Pramila Jayapal

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. Madam Speaker, that was brilliance, grace, intelligence, and complete dedication to what justice, equality, and dignity in the United States looks like. That is our colleague, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and we are so grateful to her for her voice. What my colleague from Florida did was unacceptable. It was violent. It was sexist. And I do believe he needs to apologize, not because it is going to make our colleague, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, feel any better, but because he, too, needs to learn what unacceptable behavior looks like and rise to the level of the office that he has been elected to. It does not dignify just him, but the 750,000 people that he represents. And I thought, Madam Speaker, that it would be good to review for my colleagues a little bit of the history of the word that was used, the word that begins with a b that is five letters and that rhymes with ``witch,'' that word. From 1915 to 1930, Madam Speaker, that word suddenly took off in usage in newspaper reports and articles. And do you know why? Because, in 1920, this body gave women the right to vote, and that was just a little too much power for too many men across the country. And so all of a sudden, that word rose in prominence because, God forbid, that women would have the right to vote, that we would have power in this body, that we would have power anywhere in this country. God forbid, that women would actually have a voice to speak out on issues that matter and be the arbiters of what is fair and right and spoken with dignity and truism. And so that is when that word started to take off. Now, I want to be clear that this violent language is about power. It is about power. It is about exerting power. It is about wielding power over people. It is about fear of people who may well be smarter than you, harder working than you, and more dedicated to achieving justice than you. It just may be that. It may be that fear. It is about diminishing and disrespecting when you have no other tools to do so. And it is not new. Madam Speaker, you were right here managing time on this floor when I, as a new Member of Congress, was told by one of my Republican colleagues that I was a young lady, and I didn't know a damn thing about what I was talking about. You were right here managing the time for our side, and you helped me through that moment. Thank you. And I did get an apology on this floor from my colleague across the aisle. I was also told in Judiciary Committee to learn how to read by another one of my Members across the aisle. These are the things that happen to us all the time. These are not jokes. They are not little things, not because they hurt us--we are way too strong for that--but because they say something about the caliber of person that is here in the United States Congress. Do you know, Madam Speaker, out of the 11,000 people who have ever served in the United States Congress, there are only 79 of us women of color who have ever served in this body. And, yes, we bring a new voice. And so I say to my colleague, Representative Ocasio-Cortez, thank you for your grace and for your brilliance and for your dignity. And to everybody who is out there watching us and to our colleagues across the aisle, let me say this: We are not going away. There are going to be more of us here. There is going to be more power in the hands of women across this country. And we are going to continue to speak up. We are going to continue to say, ``Madam Speaker.'' We are going to continue to have a voice for people so that everyday working people, our daughters and our mothers and our wives across the country, understand that somebody is standing up for them. So, Madam Speaker, I believe Mr. Yoho should apologize. I have been on a trip with him across the globe. I never thought I would hear this kind of language from him. I really didn't. And I am stunned, and yet, at the same time, it is a pattern, and it is an old pattern.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 891, I call up the bill (H.R. 2486) to reauthorize mandatory funding programs for historically Black colleges and universities and other minority-serving institutions, with the Senate amendment thereto, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary for his tremendous work and leadership on bringing these important issues to the floor. I am very proud that the House is considering my bill today, the Access to Counsel Act, H.R. 5581. It is a commonsense measure that would ensure that U.S. citizens, green card holders, and other people with legal status are able to consult with an attorney when Customs and Border Protection detains them for over an hour. I introduced this bill, Madam Speaker, as my first bill when I got to Congress, and it was in the wake of the Muslim ban. It was in the wake of that chaos that was unleashed at airports across the country as people from seven Muslim-majority countries found themselves detained for hours, in some cases pressured to sign papers giving up their legal status, and in many cases deported. More often than not, these people did not even have the opportunity to see an attorney or even call anyone. They did not even have the opportunity to use the restrooms or to get water and food. Since then, however, Madam Speaker--it isn't just that moment--there have been numerous cases of students detained for long periods at airports and sent back, despite holding valid visas secured after undergoing rigorous vetting by the State Department. One student was detained and deported in spite of a court order saying that he should be allowed to stay until a court could review his case. And earlier this year, we saw no less than 200 people of Iranian American descent detained at the northern border in Blaine, Washington, for up to 12 hours with no access to counsel. These lengthy detentions occurred while CBP repeatedly denied that Iranian Americans were being targeted for different treatment. Many of the people impacted were U.S. citizens, as well as elderly people and children. Some had even undergone extra vetting to participate in a program designed for trusted travelers at the northern border. A month later, CBP Acting Commissioner Mark Morgan said that border officials ``got a little overzealous in their actions,'' but the damage, Madam Speaker, had already been done. There were children of U.S. citizens--they themselves U.S. citizens--who watched their parents be detained and treated in a way that no American citizen should go through. No person should go through that type of indignity and disrespect. If my bill were enacted into law, it would ensure that any time CBP detains people with lawful status, then those individuals would simply have the right to call a lawyer and receive assistance. It does not stop CBP from doing its job; it does not create a right to counsel for everyone. This is just a simple phone call to their attorney. So I would like to thank those who bravely came forward to share their stories, to make clear the Access to Counsel Act is desperately needed, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes.''

