Pramila Jayapal

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of Representatives Sherrill's amendment to study the relationship between COVID-19 and rates of morbidity and mortality due to heart disease. And while it is true the gentleman is correct, that there is research out there, the reality is also that there needs to be more, and that the studies that are out there right now prove some elements, but not the entire causal relationship. In a large study of COVID-19 survivors conducted by the VA, researchers found increased frequency of abnormal heart rhythms, heart muscle inflammation, blood clots, strokes, heart attacks, and heart failure in patients who had COVID-19. The cardiac effects of COVID-19, however, are extremely widespread, and not broadly understood. I am just going to say, I also have personal experience with this. After my husband contracted COVID-19 from me, after I got it when some colleagues on the other side of the aisle did not want to wear masks on January 6 in the safe room, he, unfortunately had a series of heart attacks and had to have a series of heart operations last year. Every single doctor said to us, we need more research on exactly what the causal relationship is. And this is the reality of where we are today; and I think that this amendment by Representative Sherrill is a very good addition to the bill.

Ms. JAYAPAL

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

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Speaker, my amendment would direct the President to establish an office of climate resilience within the White House to coordinate climate resilience activities across all government agencies. As the climate crisis worsens, American communities are in desperate need of an office to increase the resilience of our communities. As my colleagues well know, climate disasters are increasing in frequency and severity at an alarming rate. Just last week, a few of my colleagues and I visited Yosemite National Park, where climate change continues to fuel larger, longer, and more severe fires. In the last 14 months alone, 20 percent of giant sequoias in Sierra Nevada were killed in wildfires. Not more than 48 hours after we left, a wildfire started that is still burning across 2,000 acres and endangering the park and the surrounding communities. Last month, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reported that there were nine individual billion-dollar weather and climate events across the country during the first 6 months of the year alone, including severe drought, two tornado outbreaks, and dangerous hailstorms. Last year, damages from these severe weather events totaled approximately $145 billion. These costs are felt by families across the country. These families lose their houses, all of their belongings, their livelihoods, and sometimes their loved ones in these disasters. As the climate crisis worsens, this harm will be exacerbated by the lack of climate resilience planning. There is immense work needed to make our communities resilient and safe from climate disasters. Thankfully, much work is underway. Over 20 Federal agencies have separate climate resilience action plans, but the United States lacks a robust, unified, national climate resilience action plan, and there is no overarching coordination between Federal agencies on this very important security issue. As such, these disjointed efforts are likely performing duplicative work without maximizing the potential benefit. My amendment would establish an office of climate resilience to coordinate the various efforts currently going on across the Federal Government. The office of climate resilience in the White House would leverage the expertise available from all sectors involved in climate resiliency, including the knowledge and lived experiences of frontline communities. The office would improve current climate resilience efforts throughout various Federal agencies and ensure that they are rooted in environmental justice as they protect and develop the climate resilience workforce. The amendment will enable the United States to better prepare for and prevent future climate disasters and protect American families and our Nation's security while mitigating the destruction that natural disasters wreak on our communities. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I don't understand why the other side is so distraught about an Office of Climate Resilience, and I would love to hear my colleagues on the other side go and tell the people who have lost their homes in wildfires, who are flooded underneath enormous amounts of water that somehow that is not an interest of the Federal Government or even of our military to help protect. By the way, the military does go into many of these communities when we have these big natural disasters. So it is absolutely about protecting the security of our country, and the reality is it is the duty of the Federal Government to protect these people. Now, you can make up all kinds of things about why this climate change is not real, but let me tell you, experts around the world believe this is a national security issue. They believe it is real, and they believe we need to address it. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi), my friend.

