Teresa Leger Fernandez

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Madam Speaker, I urge support for my motion so that the Natural Resources Committee can consider this amendment, this time in good faith.

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Madam Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, we are here today because Republicans think appliances have more rights than people and because they think that creating and perpetuating nonsense culture war issues will win them votes. Today, we have a bill titled Hands Off Our Home Appliances Act. Republicans say it is government overreach to regulate appliances, but Republicans will regulate women's personal healthcare decisions. Republicans will protect appliances but let women suffer and die from pregnancy complications. Republicans want freedom for refrigerators but will take away women's freedom to choose an abortion based on her own faith in consultation with her own doctor and loved ones. Republicans will take away women's freedom to choose an abortion after rape or incest, but they will go to bat for your gas stove. They care about freezers but could care less about affordable childcare. Instead of helping women with childcare costs, which would help families with the high cost of living, Republicans would rather force these access costs on consumers. Yesterday, I introduced an amendment to the rule from Representative Chu and me which changes the title of the bill to the Hands Off Our Bodies Act and strikes the text and replaces it with the Women's Health Protection Act. Mr. Speaker, 65 percent of Americans oppose the overturning of Roe v. Wade. They want us to protect women. However, this amendment didn't pass. This bill is part of a quartet of bills coming out of the Energy and Commerce Committee with titles like the Liberty in Laundry Act, the Refrigerator Freedom Act, and the Affordable Air Conditioning Act. These titles turn the cry for reproductive healthcare rights on their head. Not only are they insulting to women who are fighting for their rights, they are demeaning to women who will remember in November. Do my colleagues on the other side of the aisle think the American women will vote Republican based on these misnamed appliance bills? Women are not so gullible. We will remember. We will remember that 184 House Republicans have cosponsored bills that threaten IVF access nationwide. We will remember that Republican legislators are putting women's lives at risk when my colleagues criminalize abortion. The majority is robbing States of the healthcare they need as obstetricians and gynecologists are fleeing those repressive States. Republicans are forcing women who undergo pregnancy complications to sit until they are near death in hospital parking lots. Women will remember that Democrats believe women can, should, and must make their own decisions about their bodies. Republicans think appliances have more rights than people. However, I call on Republicans to prioritize women over appliances and reject this rule.

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, we are also here today to debate Republicans' terrible mining rule, which would open millions of acres of public lands to foreign-owned mining companies. I find it ridiculous that we are here today because, just last week, this House voted in favor of my motion to recommit, and that motion to recommit said: Let's send this back to committee. Let's send it back to committee to consider my amendment, which would have banned foreign adversaries, like China, from being able to take our public lands and resources for free. Unfortunately, almost every Republican said: It is all right for Chinese corporations to mine our data for TikTok, but the majority said: No. We want them to be able to take our gold, our silver, our copper, our resources, for free, to China. Thankfully, six Republicans voted in favor of the MTR; but instead of going back to committee to consider it, we are back here again because the Rules Committee put the bill back on the floor without that amendment. If my colleagues believe that American resources belong with American corporations, Members should vote against this rule.

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, happy Small Business Week. Today, I rise to recognize the Small Business Administration's support and advocacy for businesses and communities as they sustain and strengthen the backbone of the American economy. I especially thank SBA New Mexico District Director John Garcia. Through financing, information, and guidance, our small-business community benefits daily from the resources and support that Mr. Garcia and his team provide. Last year, SBA marked its 70th anniversary. Nationally, there are 30 million small businesses. In New Mexico, 95 percent of our businesses are small businesses--162,000 strong. Our small businesses employ 340,000 individuals, and we are growing at a rapid rate, with 7,270 new businesses opening during the March 2021-2022 period. From green chili farmers to independent bookstores to small manufacturing plants, our small businesses line our Main Streets and bring economic vitality to our communities. This Small Business Week, I recognize SBA's storied past and the even stronger future we will create.