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I just wanted to quote directly from section 2 of my bill: ``The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide the covered individual a meaningful opportunity to consult with counsel and an interested party not later than one hour after the secondary inspection process commences and as necessary throughout the inspection process, including, as applicable, during deferred inspection.'' So again, this could be a phone call. ``Meaningful access'' is a broad term and it takes into account my colleague from the other side's concerns.

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I have a motion at the desk.

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on H.R. 2486.

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise today to bring forward the No BAN Act amendment, and I thank Congresswoman Chu for her leadership on this bill. In January 2017, President Trump issued the first Muslim ban, a xenophobic policy that has inflicted irreparable harm on Muslims here at home and around the world, a policy that says to Muslims that they are not to be trusted. This is hurtful, harmful to our global relationships, and deeply untrue. When the ban was implemented, I rushed to the Seattle airport along with Chairman Nadler in New York City. We joined thousands of people in protest. Thanks to these efforts, we successfully secured the release in Seattle of two individuals. But the chaos and the pain that the ban cast upon American citizens, lawful residents, and international visitors can never truly be undone. Today, new iterations of the Muslim ban and the most recent African ban have kept families separated; American businesses and research institutions can't recruit the best minds from abroad; and our Nation's doors are closed to people seeking safety from violence, war, and persecution. The bans have hurt our relationships with other countries, harmed refugees, isolated us from our allies, and given extremists propaganda for recruitment. Most important, they do not make our country safer. And let's be clear: A pandemic is not the time to push forward these xenophobic bans. Citizens from Muslim-majority nations made up 4.5 percent of the U.S. physician workforce in 2019; and yet, between 2016 and 2018, the number of applicants to the Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates from Muslim-majority countries decreased by 15 percent, a decrease that exacerbates existing gaps in the U.S. physician workforce which is so desperately needed in a time of COVID-19. It is time to pass the No BAN Act to repeal President Trump's bans and stop any future President from implementing discriminatory bans that send the repugnant message that our foundational values of freedom of religion and liberty and justice for all do not apply. Today is historic, as the No BAN Act is the first bill to pass the House that directly addresses Muslim civil rights. And we would not be here today without the courage of Muslims and allies across the country, especially the very important people at Muslim Advocates who work to repudiate the Muslim ban and move Congress to action. This bill sends an important message to Muslims everywhere that America believes in liberty and welcomes people regardless of race or religion. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time, and I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler) control the remainder of that time.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Speaker, my amendment would repeal the law that requires the military to provide an unfunded priorities list to Congress along with their budget request each year. This year, the Pentagon requested a whopping $740 billion from Congress, even more than last year, while other agencies like the State Department, the EPA, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development were cut by over 15 percent. The defense budget eats up over half of our Nation's annual discretionary budget, and yet this year Pentagon officials gave Members of Congress a wish list of $18 billion in unfunded priorities on top of its request for $740 billion in spending. Why? Because in 2016, Congress actually passed a law requiring the military services and combatant commands to provide annual wish lists of weapons systems that the Pentagon couldn't fit into its already massive budget. No other Federal agency is