Ms. JAYAPAL

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

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, my amendment would eliminate the statutory requirement for the Defense Department to provide Congress with an unfunded priorities list. This is a wish list of items that DOD would like to have but are not necessary to carry out its duties. This practice doesn't meaningfully strengthen our national security. Instead, it worsens waste, fraud, and abuse in military spending. These wish lists are packed with billions of dollars of superfluous line items, this year totaling $24 billion on top of the $773 billion requested by the White House. Don't just take my word for it. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said last year that the President's budget request for fiscal year 2022 met DOD's requirements, yet DOD was required by law to submit these wish lists, which have not been approved by any top leadership at the Defense Department as actual priorities. Top DOD officials have, in fact, expressed strong skepticism about the practice. In a June 2021 hearing before the House Armed Services Committee, General Milley said of unfunded priorities: ``If they were critical, then they need to be higher on the priority list and in the base budget.'' In April, Under Secretary McCord said that the unfunded priorities lists ``should not be confused with saying that the budget is not adequate.'' In fact, he went on to describe to me the problem that happens when different people within the Defense Department who are overseeing their own units submit something and just say it is a priority when overall Defense leadership has not had the opportunity to prioritize, actually, and to even look into whether those things are priorities or not. Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates all but banned the list, strongly discouraging his generals from submitting these lists to Congress during his tenure. Despite the skepticism of top DOD officials, the Pentagon is required by law to submit these wish lists to Congress. It wasn't always that way. Though the practice has been around for a couple of decades, unfunded priority lists weren't statutorily required until 2017. All my amendment does to make this process optional again. The mandate only exists to serve the interests of defense contractors eager to grow their profits by selling flashy equipment. In 2021, the defense industry spent more than $118 million lobbying Congress to sell their products. Meanwhile, we cannot even verify that the money we authorized to DOD is spent responsibly because, as my colleague Ms. Lee said, it has never passed a budget audit. The most recent audit found a Navy warehouse full of $126 million of aircraft parts that were not listed anywhere in the records. We don't need to encourage this irresponsible spending by requiring DOD to give us a wish list, but most importantly, we should actually pay attention to the priorities of the top leadership of the Defense Department, which the unfunded priorities list does not do. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi).

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith), the distinguished chairman, and I thank him for his service on this committee.

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

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor my constituent, Scott Brown from Seattle, Washington who is retiring from Roosevelt High School as the director of bands after 38 years of dedicated service. Over his distinguished career, Mr. Brown has inspired and empowered thousands of students in Washington's 7th Congressional District. Mr. Brown was committed to ensuring his students had the resources they needed to succeed and had an expectation of excellence, holding his students to the highest standards. His dedication helped lead the Roosevelt High School Jazz Band to four first place wins at the Essentially Ellington Festival and between 1999 and 2022, the band made it to the finals of the competition an unprecedented 22 times. Mr. Brown's efforts and passion for teaching have not gone unrecognized. In 2004, Mr. Brown was named Jazz Educator of the Year by DownBeat magazine and both the Washington Music Educators Association and Seattle's Earshot Jazz have inducted him into their halls of fame. Now, as he enters retirement, I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating Mr. Brown's accomplishments and service to his students. Through his students, Mr. Brown's legacy will continue to grow and touch the lives of those in the Seattle metropolitan area and beyond.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Dr. Preston Phillips. Dr. Phillips was a gracious and loving husband, father, and brother who dedicated his life to his family, his community, and to saving lives. Earlier this month, Dr. Phillips was murdered during a tragic mass shooting at a hospital in Tulsa, Oklahoma, by a shooter who purchased an AR-15 2 hours before the shooting and a handgun less than 2 days before the shooting. Nothing we say can bring back a devoted father who did so much to save the lives of others as a doctor. Nothing will ease the pain of his wife and his three children who have to bury him far too soon. My heart goes out to all the families of the four people killed and the community in Tulsa that still grieves. This tragedy has also struck close to home for me. Dr. Phillips was the father of Elise Phillips, a valued member of my staff here in D.C., a member of our House of Representatives family who has spent the last year tirelessly serving the people of Washington's Seventh Congressional District as my legislative counsel. I, and our whole office, grieve with Elise and her family. This past weekend, I was honored to attend Dr. Phillips' funeral service in Tulsa at the invitation of the family. It was immediately clear to me what an exceptional community Dr. Phillips and his strong and courageous wife, Melody, have built around themselves over their life together. Everyone I met described Dr. Phillips as a man of extraordinary warmth, brilliance, and compassion. Dr. Phillips came from humble beginnings, and his life is a testament to what can be achieved with determination. He got his first job at the age of 8 shining shoes