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, America was blessed by our creator with natural beauty and an abundance of natural resources, from grazing to farmlands to minerals, fossil fuels, solar, and wind so we could feed our families and fuel our progress. We owe the American people, and, most importantly, our children and grandchildren, a duty to protect those resources so they are available for future generations and Americans are not left with public lands that have been degraded, mines that have been depleted, and profits sent off to foreign corporations. Yes, there are profits sent to China because they own some of those mines. H.R. 2925 would make it harder to protect the lands that make this country beautiful. Worst of all, it favors the biggest mining corporations and even allows foreign corporations to take American resources for free. There is a long history of bad actors exploiting, misusing, and abusing their mining claims, especially those corporations with ties to foreign adversarial nations. H.R. 2925 would give away our Federal lands to these bad actors. Why would Republicans work on a bipartisan basis to ban China from mining American data with TikTok but then be okay with China mining American natural resources for free? Why? Under the Republicans' proposal, Chinese corporations with the money could put four sticks in the ground, pay a fee, and then claim that land for mining without even proving the existence of these important minerals. I also point out, in response to my esteemed colleague, that there is mining going on. As noted earlier, we have the Chino mine in New Mexico. It produces copper. It has been producing copper for generations, in fact, for hundreds of years. Guess what. It is an American company. Freeport-McMoRan is an American company. It is international, but it is American. We want to do that. We want to make sure that American companies are the ones mining American resources. These are public resources. For this reason, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to recommit this bill back to committee. If the House rules permitted, I would have offered the motion with an important amendment to this bill. My amendment would bar companies from adversarial nations, including China, from conducting mining activities on our public lands. They shouldn't be allowed to exploit American resources and pollute our public lands and to take those resources back to China for free. Let's make sure the profits stay here, the resources stay here, and the innovation stays here. Why wouldn't my Republican colleagues support that kind of amendment? I ask unanimous consent to insert in the Record the text of this amendment immediately prior to the motion to recommit.

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues will join me in pushing back against China owning our resources and voting for this and making sure American companies are the ones owning our resources. I hope they will vote for the motion to recommit.