required by law to provide such wish lists, and with good reason. The practice is irresponsible, and it undermines the very goals of budgeting. So why does it exist? Because it gives special interests and the defense contractor industry an opportunity to argue for Congress to fund additional, extremely expensive weapons systems not important enough to make it into the Pentagon's budget. Now, this is a bipartisan concern. You might hear that this is something that just Democrats want. No. Lawmakers have long questioned the utility of unfunded priority lists. The late Senator John McCain, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said in 2015: ``Actually, I am not really big on unfunded priority lists. I think they're sort of a backdoor way of getting things done.'' Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates took a step further to ban the practice of submitting these lists to Congress during his tenure. Senator McCain and Secretary Gates were exactly right. We need to see spending discipline and better efficiency within the Pentagon. The Department of Defense has now failed two consecutive audits in 2 years. The Pentagon lost track of $800 million in construction projects and $2.1 billion in spare parts for the F-35 program. And it even buried an internal study revealing $125 billion in bureaucratic waste amid fears that the findings might lead Congress to reconsider the massive sum of taxpayer money that goes to the Pentagon each year. If a private corporation lost track of hundreds of millions of dollars and shielded evidence that it could save billions in wasteful spending, its shareholders would find that completely unacceptable, but the Defense Department has not undertaken the kind of real reform that it needs. In fact, the senior officer the Pentagon appointed just 3 years ago to reform the Department is now poised to be eliminated because she identified too much waste that could be saved. Now, the other side might claim that these wish lists are necessary for our national security. To that I say, if they are necessary, put them in the budget. Put them in the budget. The Pentagon submitted a budget for $740 billion. If these programs are so necessary, put them in the budget. No budget on top of budgets. Additionally, this amendment doesn't preclude our military services and combatant commands from sending over wish lists or testifying to Congress, but what it does do is end a terrible budgeting practice that lines the pockets of a bunch of defense contractor lobbyists at the expense of working people. That is unsustainable, and we must rein that in. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have left?

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to say that we are getting the priorities from the Pentagon. That is called the budget. That is what they are supposed to do. They are supposed to put together their priorities and send it to us. So, we are looking at exactly what the Pentagon wants. We are responding to that by, in this case, putting $740 billion into a defense budget. Now, you are going to tell me you need a budget on top of the budget. That is bad budgeting, by every stretch of the imagination. Mr. Speaker, I don't care which President asked for it, it is bad. That is why this has always been a bipartisan amendment or a bipartisan idea to get rid of this Unfunded Priorities List. It does not do the job; it bloats the military budget; and it is unnecessary and inefficient and bad spending. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Speaker, I stand in strong support of this amendment by my fantastic co-chair, Mr. Pocan, and Ms. Lee. This is critical for us to just do this small step of cutting 10 percent of our Pentagon budget. Enough is enough. This year's defense budget is 90 times bigger than the budget for the Centers for Disease Control. Yet, we are nearing 4 million COVID cases and over 141,000 deaths, and this President wants to add money for defense spending while cutting money for testing. That is just wrong. It is a small amount, but it is a start. That $74 billion could mean childcare for every family. It could mean housing vouchers for every eligible family. It could mean a $23,000 raise for every public-school teacher. So many things that we could do with this money--what we cannot do is give it away to corrupt defense contractors. Pass this amendment. Reset our priorities. It is time.