and gathering shopping carts. He used this money to pay for veterinary bills for his family's dog, Blackie. In high school, he discovered his love for medicine and focused on his studies with great dedication. Dr. Phillips was then granted admission to Emory University where he graduated with bachelor's degrees in religion and chemistry and a master's degree in organic chemistry. He continued his education at Harvard Medical School and then completed his residency at Yale University School of Medicine. Dr. Phillips began his formal medical career in my home district of Seattle in 1997, and he practiced there for 8 years before moving to Tulsa, Oklahoma. As the Representative for Seattle's Seventh Congressional District, I want to convey how proud we are of Dr. Phillips and his significant contributions to our community. During his career, Dr. Phillips emphasized giving back to community. At Yale, he founded the Yale Minority Medical Association, which focused on recruitment, mentorship, and retention of minority students in the medical field. His generosity was boundless, and he touched countless lives here and abroad. A prime example were his annual trips to Togo in Africa to perform pro bono surgeries for underserved communities and where a clinic operating room still bears his name. For many of his patients, Dr. Phillips was not just a medical professional. He was family. Throughout his decades of orthopedic practice, his patients became informal grandparents, aunts, uncles, and lifelong friends for him and his three children, whose childhoods were defined by these relationships. I am so honored to have met so many of these people at the funeral service. Even more so, his son and two daughters were defined by living in a household where love, warmth, and patience were the norm from Dr. Phillips and his wife, Melody. I, and all those I represent, have benefited from their love and warmth both during his time practicing medicine in Seattle and through his brilliant daughter, Elise. I am incredibly grateful to have Elise as part of my D.C. staff, and I see in her the same virtues that made her father such a respected and loved man in his community. Those at Dr. Phillips' service asked me to ensure that Congress passes sensible gun reforms to honor Dr. Phillips and to do all we can to ensure that tragedies like this never happen again. Last week, the House of Representatives passed the Protecting our Kids Act, a lifesaving package of gun safety legislation to raise the age of purchase for assault rifles to 21, control the sale of ghost guns, limit the number of rounds in a magazine, and require the safe storage of firearms. Legislation won't bring Dr. Phillips back or the thousands of gun violence victims back, but I hope that it brings a degree of comfort to Dr. Phillips' family and to all the families of the ones we lost that we, in Congress, will not stop until we bring an end to the gun violence crisis that has plagued our country for far too long. Rest in power. Rest in peace, Dr. Preston J. Phillips.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I rise today on the passage of H.R. 7667 the ``Food and Drug Amendments of 2022.'' Though I am grateful for many of the provisions in this bipartisan legislation, I have strong concerns that this bill does not go far enough to protect the American people--both patients and their doctors. This reauthorization, only occurring every five years, is one of our greatest opportunities to hold the pharmaceutical industry accountable and to the highest standards possible to ensure access and protection for patients across the country. Typically, this routine reauthorization of user fees is coupled with incentives directed toward the pharmaceutical and medical device industry. With each reauthorization to date, we have seen the increased adoption of expedited review pathways leaving patients and their doctors more uncertain that FDA approved treatments are truly effective or safe. Often, these new pathways that hasten FDA's regulatory review are coupled with financial incentives including exclusivity periods that prolong high monopoly prices such that the American public is paying more for less. Last year's controversial approval of the Alzheimer's disease drug, aducanumab (Aduhelm) laid bare this reality when the FDA approved this drug under the accelerated approval pathway despite harms including brain bleeding and swelling as well as uncertain clinical benefit. This shifted the focus of this year's user fee reauthorization efforts away from shortening FDA review times for new health technologies to reforms to reinstate public trust into FDA 's approval process. FDA's accelerated approval pathway can be an important way for promising drugs to reach patients. But pharmaceutical corporations have largely failed to uphold their end of the bargain of completing critical studies to confirm that these drugs are truly beneficial. Instead, accelerated approval is being used by Big Pharma to drive further profits at the expense of patient safety and Medicare spending. Although H.R. 7667 would allow for greater FDA oversight of the accelerated approval pathway, this bill should have included much stronger reforms for accelerated-approval drugs. This bill should have made sure that FDA publicly engages with their advisory committees instead of industry sponsors behind closed doors. Recent studies have found that FDA has convened these independent experts less frequently--between 2010 and 2021, FDA went from hearing these groups for 55 percent of approved drugs to just 6 percent. Transparency is paramount to ensuring trust in our government institutions. We should codify that meetings are made public and nothing should obscure a patient's ability to see how and why a therapeutic approval was granted. Moreover, the bill should ensure that lower standards of evidence cannot be accepted to approve a drug. Clarification is needed to ensure that Real World Evidence (RWE) is appropriately used to augment the post-approval studies that prove therapies approved are truly effective and research has shown that RWE has demonstrated promise for complementing clinical trials but not replacing them. When it comes to the safety of our constituents, we must ensure that speedy access does