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Minnesota for the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. America was blessed by our creator with natural beauty and an abundance of natural resources--from grazing to farmlands, to minerals, fossil fuels, solar and wind--so we could feed our families and fuel our progress. We owe the American people, and most importantly, our children and grandchildren a duty to protect those resources so they are available for future generations and Americans are not left with public lands that have been degraded, mines that have been depleted, and profits shipped off to foreign corporations. We owe a duty to those who love the forests and rivers in Minnesota or the rangeland in the Southwest to protect it and allow its use for recreation, grazing, and extraction. The Natural Resources bills that Republicans have made in order with this rule fail to protect America's blessed creation for future generations. The bills would eliminate environmental protections and increase mining corporations' ability to take public lands from the American people for free. Let me repeat that because Americans may not know that right now mining corporations--those big, profitable mining corporations--do not pay a dime in royalties when they take Americans' gold, silver, copper, or other precious minerals. That takes me to H.R. 2925, the Mining Regulatory Clarity Act. The 1872 mining law that we operate under now is old. It needs updating. It gives away our public resources for free. In the arid West, it allows mining companies to use as much precious water as they want and doesn't require those big corporations to fully clean up after themselves. Last week, I visited the Pecos Watershed, a vital resource for northern New Mexico communities and a river that flows to Texas. In that watershed, a foreign company had mined, polluted, and abandoned the people and the river that I visited. We need to protect this type of land with these kinds of water resources, but H.R. 2925 would actually make it harder to protect this and other watersheds. It favors the biggest mining corporations and, even worse, favors foreign corporations. We all know there is a long history of bad actors exploiting, misusing, and abusing their mining claims. H.R. 2925 would give away our Federal lands to these bad actors. Under the Republicans' proposal, corporations with the money could put four sticks in the ground, pay a fee, and then claim that land for mining without even proving the existence of minerals. The Republican proposal would also loosen restrictions so these corporations, even those based in countries like China or Russia, could more easily exploit American natural resources for free. Why would Republicans work on a bipartisan basis to ban China from mining American data with TikTok but then be okay with China mining American natural resources for free? In the Rules Committee, I introduced an amendment to prohibit our adversaries, like China, from taking our public lands and minerals. Sadly, every Republican on the Rules Committee voted against making in order these amendments to prevent foreign adversaries from accessing these valuable American resources. I also introduced an amendment that would require mining corporations to make sure our waterways are not contaminated. Republicans blocked that, too. Our current 150-year-old mining laws are not equipped for today's environmental challenges, but Republicans' response is to make it easier, not harder, for these greedy mining corporations to take what they want and leave their messes behind. As if that weren't enough, this rule also makes in order what we should call the no public use on public lands act. This bill would overturn a new Bureau of Land Management rule that finally recognizes conservation and public land management as a value on par with other uses. The BLM rule does not change their existing land management processes. BLM will continue to allow grazing, drilling, and other extraction on managed lands. What it does do is allow BLM to also include the important goal of conservation of the public lands as they consider new applications for Americans' public lands. I might remind my Republican colleagues that they are turning their back on a great legacy, a great Republican legacy, from the Clean Water Act, the EPA, and the words of that great Republican President, Teddy Roosevelt, who said: ``Conservation is a great moral issue, for it involves the patriotic duty of ensuring the safety and continuance of the Nation.'' This patriotic goal of conservation and preservation is vital so our grandchildren can one day see the beauty that the West holds, and farmers and ranchers agree. They and other stewards of our land actively engaged with the Biden administration in the development of this rule. Congress should listen to the science and the stewards of this land on this issue instead of trying to dictate what is best for the West from D.C. We should also continue President Biden's policy of ensuring our energy independence and security, all while growing American industry. I must also point out that the Biden BLM rule explicitly prevents foreign entities from holding conservation or mitigation leases, something that I might remember and remind our Republicans they were unwilling to do with regards to mining. The rule also allows a bill that ignores science and would prevent regulation of lead-based tackle and ammunition. Didn't we learn our lesson with leaded gasoline and its harmful effects on people and the environment? Apparently not. Lead is poison. We all have heard of and sometimes seen the death of bald eagles and other magnificent birds who have consumed even the smallest amount of lead buckshot or fragmented lead ammo. Lead finds its way onto hunters' and anglers' tables, too. One study found that there were lead fragments in 34 percent of ground venison burgers. Do you want your children to consume lead? Every year, I make tamales for Christmas, and as my family has done for generations, we use wild game--deer, elk, and antelope--that has been hunted in New Mexico. We are grateful for lead-free ammunition because we don't want to poison ourselves or our environment. This rule also makes in order a bill to undo the Biden administration's work to protect one of the world's most fragile and significant ecosystems, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. In recent years we have seen record amounts of oil and gas production in the United States. We are the top producer of oil in the world right now. We can do that while also preserving the beautiful lands that make ``America the Beautiful'' the right song to sing. Finally, Madam Speaker, I want to address the issue of anti-Semitism not just on college campuses but also across the country since October 7. Let me be clear: Anti-Semitism and hate in any form is simply unacceptable anywhere in our country. This rise in hatred across the United States should be a wake-up call for our democracy. However, last fall, House Republicans proposed a 25 percent budget cut to the office that is actively investigating incidents of anti- Semitism on campuses. If you care about anti-Semitism, why do you take away the resources from the office that is prosecuting those kinds of claims? Well, yesterday we got an answer why. My Republican Rules Committee colleague, Representative Massie, was very honest describing what this bill really is about when he said: ``Everybody has introduced almost at this point a bill to deal with something along these lines since October 7. None of them actually get to anything real. I think it is a political ping-pong game, of course. We''--meaning Republicans--``get to serve every time, and a lot of these''--meaning resolutions like this--``are just political traps. I call them sticky traps designed to split the Democratic Party and get them stuck in the sticky trap.'' I thank Mr. Massie for his refreshing honesty and candor, but if we wanted to actually do something real, we could. Rather than doing a sticky trap, we could take up my colleague Congresswoman Manning's bipartisan bill, H.R. 7921, the Countering Anti-Semitism Act, which would designate a senior official at the Department of Education to counter anti-Semitism on college campuses, among many other solutions that are also based on Biden's policy regarding attacking anti- Semitism. If we want to deal with anti-Semitism on college campuses, I suggest a bill with real solutions is a good place to start. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, how dare the party of Donald Trump and Marjorie Taylor Greene come down here and lecture Democrats about anti-Semitism. Remember, the leader of the Republican Party, Donald Trump, dines with Holocaust deniers and said there were ``fine people on both sides'' at a rally where white supremacists chanted: ``Jews will not replace us.'' Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene appeared on stage at a white nationalist rally alongside a Holocaust denier. She tweeted anti- Semitic videos and talks about Jewish space lasers. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article from Politico titled: ``Donald Trump dined with white nationalist, Holocaust denier Nick Fuentes.''