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Speaker, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith), the distinguished chairman of the committee.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, on Saturday, May 16, 2020, Seattle unexpectedly lost the kind-hearted, luminous filmmaker Lynn Shelton. Shelton made her first film in 2006--We Go Way Back--adding seven more films to her oeuvre in the ensuing years, including Your Sister's Sister and Sword of Trust. All but the last film showcased the essence of the Pacific Northwest in environment and feeling, but the themes and directorial treatments were always uniquely her own. Most recently, she focused her directing skills on episodes of well- known television series, living in Los Angeles to be close to this work. However, she remained tied to the northwest, notably participating in The Stranger's daily ``Message to the City'' column. In her video, she shared how she discovered that singing out loud lifted her mood and to illustrate the point, she produced a medley of friends singing songs, having learned how to edit the video on her phone along the way. Ms. Shelton leaves behind a deep impression on the local artistic community. Even beyond the success of her films, she will be remembered for the kindness with which she treated those around her, for her enjoyment of life, and for her prodigious talent. Ms. Shelton is survived by her son Milo Seal, her husband of many years Kevin Seal, her parents, three siblings, as well as Marc Maron, with whom she spent the last year of her life.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Speaker, my amendment would set aside an additional $9 million for airplane noise mitigation and other projects to support aviation-impacted communities. In my district, the rapid growth of Sea-Tac Airport to meet demand has impacted the day-to-day life of many of my constituents who live nearby. In large part, that has been due to increased noise. While we cannot stop rising demand, we can protect our communities with additional funds for noise insulation and by studying environmentally sound ways to reduce aviation impacts. The FAA has not taken this issue seriously enough, failing to respond to my constituents' concerns in community meetings and refusing to release congressionally mandated studies on reducing airport noise. That is why my amendment would compel the FAA to devote more resources to aviation-impacted communities across the Nation.

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Speaker, I have a major bridge in my district that connects west Seattle to downtown, and it was abruptly shuttered after growing cracks were discovered in a routine inspection. Repairs and possible replacement will cost hundreds of millions of dollars, and the people that live in that part of my district--very populated--have no way to get out of that, except for one little place on the south end of that area. So we desperately need to find these issues before they come up, and we need to invest.

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman DeFazio for yielding and for this transformational bill that has been put forward, a deeply necessary investment in our country's infrastructure. My amendment would ensure that our Nation has a well-equipped workforce to build climate resilient infrastructure projects. And it does this by adding a critical requirement to study labor, workforce, and equity considerations. Climate change is compelling us to boldly innovate, and workers will need training to acquire new skills to implement emerging technologies that keep us and our communities safe. As this is unchartered territory, we will need to study how to best support our workers so they are prepared to meet that challenge head on. We also need to make sure that Federal investment improves, not worsens existing inequities in our economy. Let's fully identify effective strategies to guarantee that jobs are first available to populations that face the greatest barriers to employment and are most vulnerable to the very risks of climate change that we must address. Finally, Mr. Chairman, I have one of those bridges in my district, and we desperately need help. We need revenue to rebuild our Nation's infrastructure. I have a major bridge in my district that was abruptly shuttered.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Speaker, the American people do not support Betsy DeVos. We don't support her radical attempts to privatize education. We don't support her corrupt efforts to take coronavirus relief away from public schools so that it can be sent to private ones. We don't support her hateful, transphobic agenda or her attacks on survivors of sexual assault. And we do not support her putting predatory, for-profit colleges over those they cheated with a rule that would force the most vulnerable students who were robbed to repay 97 percent of what they borrowed. That is why Congress passed H.J. Res. 76, with bipartisan support. But just as Vice President Pence had to save Betsy DeVos' Senate confirmation, President Trump is trying to save her dangerous rule against our bipartisan bill. So I urge my colleagues to override this veto, and, once again, let's make clear that the people's House stands on the side of the people and not Betsy DeVos.