not eclipse safety. A recent study published in JAMA Health Forum explored how much Medicare and Medicaid spend on drugs granted accelerated approval by the FDA both before and after the drug's clinical benefit is confirmed. The study found that for the 38 drugs granted accelerated approval by the FDA between 2012 and 2017: CMS spent almost $70 billion through 2020 on these drugs; just over $50 billion (75 percent) was spent after the accelerated approval drugs were converted to standard approval following completion of their required confirmatory trials; but almost 60 percent ($40 billion) of this spending was for drugs with confirmatory trials evaluating surrogate endpoints instead of assessing meaningful clinical endpoints demonstrating the effect of these drugs on how patients feel, function, or survive. In addition, this bill should squarely place patient safety at its core and mandate the automatic withdrawal of drugs, preliminarily approved under accelerated approval, that fail to prove efficacy. Not explicitly mandating that approval should expire one year after any target date of study completion, and in no case later than five years after the product is approved unless certain criteria relative to post approval studies are achieved, is a significant concession to the pharmaceutical industry that puts patients and payers at risk of prolonged medical and financial harms. There should be no barriers to removing a drug that at best is ineffective and at worst dangerous. Another troubling inclusion in the approved measure are additional provisions that would empower a sponsor company to request a meeting with the FDA Commissioner, a public comment period followed by responses by the agency, and a convening of the advisory committee to review the agency's request for withdrawal, wasting precious time. Rather, the Secretary should have the power to convene and consult an advisory committee if the review is needed, not if it is mandated by the sponsor company. Given current FDA resources and staffing constraints, providing due notice with an explanation for the proposed withdrawal is sufficient. There should be no delay in protecting the health and safety of patients. We must ensure that the expedited therapeutic review process is transparent and fair--not a revolving door between the agency and industry. As of 2020, we have spent over $40 billion in taxpayer dollars for drugs that never demonstrated benefit, all to line the pockets of pharmaceutical corporations. This is another example of why further reforms are needed to ensure we are protecting our constituents across the country and being thoughtful arbiters of this reauthorization, which will define patient access and safety for the next five years. I am glad to see the bipartisan efforts achieved in the passage of H.R. 7667, but I do not believe this should be the last word on accelerated approval. I want to officially submit my concern that this bill does not go far enough to protect patients from unnecessary risk of exposure to unproven, ineffective, and potentially dangerous therapies. I hope to continue working with my colleagues to ensure the correct balance is struck between timely and safe access to therapies needed in the final passage of a bi-cameral reauthorization.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, the Protecting Our Kids Act is about saying no more to mass shootings, no more to children murdered in schools, no more to Black people murdered at the grocery store, no more to doctors being murdered in hospitals, no more to losing our children, our fathers, mothers, siblings, and friends in this uniquely American epidemic of gun violence. The families who have lost loved ones know that these deaths are not inevitable. We need to act now. This bill has simple but effective solutions: Raise the minimum age to 21 to buy a semiautomatic rifle, prohibit gun trafficking and high- capacity magazines, require safe storage, and crack down on ghost guns and bump stocks. Had these protections been enacted in 1999, they would have stopped at least 35 recent mass shootings and saved over 400 lives. Today, we can choose to mean it when we say ``never again.'' Vote ``yes.'' Save lives. Save children. Save our communities.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I thank Chairwoman Maloney for her tremendous leadership on so many issues, including reproductive rights, and for holding a hearing earlier in her committee on abortion and inviting several of us to testify. I am very proud to be here as the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. This is our Special Order hour, and I couldn't be prouder to be dedicating this Special Order hour to this critical issue of women's freedom, because that is what we are talking about is women's freedom. The leaked draft opinion from the Supreme Court represents an unprecedented, unlawful, and unjust attack on our constitutional reproductive rights. Reproductive rights groups and Black and Brown folks on the front line of this fight have been sounding the alarm for years that this day would come. The leaked draft opinion is a culmination of decades of insidious work from the extreme right, who have rigged the system in their favor. I speak to you, Madam Speaker, today as one of the one in four women in America who have had an abortion. For people to understand how I ultimately decided to have an abortion, I have to start with the birth of my first child, Janak. Janak was born at 26\1/2\ weeks while I was on a 2-year fellowship in India. She weighed only 1 pound 14 ounces, and upon birth she went down to a weight of just 21 ounces. Janak was so small, she fit into the palm of my hand. She was no bigger than a medium-sized squash. For 3 months, we did not know if Janak would live or die. She needed multiple blood transfusions, she had to be fed drop by drop, and she constantly had her heart stop and restart. We returned to the United States after 3 months, and in those early, intensely difficult years, Janak had hydrocephalus, water in her brain. She had seizures and she returned repeatedly to the emergency room because of life-threatening pneumonia. The fact that Janak is today a 26-year-old beautiful human being is a true miracle, and the greatest gift in my life. At the same