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Madam Speaker, I also ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an article from The Atlantic titled: ``Trump Defends White-Nationalist Protesters: `Some Very Fine People on Both Sides.' ''

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Madam Speaker, I would like to enter into the record, actually, my objection to this absurd attack on Democrats for pointing out that this bill has in the title ``anti-Semitism,'' but there are problems with it. We need to address anti-Semitism and look at the root causes. Instead, what are we doing? We are debating codifying a definition that numerous Jewish organizations, including Jewish Action, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, and the New Israel Fund, among others, oppose. The reason these organizations oppose it is because we cannot equate criticism of Israeli policies with anti-Semitism. They are two very different things. We need to remember that we are constitutionally bound to protect free speech, even, and more importantly, when it is speech with which we do not agree. Yesterday, for example, in the Rules Committee hearing for this bill, Representative Fry called Prime Minister Netanyahu's work in Gaza remarkable. He praised it. I personally don't think it is remarkable that over 35,000 people, most of them children and women, are dead. I don't think it is remarkable that over 130 hostages are still not home. Netanyahu is being protested in his own country for these and many other things. I don't think it is remarkable that 27 kids have already died of malnutrition and that famine is imminent for 1.1 million Gazans. Saying none of this is anti-Semitic. I am Catholic with Sephardi heritage, and I think that my love that comes from the teaching and my spirituality calls upon me to talk about these things. That is not anti-Semitic. That is the worry that these Jewish organizations, ACLU, and others talk about today. If we really want to move forward on combating anti- Semitism, let's fund the office that investigates and takes action against those colleges that fail to protect their students. Let's move forward with Congresswoman Manning's bipartisan bill, H.R. 7921, the Countering Antisemitism Act. We should investigate how these issues continue to seep into our schools and communities. We could do real work to address these root causes. Instead, we're debating a definition that numerous Jewish organizations, including Jewish Action, The Jewish Council for Public affairs, and the New Israel Fund, oppose. The reason these organizations oppose it is because we cannot equate criticism of Israeli policies with Antisemitism. That is free speech. Yesterday, in the Rules Committee Hearing for this very bill, Representative Fry called Prime Minister Netanyahu's work during this war ``remarkable.'' I don't think it's remarkable that over 35,000 people are dead. I don't think it's remarkable that over 130 hostages are still not back home today. I don't think it's remarkable that 27 kids died of malnutrition or that Famine is imminent for 1.1 million Gazans Saying all of this could be construed as antisemitic if we adopt the definition we're debating today. That is not helping us move forward or address the scourge of antisemitism that's hurting our students and their families. To move us forward in the fight against antisemitism, we could consider Congresswoman Manning's bipartisan bill H.R. 7921, the Countering Antisemitism Act. This bill would designate a senior official at the Department of Education to counter antisemitism on college campuses, among other solutions. We could increase funding at the Office for Civil Rights so the office has the resources to actually investigate and address antisemitism on college campuses. If we want to deal with antisemitism on college campuses then I would suggest that these are good places to start. Madam Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 17, a bill to help with pay disparities for women in the workforce and strengthen our economy. Madam Speaker, rising costs are affecting American families and the American worker, but instead of helping families put more money in their pockets to save for retirement, to send their kids to college, or to simply put food on the table, House Republicans are focused on helping Big Oil and Big Mining corporations. My colleagues constantly talk about the economic hardship Americans face, but instead of bringing legislation to actually address that, nearly every bill in this rule would create a corporate giveaway at the expense of our public lands. We see where their real priorities are--with the biggest corporations, foreign corporations, even Chinese corporations--but House Democrats are focused on the American people. That is why we must bring up H.R. 17, the Paycheck Fairness Act, to address the wage gap for women of this country and make sure families aren't cheated out of dollars and paychecks that they deserve. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the Record, along with any extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee, to discuss our proposal.