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I rise for Charleena Lyles, Che Taylor, Manuel Ellis, Tony McDade, George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Rayshard Brooks, Eric Garner, Atatiana Jefferson, Ezell Ford, Tanisha Anderson, Tamir Rice, Walter Scott, Philando Castile, Gabriella Nevarez, Botham Jean. I rise for Eric Reason, Stephon Clark, Dominique Clayton, Alton Sterling, Michael Brown, Terence Crutcher, Janisha Fonville, Oscar Grant, Freddie Gray, Laquan McDonald, Michelle Cusseaux, Akai Gurley, Jamar Clark, Ariane McCree, Frank Smart, Natasha McKenna, Tony Robinson, Anthony Hill. I rise for Alexia Christian, Mya Hall, Calin Roquemore, Peter Gaines, Sandra Bland, Demarcus Semer, Willie Tillman, Alteria Woods, Jordan Edwards, Aaron Bailey, Antwon Rose II, Pamela Turner, Salvado Ellswood, Darrius Stewart, Billy Ray Davis, Samuel DuBose. I rise for Felix Kumi, Tyree Crawford, India Kager, Antronie Scott, Troy Robinson, Anthony Ashford, Bettie Jones, Nathaniel Harris Pickett, Aura Rosser, Dominique White, George Mann, William Chapman II, Brendon Glenn. I rise for all of our Black brothers, sisters, and siblings who have been killed by law enforcement in this country. But, Madam Speaker, it is not enough just to say their names. It is not enough just to say that Black lives matter. We must fight for Black lives and for real transformative justice. Let us pass the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act as a bold, urgent, necessary first step. It bans chokeholds and defines them as civil rights violations. It bans no-knock warrants for drug cases. It establishes a public police misconduct registry. It reforms qualified immunity and ends racial profiling by law enforcement. It requires reporting of incidents of use of force, stops, and searches, and the demographics of those involved, too. It demilitarizes law enforcement by restricting the transfer of military equipment to local police departments. It finally classifies lynching as a Federal hate crime and gives the Department of Justice the power to subpoena law enforcement departments for pattern and practice investigations. And so critically important, it invests money into Black and Brown communities to reimagine what policing should look like, so everyone is safe. Madam Speaker, hundreds of thousands of people in communities across America are standing up and speaking out for bold reform, organizing day after day, night after night, in big cities and small towns. They have not just forced a necessary conversation; they have prompted necessary action. So let us, today, heed these righteous voices of the powerful movement on the ground so local communities, led by Black voices, can move forward on transformational changes. That begins today by passing the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, in days, we will lose more American lives than we lost during the Vietnam war, 26 million Americans unemployed from COVID, body bags piling up, and insufficient testing and PPE. Democrats took a bad Republican proposal and we made it better, but this is far from enough. CARES four has to meet the scale of this crisis with a bold paycheck guarantee that stops mass unemployment, an essential workers package, and State and local government funding. Every minute, Madam Speaker, is a death, a family devastated, a business shuttered. We must think and deliver better.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 748, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act. On Thursday, the United States gained the unfortunate distinction of being the country with the largest number of known COVID-19 cases in the world. As people across the country struggle to stem the COVID-19 pandemic, this bill is an urgently needed $2 trillion disaster-relief package that delivers immediate support to individuals, families, and small businesses across the country, while also providing worker- centered relief for some industries. My home state of Washington has been reeling from the spread of COVID-19, with over 3,200 cases and 147 deaths as of last night. I am so proud that we have one of the finest public health systems in the country, but it is under siege--as are our healthcare institutions, our economy, and my constituents. I have been focusing my efforts wholly and completely on ensuring that we in Congress do everything in our power to deliver a response from the Federal government that matches the enormous scale of this crisis. This bill is an important step in that direction, though we will certainly need to do even more. The CARES Act puts $100 billion into ensuring hospitals and healthcare providers can cover COVID-19-related costs and $200 million to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in nursing homes. Importantly, after years of disinvestment in the Strategic National Stockpile, the CARES Act adds $16 billion to the Stockpile to provide essential personal protective equipment for our frontline workers and emergency responders. This bill also includes a critical priority for me: the largest expansion of unemployment insurance in decades to ensure that most workers get nearly 100 percent of their pre-layoff wage without traditional restrictions. It also creates a special Pandemic Unemployment Assistance program to provide relief to those who may be ineligible for regular unemployment benefits, like gig workers and people who are self-employed. Because people are suffering right now, I believe we must include direct cash support to individuals. I had advocated for double the amount that is in the bill, for monthly instead of a one-time payment, and for everyone to be included. We were not able to get that. However, the CARES Act delivers $1,200 per adult and $500 per child in cash relief to the vast majority of everyday people to immediately help put cash in people's pockets to pay those mounting bills. To keep people in their homes, the bill provides $3 billion in rental assistance. It enacts a 120-day moratorium on evictions for properties receiving federal assistance as well as a 60-day foreclosure moratorium