time that Janak was born, I was also fighting to keep my legal permanent resident status, married to a U.S. citizen and with a U.S. citizen child, and yet without the ability to return with the same status that I had. In the end, I was able to return to the United States with Janak, provided that I started from scratch to qualify for citizenship. As a new mom taking care of a very sick baby and recovering from major surgery myself, I was struggling. I experienced severe postpartum depression and post-traumatic stress disorder that was only diagnosed after I contemplated suicide and realized that I needed to seek help. My marriage did not survive. We split custody of Janak, and I was a part-time single parent. Shortly after, I met a wonderful man who is my husband today. I knew I was not ready to have another child, so I religiously took my daily contraceptive pill. Despite that, I became pregnant. I consulted with my doctors, who told me that any future pregnancy would likely also be high risk to me and to my child, similar to what I had gone through with Janak. I very much wanted to have more children, but I simply could not imagine going through that again. After discussions with my partner, who was completely supportive of whatever choice I made, I decided to have an abortion. Two decades later, I think about those moments on the table in the doctor's office, a doctor who was kind and compassionate and skilled, performing abortions in a State that recognizes a person's constitutional right to make their choices about their reproductive care. For me, terminating my pregnancy was not an easy choice, but it was my choice, and it really shouldn't matter if it is a difficult or hard choice. That choice, that freedom is what has to be preserved for every pregnant person, a freedom that cannot be dictated by people in the minority pushing their extremist agenda on everybody else, the Supreme Court included. Until 2019, so for 15 years, I never spoke publicly or privately about my abortion. In fact, I didn't even tell my mother about it. Some of it was because as an immigrant from a culture that deeply values children and in a society that still stigmatizes abortion here in the United States, I felt a shame that I never should have felt. Two years ago, I decided to tell my story as a Member of Congress because I was so deeply concerned about the abortion ban legislation that was coming out from States across the country, and I became only the second Member of Congress to publicly talk about my abortion. Today, as we are on the cusp of a horrific decision from the Supreme Court to criminalize women's rights and the right to an abortion, we all have to speak out to tell our truths if we are able. I want you to know that there are so many different situations that people face in making these choices. Whether the choice to have an abortion is easy or hard, whether there are traumatic situations or not, none of this should be the issue. It is simply nobody's business what choices we pregnant people make about our own bodies. Let me be very clear, I would never tell people who don't choose to have an abortion that they should have an abortion, nor should they tell me that I shouldn't. This is a constitutionally protected, intensely personal choice. I did not suffer the economic issues that so many poor people suffer. I did not suffer from living in a State that doesn't allow pregnant people to make these choices, and I was very privileged to live in a world post-Roe v. Wade where abortion had been established as settled law as a constitutional right. Today, abortion is still the law of the land, and providers remain hard at work to give the care that so many desperately need and deserve. But it is clear that the Supreme Court, a majority on the Supreme Court who were appointed by two Republican Presidents who did not win even the majority of the popular vote, that the Supreme Court is poised to overturn this fundamental right to choose. And the communities that will pay the steepest prices are our low-income communities, our Black and Brown communities, our LGBTQ communities. The Progressive Caucus and our members have been at the forefront of protecting these rights and ensuring that we in the House passed the Women's Health Protection Act, that we work to repeal the Hyde amendment, and that we remove the stigma around abortion care and reproductive health choices. This is existentially urgent, and we will not allow the Supreme Court or the United States Senate, the people who voted against the codification of Roe v. Wade, to win in this battle. We will fight to the very end for our freedoms.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, workers' rights are human rights. The labor movement has shown us what is possible when we dream big and fight hard. Tonight, we will clear yet another hurdle in the battle for workplace safety and dignity. I thank my colleague, Representative Levin, for his tremendous leadership on this resolution. With House Resolution 915, congressional staff will be able to organize and bargain for a better workplace without fear of intimidation or retaliation. As someone who organized with unions, working people, and for collective bargaining rights before coming to Congress, I know how important it is that we guarantee our staff that same right. As a co-lead of the PRO Act, I have continuously pushed for pro- worker policies that prioritize safety, equity, and better pay. Like other workers, congressional staff deserve to be protected at work. They put in long, hard hours. They work incredibly hard to serve the people. We must lead by example and show our gratitude by ensuring our staff have the right to bargain, to organize, and to unionize.