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I just want to make the record clear. Democrats and President Biden have repeatedly and constantly, and not just since October 7, condemned anti-Semitism and taken actual actions to actually address it, and that is the problem with what we are hearing. As their own Rules Committee member has said it, these are about sticky bills. They are not about getting solutions. We must remember that most of the bills in the rule today are actually talking about our natural resources and how Republicans want to turn the clock back on the progress that Americans have been demanding for decades to protect our natural beauty but also to protect our natural resources for Americans. I want to talk a little bit about mining reform, a 1872 mining law that says it all. That law is way too old and needs fixing. Well, how do we make sure we go about fixing it? The Republicans' proposal is to just give more of it away. It makes it easier for foreign corporations and for big, greedy corporations to take that land, to take those natural resources. What do Democrats propose? We propose responsible mining reform that allows for critical minerals to be extracted without destroying our environment. My good friend and ranking member, the former chair of the House Natural Resources Committee, introduced the Clean Energy Minerals Reform Act, of which I am a cosponsor. That kind of bill would require annual rental payments for claimed public lands, treating mine operators the same way we treat oil and gas or any other ones. Let's make them pay for our resources. They belong to us. Imagine if the $300 billion in profits that is going to those foreign corporations went to Americans instead. We would set a royalty rate of not less than 5 percent and not greater than 8 percent, based on gross income. We would make sure that there would be a reclamation fund, so when the mining companies go in there and make their mess that there would be a way for us to clean it up. I can tell you, New Mexico is littered. In Colorado, all the intermountain areas are left with these abandoned mines that leach acid into our rivers and streams and make it so that we cannot hike and camp on those lands. I have picked up those rocks that when they are exposed to air and water create sulfuric acid, and they leave piles of them. Those are the things that we must be doing. We must give the Secretary of the Interior the right to protect our public lands, to protect the waters of Minnesota, right, and to protect the waters of this great country. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The natural resources bills that we are dealing with here today, as I pointed out, are a great gift to big mining corporations and overturn decades of work by local organizations and by the public in these areas who want to see their lands protected. What is interesting is Republicans are putting forward these bills, even though the American public and their own constituents are not interested in seeing what they are doing. While Republicans are helping out the big mining corporation fans, their constituents want the opposite. I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record the article titled: ``Analysis: Public Comments Overwhelmingly Support BLM Public Lands Rule.''

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Madam Speaker, that analysis found that the Biden administration's Public Lands Rule received 92 percent of support in public comments. Madam Speaker, 92 percent of the 150,000 Americans who commented on this rule agreed that the BLM is moving in the right direction by protecting our public lands. Many of them were farmers, ranchers, and stewards of the land. In fact, one farmer said to me: I recognize how important it is to allow our land to recover so that we can use it in the future for grazing. I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record the following article titled: ``The 2023 Conservation in the West Poll from Colorado College.''

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Madam Speaker, the article can be found here: https://www.coloradocollege.edu/other/stateoftherockies/ conservationinthewest/2023.html This survey found that 82 percent of voters across 8 Western States support the conservation of our public lands and waters. Let's listen to the people on the ground. While Republicans want to mine the beautiful forests of Minnesota, constituents actually want to protect the area from sulfite or copper mining. I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record the article titled: ``The Campaign to Save the Boundary Waters 2022 Post-Election Poll.''