on federally backed mortgages and up to 180 days of forbearance. The bill also includes crucial funding to the Emergency Services Grant to ensure we are providing care to people experiencing homelessness. However, we still need a real response to the surge of homelessness in this time of crisis. My Housing is a Human Right Act, introduced last week, puts important measures on the table to ensure that we address homelessness in the short and longer-term. One of the most important things I heard from my district was the pain and suffering of small business owners and non-profits of all sizes. The CARES Act creates a Payment Protection Program that helps businesses keep workers on payroll, through $350 billion in forgivable loans that can also be used for payroll, rent, utilities, and other necessary costs that will help small businesses weather the crisis. Small businesses will also have some opportunity to receive direct grants of $10,000 as an emergency bridge loan. The bill creates safeguards to protect against employers gaming the program. It also recognizes that some employers will be forced to do temporary furloughs, but then bring their employees back on. This is a pro-worker provision that will incentivize employers to avoid layoffs. It is crucial that we in Congress ensure that these loans are carefully managed and scrutinized to prevent predatory lenders from taking advantage of desperate times to force unfair or exploitative loan terms on small businesses, and to prevent bundling or repackaging in ways that would create expanded economic inequality or lead to the unstable market conditions that caused the last major recession. On education, the bill invests over $30 billion for states, school districts, and institutions of higher education to help alleviate the challenges educators, students, and families are struggling with in light of school and childcare center closures. This is especially acute for students with disabilities, English language learners, and students experiencing homelessness. However, as state budgets decline due to the pandemic response, it will be critical for Congress to step in and ensure equity for our nation's students. Specifically, Congress must take further steps to address the ``homework gap'' and ensure the tens of millions of students at home have the technology they need to ensure they do not fall behind. The CARES Act also helps borrowers facing insurmountable student loan payments during the pandemic. It suspends payments for all federally- held student loans through September 30, 2020, during which time interest will not accrue, and borrowers will continue to receive credit toward Public Service Loan Forgiveness, Income-Driven Repayment forgiveness, and loan rehabilitation. It also prohibits forced collections such as garnishment of wages, tax refunds, and Social Security benefits, and negative credit reporting during this time period. While the bill does require the Education Secretary to keep borrowers apprised of when normal payments will resume after the pandemic ends, Congress will need to exert strong oversight over servicers and Department of Education to ensure that students aren't penalized for taking advantage of this program. I am disappointed that millions of borrowers holding over $300 billion in private student loans, federal Perkins loans, and commercially held federal student loans are left out of the relief this bill provides. There is no doubt that Congress must take significant additional steps to expand student debt relief during this pandemic to avoid another crisis that followed the last financial meltdown. Adopting pieces of my College for All Act and, at a minimum, cancelling student loan debt for the duration of this crisis would not only provide enormous relief and avoid fiscal cliffs for student loan borrowers, it would also contribute to stimulating the economy as we move into recovery. I will be pushing for this in the next package. It is critically important that we immediately address the unique funding delays that Native American tribes have faced in the COVID-19 response and supports chronically underfunded programs in the Indian Health Service. I'm proud that this bill begins to do that. It ensures Native American Tribes, Tribally owned businesses and Native American owned business have equal access to federal COVID-19 economic recovery resources by establishing an $8 billion Tribal Coronavirus Relief fund and ensuring parity in access to other crucial programs to help Native American communities across the country. There is no question that this bill is not perfect. There are many things in our Democratic House bill that reflect the urgency and scale of the crisis that did not make it into this bill. There are also things in the bill that Republicans insisted on--such as a $500 billion ``slush fund'' for the Treasury Secretary--that allow for giant corporations to get enormous amounts of taxpayer dollars with little oversight or accountability. We must immediately work to strengthen those accountability provisions and ensure that there is real authority for the Oversight Panel that was established as a last-minute concession to Republicans. We should use the kinds of worker-centered conditions that we were able to include in the provisions on airline industry assistance as a model: ensuring that funds go to support the payroll and benefits of employees, prohibiting stock buybacks and dividends, as well as real limitations on executive compensation for corporations that receive taxpayer assistance. That will ensure that corporations and CEOs are not getting blank checks while millions of people remain unemployed, without paid leave or health care during