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Forced Arbitration Injustice Repeal Act. Forced arbitration deprives workers of the choice to have their day in court. When companies impose forced arbitration clauses, they choose every aspect of the process. They choose the mediator; they choose the location; and they choose the terms of the relief. This is a lose-lose scenario, and it disproportionately harms workers, particularly women and communities of color, but it imposes enormous consequences for everyone. You sign a contract for car repair, for car rental, for any consumer transaction, and when you need that car rental, hidden in those contracts is a prohibition from you taking any claim to court. No choice, no notion, even, for the majority of people that this fundamental right to that choice to sue an unscrupulous corporation is being taken away from you when you sign that contract. Madam Speaker, I think of this bill as a bill for the little guy or the little woman. Women and people of color forced into arbitration face mostly White male arbitrators in environments that heavily favor corporate interests. When musician Jay-Z entered arbitration without a single Black arbitrator in the room, he asked for ``neutrals of color.'' But only three suggested alternatives were Black, one of whom was a partner at the law firm representing the opposing party. Eliminating forced arbitration would open the courthouse doors for women, for workers of color, for poor folks across this country, advancing social equity and aiding the fight against discrimination. But it is also the right thing for every single consumer to be able to pursue this right to a day in court. Just last week, President Biden signed into law my bill with Representative Cheri Bustos to ban forced arbitration in cases of sexual harassment and sexual assault. That will protect the right of 60 million workers to a fair day in court. And that is just the people who are subject to employment contracts. On top of that, it will apply, and it will apply retroactively, to all the contracts around sexual assault and sexual harassment. That is huge progress. What is good enough in cases of sexual assault and sexual harassment--and that bill passed in a bipartisan and bicameral way--is good enough for all workers. It is time to take the next step by passing this bill to extend these protections to a fair day in court across the board. Again, we emphasize that if somebody wants arbitration, it doesn't stop that route, but it does say you can't be forced only into this and into denying your day in court. Now, let's also be clear that the FAIR Act is carefully crafted to protect unions. It preserves essential union bargaining power while creating freedoms for nonunionized workers. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have introduced an amendment that would undermine that power. This cannot happen. We cannot allow our Republican colleagues to undermine unions and the foundation of our middle class. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to pass the FAIR Act, and I thank Congressman Hank Johnson for his leadership.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor my constituent, Leanne Kim Do, from Seattle, Washington. Today, on the day of President Biden's State of the Union Address, we celebrate the bold and progressive accomplishments that have bolstered our economy and served as a critical lifeline for families and small business owners across our nation. I am proud to have worked alongside President Biden to enact the American Rescue Plan and Infrastructure Investments and Jobs Act, two landmark pieces of legislation that invest in our communities and create good paying jobs for Americans. Leanne, a writing skills teacher and working mother of three young children, was a direct recipient of the Child Tax Credit and is a testament to the real differences these payments have made in the lives of Americans. Both Leanne and her spouse, Nathan, uplift the brilliance of marginalized communities in their work but neither were provided with paid family leave to welcome their third child into their family. The Child Tax Credit payments allowed them to take much needed time off without worrying about how they were going to pay their bills or having to leave their cause-driven professions for higher pay. This past year we have made critical investments in vaccine distribution, rental and nutrition assistance, grants to small businesses, and funding for schools and child care facilities. It is imperative that we keep this momentum up and continue to deliver for families, like Leanne's, across our Nation.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, this is a landmark day. H.R. 4445, the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act, will ensure that tens of millions of people are no longer silenced in instances where there is sexual harassment and sexual assault. These forced arbitration agreements require that people with disputes against a company use a secretive, one-sided mediation process instead of the judicial system. Sexual assault and sexual harassment survivors with claims against a company are stripped of the right to decide how to pursue accountability for their perpetrator. It is a lose-lose scenario. People are left with little alternative but to sign these agreements, and yet, they often face retaliation and backlash when they are pursuing their claims. This bipartisan bill is essential for survivors like Tatiana Spottiswoode, who bravely testified under the protection of a friendly subpoena at a House Judiciary Committee hearing. Tatiana needed that protection because forced arbitration took away all of her rights to speak publicly about the severe harassment that she had endured from her boss and her abuser, former CEO of Afiniti, Zia Chishti. At the hearing, Tatiana testified that ``the person who changed my life forever continues to abuse me because forced arbitration gives him the power to do it in secret.'' Tatiana's freedom to discuss her experiences publicly had real impact. Mr. Chishti was finally fired, and the former Prime Minister of the U.K. resigned from the advisory board of her abuser's company. Her story, and countless others like hers, show why this bill is so critical. I am so proud to colead this bill with the incredible Representative Cheri Bustos. And I thank Representative Bustos and Representative Morgan Griffith and Representative Ken Buck for their leadership, as well. No one should have to endure what happened to Tatiana and so many others like her. We have an opportunity in the House of Representatives to set this right for millions of brave survivors. Vote ``yes'' to pass H.R. 4445.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I rise today to offer an amendment to the America COMPETES Act section 60501.