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Madam Speaker, the article can be found here: Https://www.savetheboundary waters.org/sites/default/files/resource- file/Campaign%20To%20 Save%20The%20Boundary%20 Waters%20__%202022%20Post-Election%20Poll%20Results.pdf Madam Speaker, the poll found over 70 percent of Minnesotans support proposed legislation to permanently protect the boundary waters from risks associated with sulfite or copper mining. The boundary waters are one of the most visited national recreational areas in the United States. I look forward to going and looking at those lakes and those rivers and those forests and how they are intertwined and how those canoes glide along their surfaces. Minnesotans know what that beauty looks like, and they want to make sure that the mining that is proposed by the Trump administration--and I might remind people that the Trump administration overturned actions by Obama, so they could give two leases to a Chilean billionaire--a Chilean billionaire, who it so happens, was a landlord of the President's daughter. These kinds of dealings with foreign corporations, we must say ``no'' to. Why would Minnesotans want to take their precious natural resources and have them leased so a Chilean billionaire can make even more money? We are urging our Republican colleagues to listen to their constituents, to listen to the people who are speaking on these issues, to vote against these rules, and to vote against these bills. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. Madam Speaker, the bills my Republican colleagues have proposed today threaten to overturn regulations put in place to make sure that we are responsible in our use of natural resources. The Biden administration has worked to reverse many of the Trump-era policies that just help the rich get richer. For too long, what we have seen in America is the rich keep getting richer, and it appears that Republicans, certain Republicans, but most definitely former President Trump favored the richest corporations. In turn, I ask my colleagues to think about what our role is here in Congress. I remind my colleagues of these powerful words from the Conference of Bishops. ``We show our respect for the creator by our stewardship of creation. Care for the Earth is not just an Earth Day slogan, it is a requirement of our faith. We are called to protect people and the planet, living our faith in relationship with all of God's creation.'' It is possible to protect the planet and still be a leader in energy. In the last 3 years, the Biden administration has invested over $18 billion toward Federal, State, local, and Tribal land conservation efforts in all 50 States. Contrary to what my colleagues claim, the U.S. has had record oil and gas production under the Biden administration. We produced an average of 12.9 million barrels of crude oil, millions more than are coming out of Russia and Saudi Arabia. Regulations are important. They prevent catastrophic environmental disasters, like the 137 oil spills that occurred during the second year of the Trump administration. Remember, there will be no more elk to hunt, no more breathtaking lakes reflecting the sunlight to hike to, and no more oil and minerals to drill for if we do not listen to the experts about protecting our lands and waters. Wildlife protections and mining regulations are in place to make sure future generations of Americans can enjoy the same beautiful landscapes and profit off of America's resources. Finally, I need to remind everybody, we all condemned October 7. We all have condemned Hamas. It is a terrorist organization. However, we have taken up these resolutions over and over again. Once again, our Republican colleague has spoken the truth when he has said that these are sticky resolutions simply intended to divide the Democrats. Let's not work on division. Let's come together in love and a belief in each of our individual strengths to push back against the hatred that we see and to do it in a manner that is not partisan, that uplifts our morality, that uplifts our empathy for all, and that addresses all the forms of hatred that we see. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Larry Foster of the Navajo Nation for his induction into the North American Indigenous Athletics Hall of Fame. This honor demonstrates the outstanding leadership and athletic achievement of Mr. Foster. It is a hallmark of his commitment and dedication. Foster was a student at Window Rock High School in Arizona where he earned All State and All Conference Honors in baseball, football, and basketball from 1966 to 1969. Upon graduating high school, he continued to play baseball at Bacone Juniors College in Muskogee, Oklahoma and later Adam State College in Alamosa, Colorado. He was named as the Rocky Mountain Athletic Conference Batting Champion in 1971 with a batting average of .442. After college Foster played semi-pro baseball and was a nine-time All Tournament outfield and batting champion and continued to play in All Indian baseball tournaments from 1964 to 1976. Foster now resides in Gallup, New Mexico with his wife Mattie Foster. He continues to be an active member of his community, including being a local sportswriter Na b// hozh0 (Congratulations), Mr. Foster. We are grateful for his contribution to sports in New Mexico.

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ

Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, today, after months of delay that cost the loss of the Ukrainian military advantage, that cost children's lives and access to food and aid, that allowed China to threaten the Indo-Pacific, Congress will finally vote. Congress is finally going to vote to fund the fight against the tyranny of Russia, Iran, and China, the fight for democracy and peace. Why did it take us this long? Yesterday in Rules, the Republican chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee noted that every Republican President since the Soviet Union era has stood on the right side of history and stood up to Russia. Presidents from Eisenhower to Reagan, George Bush, Sr., and George Bush, Jr., they all knew that Russia's desire to reassert its empire by bombing and invading its neighbor also harms America and American interests--every Republican President, that is, until Donald Trump. In contrast to every President before him, Trump praised Putin, tried to do business in Russia, allowed Putin to gain the upper hand, and eventually denied Ukraine military aid that Congress had approved unless Ukraine gave him dirt on Biden. Donald Trump became the pied piper for Putin. Some of Trump's most ardent followers in this House became Putin- protecting Republicans and denied the Members of Congress this vote until now. Now is the moment history has its eyes on this Chamber as Democrats and Republicans stand up and stand together for what we love-- democracy. Democracy is the very reason we get to sit here together today and debate in the people's House. Democracy is the best answer to tyranny, aggression, and depravity. It is our shared bipartisan love for democracy that best unites us with our allies around the world, allies that are once again united in our fight against the war in China and Russia thanks to the leadership of President Biden, who repaired the damage Trump inflicted on our international relationships. I hope that shared love of a world where democracy is defended will also unite us in this Chamber. I remind my colleagues, Republicans and Democrats, that bipartisanship is a good thing. It is how America expects us to govern, and it is how we move one step closer to defeating the cruel regimes that seek to take the world backward.