this crisis and the subsequent recovery period. Nor is this package sufficient. Unfortunately, the scale of this crisis is enormous and we are only beginning to see the devastation it will wreak on our families, communities, and economy. I will immediately begin drafting priorities for the next package. These will include: more money for states and localities, our health care system, and a strong and robust safety net that includes everyone. We must ensure health care--from testing to treatment to recovery--for everyone without costs. We have to immediately fix the fact that too many immigrants--including those who are working right now to guarantee food is put into food banks and on tables across the country--are excluded from any relief we have passed, simply because they are undocumented, DACA and TPS recipients, or legal permanent residents who have been here for less than five years. This is immoral. COVID-19 does not discriminate based on country of origin or immigration status and our relief packages cannot discriminate either. Our next package must include strong protections against price- gouging, including a specific mandate that the Federal Trade Commission prioritize and proactively prosecute cases of COVID-related price gouging, and safeguards to prevent large corporate mergers from taking place while oversight bodies are distracted by this pandemic. And all federal agencies must temporarily halt all rulemaking that is unrelated to COVID-19 as our states and municipalities struggle to respond to urgent community needs. In addition, we must ensure that robust paid leave provisions apply to all workers in this time of crisis, including at companies that employ 500 or more workers. These large companies are best situated to implement leave policies that will be most impactful in preventing the spread of COVID. It is vitally important that they play their part during this pandemic and meet, at minimum, the paid leave standards we laid out in our second relief package for small businesses. We also must protect seniors and people with disabilities who rely on homecare and direct care workers to live independently by continuing to add Medicaid FMAP increases that specifically allow for higher wages, paid leave, and safety equipment for this crucial workforce. In this time when so many working parents are struggling to both care for children and work, we must also ensure that the childcare providers funded through Childcare Development Block Grants are paid living wages and have access to paid leave. Further, large on-demand companies that benefit from the labor of low-wage workers, but classify those workers as independent contractors, must pay their fair share and put money into the unemployment insurance state system. Our next package must immediately enact strong OSHA emergency standards to protect our frontline health care workers. This was stripped out by Republicans and that is unconscionable. Failure to include these protections will devastate our frontline workers in health care and other critical functions that we need to keep our communities functioning even during Stay Home orders. As our nation depends on health care workers and other essential employees to help and protect all of us from the spread of COVID-19, the very least we can do is require employers to take the necessary steps to mitigate hazards that jeopardize worker safety and health. Finally, we must also protect the health and safety of people in the criminal justice and immigration detention systems. These people are dependent on the government for everything; and it is incumbent on us to ensure their safety. People should not have to go on hunger strike to get soap simply so they can follow public health guidance and wash their hands--one of the most basic protections to guard against the spread of COVID-19. These jails, prisons, and detention centers are so crowded, it is nearly impossible to practice social distancing in congregate settings. We must immediately take basic steps to reduce the risk of what would be a catastrophic outbreak in institutional settings. First, we must release as many people as we can, starting with those who are most vulnerable to contracting COVID-19, such as people who are age 50 and over and people with medical conditions. The criminal justice and immigration detention systems have a broad menu of alternatives to detention to facilitate release--we have a duty to use them. Second, for those who remain in custody, these facilities must do the essential work to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in close consultation with public health officials. I am proud of House Democrats who fought very hard to include many of these protections and issues in our House bill. It is unfortunate that Republicans fought us on so much. However, at the end of the day, this is still a bold, bipartisan, and urgently necessary bill to deliver critically timed relief to individuals, families, businesses, and communities across the country who are suffering and I am proud to cast my vote for its passage. This is a crisis of epic proportions and we must continue to do everything we can to respond with the scale sufficient to address the suffering of people across our country. I am also proud to represent a district and a state that has responded with so much compassion, caring, and commitment, and I will continue to fight for all my constituents as we weather this together.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I rise today to include in the Record how I would have voted for the following votes had I not been necessarily absent. Had I been present, I would have voted: YEA on Roll Call No. 87; YEA on Roll Call No. 88; NAY on Roll Call No. 89; and YEA on Roll Call No. 90.