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I rise today to encourage my colleagues to vote for my amendment to section 60501 of the America COMPETES Act, which asks the Treasury Department to study the growth of Chinese Government influence and illicit finance in Afghanistan. My amendment would also require the Treasury to examine the humanitarian impact of U.S. sanctions in Afghanistan, projected increases in civilian deaths and refugees, and the resulting effect on additional Chinese Government influence in Afghanistan. Today's New York Times published a harrowing front-page article headlined ``Over a Million Flee as Afghanistan's Economy Collapses,'' which reports that for millions already living hand to mouth, Western sanctions have led to life-threatening hunger across the country as incomes have dried up and humanitarian aid has been obstructed. After our withdrawal from Afghanistan, U.S. sanctions on the Taliban have impacted the broader functioning of the entire Afghan Government, including schools and hospitals, which cannot buy food for patients or gas to heat their buildings. The New York Times reports that, according to aid organizations, starvation could kill 1 million children this winter. These fatalities could far exceed civilian deaths resulting from 20 years of war. The United States has frozen $9.4 billion of the Afghan central bank's foreign reserves, making it impossible for the country's financial system to function and threatening to collapse the entire economy. U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres has pleaded for ``increased liquidity'' to ``free up frozen currency reserves and reengage Afghanistan's central bank'' to ``pull the economy back from the brink.'' Former Republican South Carolina Governor David Beasley, now the head of the World Food Programme, similarly said that unless those Afghan central bank funds are unfrozen, ``this country will absolutely collapse.'' A senior official at the International Red Cross pointedly asked: ``Can the international community hold 39 million people hostage to the fact that they do not want to recognize the authorities that are now in place in Kabul and in Afghanistan?'' If appeals from the world's leading humanitarian and aid organizations on the devastating impacts of current U.S. policy do not persuade my colleagues, I ask them to consider whether Afghanistan's economic crisis will pose an opportunity for neighboring China to expand its influence in the country. For those seeking to better understand the Chinese Government's influence in Afghanistan and the rise of illicit financial transactions in the country, my amendment would ensure that we have this information. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, which simply requires additional information on the impact of U.S. sanctions on Afghanistan's migration, mortality, financial health, and influence from the Chinese Government. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I rise to offer amendment 22 as a designee of Congressman Jamaal Bowman.

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I first want to offer my congratulations to the chairwoman of the committee for this very, very important piece of legislation. Madam Speaker, I rise today as the designee of Congressman Jamaal Bowman to offer this amendment. The climate crisis is the single biggest threat facing humanity, and if we are going to address it at the scale needed to limit global warming to not more than 1.5 degrees Celsius, we are going to have to work together. We are going to need unprecedented levels of global cooperation and collaboration to meet everyone's basic needs, including food, clean water, and keeping the communities we call home habitable. At the same time, we increasingly rely upon sanctions as a key foreign policy lever. The material impact of sanctions is known to undermine the human rights of civilians who can get cut off from access to basic needs, often the same basic needs that are threatened by the very climate crisis, as we see increasingly more frequent extreme weather events. This amendment would simply require the State Department to issue a report in coordination with the Department of Energy on the impact that sanctions have on our ability to be innovative in addressing the climate crisis and economic justice. This will give us important information as we seek to create and craft sanctions or understand the impact of sanctions and decide not to use them. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Speaker, I don't really understand--and with tremendous respect to my colleague across the aisle--how assigning a report so that we can get more information about the effect of sanctions on the people of a country undermines in any way anything that we are trying to do in this bill. In fact, competitiveness is deeply tied to whether or not we adhere to human rights values that the United States holds very dear. And the question of how we can be most effective in our policy is very important to this bill. So I really don't understand why we wouldn't want the information that a report is going to generate unless we are afraid that it is going to present some choice that feels very difficult to us. So I am not sure why there would be resistance to a report that says, Department of Energy, in coordination with the State Department, tell us what impact sanctions have on our ability to be innovative, one of the key goals of this bill, in addressing the climate crisis and economic justice. Let's not disentangle competitiveness from justice. Let's not disentangle competitiveness from our ability to uphold our core values as a country. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, we join the American people in telling the President that he did the right thing by finally ending this never- ending war in Afghanistan. However, we can't abandon the country and its people. We have to make sure we get aid to the people of Afghanistan in the wake of our 20-year war there. In addition to the moral urgency of reevaluating a set of economic policies that threaten to harm untold Afghan civilians, including 1 million children, American policymakers deserve to have a complete and comprehensive picture of what is occurring in Afghanistan, including an honest understanding of our own actions, their human impacts, and their political and economic effects. We must not be afraid to connect the dots. Indeed, this is a pre- condition to changing U.S. policy when it contributes to outcomes that contradict our own interests and our own values. Any report on Afghanistan's financial picture would be gravely incomplete without also examining current U.S. policies. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JAYAPAL

Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, Representative Bowman, for his incredible leadership. It has been a true honor to serve with the gentleman in the Progressive Caucus, this Special Order hour has always been the Progressive Caucus' Special Order hour led in his very capable hands and also to be able to serve with him on the Education and Labor Committee. The gentleman brings tremendous power to the actual experience of education through his own background. I am so proud to serve with the gentleman. Madam Speaker, I, too, am here to talk about the need to cancel student debt. This is a tremendous crisis for 36 million Americans who are being crushed by $1.8 trillion in student loan debt. When I first ran for Congress in 2016, the number was $1.2 trillion; then it was $1.3 trillion, $1.5 trillion, now it is almost $1.8 trillion in student loan debt. Working families and students are counting on this administration to build us all back better. But many families like those I represent in Seattle cannot thrive with the crippling burden of student loan debt holding them back at every single turn. With the student loan moratorium expiring at the end of January, borrowers are literally just a few weeks away from resuming to pay substantial amounts of their income toward student loan payments and the crises that they are facing, the trauma that they are facing as they think about what they are going to do when this moratorium expires and how they are going to make these payments. Over one-quarter of borrowers expect at least one-third of their income will go toward student loans once the pause ends, and they are terrified. Eighty-nine percent of full-time employed borrowers are expecting to be financially insecure come February 1. While that number is concerning, it should not be surprising. The economic toll of the pandemic has made it tough for one-quarter of all adults to pay their bills. To make ends meet, people have stayed afloat by using the money that would have gone to student loan payments on all the other essential costs that they have. Eighty-seven percent of borrowers report using these savings to pay off other bills. This is personal. My office recently heard from a mother and a veteran in the Seattle area who was delinquent in her payments even before the first case of COVID-19 hit our country. She is glad that the pause has given her a chance to catch up on payments, but she is concerned that very soon she will have to choose between paying her mortgage and repaying her student loans after January. Not having to make student loan payments has helped her and her family. But should this pause end without student debt cancelation, she and her children will be on the path to financial ruin. We have the power to make sure that does not happen. This administration has the power to make sure that does not happen. The good news is that this administration does have, as my colleague said, the authority to do what is right for families like hers and like so many that I have been hearing from. Clearly, if the pause on student loans and interest was necessary to help families sustain themselves through the pandemic, then ending it without any form of permanent student debt relief would be harmful, especially as many families are continuing to struggle during this ongoing crisis. Consider the tremendous strides the Biden administration has made toward reviving our struggling economy: low unemployment, reopened businesses, and vaccinations driving consumer demand. Eliminating $50,000, at least, of student debt per borrower would increase average yearly pay by $3,000 which in turn would increase GDP by $1 trillion. Cancelation would also solidify access to important paths for building the middle class which have been delayed due to student loan debt. More than 80 percent of borrowers with student loan debt report that that debt is holding them back from being able to afford a home. Many would be in a better position to begin saving for homeownership as well as retirement or starting a business. Student loan forgiveness would also help close the wealth gap, as Mr. Bowman pointed out, especially in communities of color. Black, Latinx, and Native borrowers are more likely to struggle with repayments and consequently default on their loans at higher rates. Further, it is estimated that Black borrowers on average owe nearly $53,000 in student debt, the highest compared to other communities. In fact, the average student debt for Black households tripled in the 12 years following the 2008 recession with student debt held by Black borrowers being triple what White borrowers owe just 4 years after graduating. So, yes, this is clearly a matter of racial and economic justice. Low-income and middle-class Americans are encouraged to pursue higher education as a tool for economic and social mobility. But here is the catch, the enduring weight of student loan debt negates opportunities for many borrowers to truly transform their lives and our country. As the lead sponsor of the College for All Act in the House and a proud cosponsor of the debt cancelation bill from Representative Omar, I know that eliminating student loan debt will better ensure that earning a degree remains a strong path to social mobility and economic security, particularly during this pivotal moment for our recovery. That is why the administration should cancel student loan debt. They can start with immediately eliminating at least $50,000 in student loan debt per borrower before the payments begin again. It is a single action that can cement progress for an entire generation of Americans and those who come after that. So let's deliver that financial breathing room. Let's deliver on racial equity and economic security by canceling student loan debt.