer and a great Arizonan, Congressman Ed Pastor. Congressman Pastor dedicated his life to fighting for working families. Renaming a post office in the district he represented with distinction for 12 terms is the very least we can do to recognize his more than three decades of outstanding public service. I thank my colleagues in the Arizona delegation for their enthusiastic support of this bill. I am also grateful to Chairman Chaffetz and to Ranking Member Cummings for enabling this bill to come to the floor today. Mr. Speaker, Congressman Ed Pastor's life embodies the American Dream. Throughout his time in Congress, Mr. Pastor fought to make the dream accessible to everyone, including to the most vulnerable in our society. As Leader Pelosi once wrote: Ed Pastor never forgot his roots and always worked to build a brighter future for the children of our Nation. The son of a miner, Mr. Pastor was the first member of his family to go to college and receive his bachelor's degree from Arizona State University in 1966. After graduation, he taught at North High School in Phoenix before returning to ASU in 1971 to earn his law degree. Mr. Pastor subsequently worked on the staff of Arizona's first Latino Governor, Raul Castro--a job that cemented his lifelong commitment to public service. Mr. Pastor later served three terms on the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors before being elected to the 102nd Congress in a special election in 1991. Congressman Pastor spent 24 years in this body and earned a reputation as a tireless advocate for the people of Arizona. I am proud to say that Mr. Pastor was the first Latino to be elected to Congress from our great State. He was also one of the founding members of the Progressive Caucus and chaired the Congressional Hispanic Caucus in the 104th Congress. In addition, he served on the House Appropriations Committee and as chief deputy whip of the Democratic Caucus. Throughout his career, Congressman Pastor was a passionate advocate for fixing our broken immigration system, for investing in our Nation's transportation infrastructure, and for protecting the civil rights of every American. Perhaps, even more importantly, as President Obama noted, Congressman Pastor served as a mentor and as a role model to young Latinos and Latinas throughout Arizona and our country. He was supported in this groundbreaking work by his loving wife, Verma. Congressman Pastor retired in 2014, and he remains a beloved and respected figure in the city of Phoenix. I am incredibly proud to follow in his footsteps as the Seventh Congressional District's Representative here in Washington. The Ed Pastor Post Office will join the Ed Pastor Elementary School and the Ed Pastor Center for Politics and Public Service at ASU as monuments to his outstanding service to our Nation. Congressman Pastor's legacy lives on, not just in these buildings, but in the transportation projects he championed, in the legislation he authored, in the working families he helped, and in the young people he inspired. Mr. Speaker, I respectfully request the support of every Member in recognizing a legendary Arizonan, Congressman Ed Pastor.

Mr. GALLEGO

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition.

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, I also strongly oppose the amendment offered by my friend, Mr. Gosar. Mr. Gosar is an outstanding Member of this body and a great advocate for the great State of Arizona, but unfortunately we don't see eye to eye on this amendment. Mr. Chairman, immigrant service in uniform shouldn't be a controversial issue. The Secretary of Defense has the statutory authority to allow any immigrant to enlist if it is in our national interest, including DACA recipients who want to fight for our country. Simply put, we shouldn't let political posturing stand in the way of our military's recruitment goals. Our Armed Forces need the best and the brightest soldiers, marines, and airmen they can get. Countless DREAMers and other immigrants want nothing more than to serve the country they love and call home. I fought in Iraq, and I know that on the battlefield what matters is your character and your commitment, not your immigration status. Mr. Chairman, when we vote on this amendment later this evening, I hope we all consider the long sweep of history and not just the anti- immigrant politics of this present time. Immigrants, including those who came here without the right papers, have served with distinction in both world wars. Our military was made stronger in the 1940s because these men were allowed to enlist, and our military will be made stronger in 2016 if we vote to give another generation of immigrants the chance to serve. Mr. Chairman, the willingness to fight and die in uniform is the purest expression of our love for our country. Let's oppose this amendment and give immigrants who love America the opportunity to try to enlist in America's Armed Forces. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, immigrants have been fighting in America's Armed Forces since the founding of the Republic. Many of them did not come here legally, but in countless cases we still allow them to enlist because, for most of our history, your patriotism was more important than your papers. The amendment offered by Congressman King is inconsistent with this rich tradition of immigrant service. DOD is currently allowing a small number of immigrants who possess critical foreign language and technical skills to join the military through a program called Military Accessions Vital to the National Interest. The amendment before us would end this important program, preventing immigrants from serving in uniform who have medical expertise, linguistic skills, and cultural knowledge that could make a difference in the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan. It is important to note that the MAVNI program is fully consistent with current law. As the chairman of the House Committee on Armed Services, Congressman Thornberry, stated in a recent debate on this issue: The Secretary has the authority to fill critical needs, whatever they may be, with individuals, however they may have gotten here. It is also worth noting that, though the MAVNI program allows certain DREAMers to serve, it also makes eligible 22 other categories of immigrants, including a variety of visa holders who entered the country legally. Finally, this amendment is contrary to our national security interests. As a proud veteran of the Iraq war, I know that the strength of our military is defined not just by the potency of our weapons, but the quality of our people. Our Armed Forces need the best soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen they can get. Mr. Chairman, we should leave the doors of our military open to our young immigrants who love America and are willing to lay down their lives for our country. Please join me in voting ``no'' on this misguided, mean-spirited amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. GALLEGO

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate Congressman Cook, a fellow Marine, for crafting this bill before us. H.R. 496 establishes the Alabama Hills National Scenic Area on approximately 18,000 acres of Federal land in southern California. Only a few hours' drive from Hollywood, Alabama Hills features a unique collection of rock formations which attracted filmmakers for a decade, as the gentleman has told us. The area's unusual landscape has served as the backdrop for famous television and movie scenes, including ``Bonanza'' and even now great movies like ``Iron Man.'' By incorporating the area into BLM's National Conservation Lands, the establishment of the Alabama Hills National Scenic Area will promote permanent protection of the area and encourage tourism and recreational activities. Mr. Speaker, this bill provides a model for responsible conservation that we should seek to emulate across the country. There are areas of Federal land throughout the United States that deserve enhanced protection. I hope we can continue to work in a bipartisan manner to preserve them for future generations through locally driven conservation initiatives. For now, I urge my colleagues to support this bill. I look forward to working with the majority to identify additional opportunities to protect public land. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GALLEGO

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, we are all aware of the challenges that Native children face when it comes to their health, safety, and security. For example, Native children are 2.1 times more likely than other American children to end up in foster care. They are also 2.5 times more likely to become victims of abuse or neglect. The Native American Children's Safety Act will help to address these disparities by strengthening background checks for prospective foster care parents prior to placement. In addition, the legislation will ensure that Federal and tribal agencies conduct these checks in a uniform manner. The House previously passed an identical bill, H.R. 1168, introduced by our colleague from North Dakota (Mr. Cramer), and it is critical that we pass the Senate version as well. Mr. Speaker, there are many troubling issues that we in Congress must address in order to reverse the alarming trends that we see today in the health, safety, and well-being of Native children. These kids deserve far more of our time and our attention; yet, for too long their needs have been neglected by this body. So, Mr. Speaker, I call on Congress to reverse this pattern of neglect and to start passing legislation like the bill before us today that will help protect and provide for our Native children. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Senators Hoeven and Tester for introducing and moving the Native American Children's Safety Act through the Senate. I ask my colleagues to stand with me in support of S. 184 and in support of our Native children. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.