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of this War Powers Resolution to ensure that the President cannot start a war with Iran without Congress' approval. I understand this is the fourth time that the House will vote to say ``no'' to war with Iran since President Trump ordered an unauthorized, illegal strike on Iranian General Soleimani. We passed our own war powers measure, led by Representative Slotkin. We passed a bill with bipartisan support to cut off funding for unauthorized, offensive military operations against Iran. And we voted to repeal the 2002 Iraq war authorization that the Trump administration has inappropriately used to justify the strike on Soleimani and potential future strikes against Iranian targets. Madam Speaker, we have to be clear that this is not about whether General Soleimani was a good guy or a bad guy. Nobody is really disputing that. The question here is: What is Congress' authority to have a say on whether or not the United States is going to war? If we are going to send troops into war, then we have an obligation to vote on that, to debate that, and to make sure that we preserve the congressional authority. And I think, Madam Speaker, that this is something that both Democrats and Republicans have consistently succumbed to. So we have consistently, Democrats and Republicans, given authority to the Chief Executive that is not theirs to start with. Congress has spoken again and again on this. We should have learned by now. The American people have spoken. They don't want us in endless wars without authorization from Congress, without a debate here in Congress, without utilizing those Constitutional powers that our Founding Framers gave us. It is time for us to do this, and to ensure that the President listens. So today, I am urging all of my colleagues to set aside partisanship, to think about this as something that we are reclaiming for ourselves as Congress, to support this resolution that has already passed the Republican-held Senate with bipartisan support.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, what a glorious day this is. Today, the House of Representatives will vote to remove the arbitrary deadline to ratify the equal rights amendment. With our vote today, and with Virginia's historic vote to become the 38th and final State necessary to ratify the amendment, little girls, their moms, and women across this great Nation will know that, yes, our Constitution can, will, and must enshrine a ban on discrimination on the basis of sex. Equality of sexes is not debatable. It has no expiration date. First proposed almost a century ago and passed by Congress in 1972, the equal rights amendment would be a momentous step forward for women to end unequal pay, pregnancy discrimination, and sexual harassment and exploitation. So today, to women across this country who are watching, as the first South Asian woman ever elected to the House of Representatives, let me say: We see you. We stand with you. And we will fight for you.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support today of the PRO Act. I talk to people every day who take tremendous pride in the work that they do, and, yet, many of these workers are facing terrible injustices on the job; poorly paid; inadequately insured; harassed; and often in workshops that are dangerous and discriminatory. Mr. Chairman, no one should have to go to work and face injustice and be afraid to speak up. That is just not right. The PRO Act makes it clear that we are putting power back into the hands of workers; and that we are ensuring and expanding workers' rights to organize. Let's be clear that that benefits everybody. Unionized women earn wages that are 23 percent higher. Black workers' wages are 14 percent higher, and Latinx workers' wages are 21 percent higher than in nonunionized workplaces. Young unionized workers more often have health insurance, higher pay, and a retirement plan. That is why workers' approval for unions keeps rising. Mr. Chairman, every worker deserves a fair and safe workplace, and that is what the PRO Act does. Mr. Chair, I include in the Record a petition signed by over 63,000 community members in support of the PRO Act. February 4, 2020. Re Delivery of signatures regarding the U.S. House of Representatives' floor vote on the Protecting the Right to Organize Act. Chairman Bobby Scott, House Education and Labor Committee, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Bobby Scott: Please accept over 63,000 signatures from community members across the country on behalf of a coalition of 11 advocacy, climate, labor, and trade organizations advocating for the passage of the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act. We ask that your office enter this letter and the accompanying signatures into the public record. We thank you, Chairman Scott, for your introduction and support of this historic legislation. Our coalition believes that working class and middle class families in the United States deserve income security and should be able to organize their co-workers to demand living wages and healthy working conditions. In a time when the richest Americans' wealth growth has increased by over 200 percent while wages remain stagnant for the rest of us, we urge the U.S. House of Representatives to pass the PRO Act. Sincerely, AFL-CIO, Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance (APALA), Climate Hawks Vote, Courage Campaign, CREDO Action, Daily Kos, Economic Policy Institute Policy Center, Friends of the Earth Action, National Employment Law Project, People For the American Way, Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch.