Barbara Lee

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chairman the United States once again became a proud member of UNESCO this past July. This decision was a huge achievement. It involved several years of negotiation, and it absolutely is in the United States' interest, something only the United States should be able to decide. It is wrong to let another party make that decision for us. Debates currently at UNESCO range from protection of world heritage sites to the evolution of artificial intelligence to the responsibility of nations to respect media freedoms to the equitable access to education, and importantly, the toll of the Holocaust. The United States should be part of these discussions, making sure that our values are reflected. We are fighting for our values. Already since we rejoined in July, we have been able to successfully advocate for the direct participation of Israel in a recent meeting in Saudi Arabia--a diplomatic achievement in everyone's interest. Participation in international institutions like UNESCO are in the best interest of the United States of America. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, putting America first actually means our relationships throughout the world in terms of what we invest in and how we raise our concerns and our values and what we do to bring the world together in peace and security. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, stripping Palestinians of food, housing, healthcare, education, and opportunities to strengthen their livelihoods only threatens to ignite further unrest, instability, and distress. Such a cutoff would not only affect the West Bank in Gaza, but Lebanon, Syria and Jordan, as well. Now, along with our Ranking Member DeLauro, I have visited UNRWA schools, and I can tell you that these young people are grateful to America for our support. Yes, our absence, of course, invites other countries. I want these young people to remember who supports them and who is looking out for them. This bill already puts oversight and accountability requirements on UNRWA before funding can be made available. A total suspension of aid would make it much harder for UNRWA to make sure that these controls are in place and to do proper monitoring, while at the same time cutting off essential services to the Palestinian people that currently are only provided by UNRWA. This is morally wrong. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. A couple of facts. One, UNRWA reviews all host country textbooks used in its schools to ensure consistency with the United Nations' positions, educational appropriateness, and UNESCO standards. Secondly, UNRWA has a zero tolerance policy with regard to staff neutrality violations and takes all such violations seriously, including those raised by organizations. Investigations are launched with involved staff members placed on administrative leave pending investigation. Where allegations are found to be true and, thus, contrary to UNRWA's regulations and rules, appropriate disciplinary measures are imposed up to and including dismissal. Like any other organization which we provide resources to, UNRWA has accountability mechanisms in place and, in fact, follows up with regard to any charges that the gentleman has raised. The damage that is going to be done through this amendment is a damage that is really damaging, first of all, to the children who benefit from UNRWA investments from this country, but it is also damaging to our leadership as it relates to being a real leader in terms of our efforts to seek global peace and security. That is what this bill really should be about. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my colleague's amendment, and I thank Representatives Massie and McGovern for offering it. Cluster bombs are some of the most inhumane weapons on Earth. The United States should not use or stockpile these weapons, and we certainly should not be transferring them to any other nation. Cluster bombs undermine our efforts to promote human rights and dignity everywhere. At a time when we are trying to mobilize the world in defense of human dignity in Ukraine, our cause is undermined by the continued existence of these weapons in the United States' arsenal. Cluster munitions leave bomblets spread over an indiscriminate area, often lying undetonated for generations. Unexploded cluster munitions have maimed or killed countless civilians over the last few decades, including an outrageous number of children. We are still spending millions of dollars to clean up cluster munitions used in Southeast Asia decades ago. We cannot be complicit in their further spread. Nearly 125 countries have banned their use by signing onto the United Nations Convention on Cluster Munitions. For years, this bill, the SFOPS bill, has carried language severely limiting their transfer to other countries.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, let me reiterate that nearly 125 countries have banned their use by signing onto the United States Convention on Cluster Munitions. For years, the SFOPS bill, our bill, has carried language severely limiting their transfer to other countries, but this has not proven to be enough. A complete ban is overdue, and I am proud to support this amendment. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support it.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I can't even imagine the dire straits that would lead me to send my child on their own on a perilous journey to face an uncertain situation at the United States border. No one does that willingly or without exhausting every other alternative. I have been to the border many times. I was born and raised in El Paso, Texas, a border town. I talk to everyone I meet and ask them about the circumstances and why they left their homes. Ninety-nine percent said they did not want to leave where they lived. No one wants to leave their homes. For this amendment to suggest that countries are intentionally sending their youth away or that somehow this desperation would be improved by taking away the education, anticorruption, or nutrition programming that this assistance pays for is ignorant at best and cynical at worst. The gentleman's amendment cut three times the assistance we provide to Guatemala. That is three times for the last full programming year. It cuts double the assistance for Honduras and Guatemala. It is un- implementable, and it is really very cynical and dangerous. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 390. Stated against:

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Madam Chair, as Co-chair of the Congressional Cannabis Caucus, I rise in strong support of this bipartisan amendment No. 36, to the Fiscal Year 2024 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies bill. This amendment would help veterans participate in a legal state medical cannabis program, ensure services are not denied, or limit health care providers' ability to make appropriate recommendations of this treatment option for veterans. Currently, VA physicians aren't allowed to complete medical forms relating to their patients' cannabis usage nor can they assist their patients in enrolling in medical cannabis programs. This amendment would authorize VA physicians and other health care providers to provide recommendations and opinions regarding the use of medical cannabis to veterans who live in states with existing medical programs. Millions of American veterans suffer from post-traumatic stress and depression. Moreover, of the nearly one million veterans who receive opioids to treat painful conditions, more than half continue to consume beyond 90 days. Time after time, data has revealed that the mortality rate from opiate overdoses among VA patients is nearly double the national average. In states where patients can legally access medical cannabis to treat painful conditions, often as a less addictive alternative, the hands of VA physicians should not be tied. Cannabis is currently legal in most states and territories for medicinal or adult use and the VA health system must keep up. I am proud to co-lead this amendment and want to give a special thanks to my Cannabis Caucus Co-chairs, Representatives Mast, Blumenauer and Joyce, for their partnership on enacting comprehensive cannabis reform. I urge my colleagues to vote and support this bipartisan, common- sense amendment that would benefit our armed service members.

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Madam Chair, I rise to express my outrage at the far-right minority in this Congress attempting to force their extreme anti-abortion agenda onto what should be a bipartisan bill. We all know the Dobbs decision last year decimated abortion access, including for over half of active-duty female servicemembers. In response, the Department of Defense announced important changes to safeguard reproductive health care access. Amendment No. 5 aims to revoke those protections and push reproductive care further out of reach. It is a shame that MAGA Republicans can trust women to defend our nation on battlefields but refuse to trust them to make their own healthcare decisions. The military offers vast healthcare and educational benefits to service members. Women continue to be the fastest growing demographic in the military, but restricting their rights tells them they're not welcome. If my colleagues care about personal freedom, they will vote NO on this amendment.

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. Madam Speaker, never before has this country marked the day that a fundamental freedom was taken from us. This Saturday, for the first time, we will. Almost 1 year ago, the Supreme Court's shameful and unprecedented Dobbs decision stripped a constitutional right from all Americans, and the harm it triggered has only grown in the year since. We are here to say enough is enough. Extremist Republicans around the country created this reproductive healthcare crisis against the will of the people with their out-of-touch, anti-choice agenda. People should have the right to make decisions over their own bodies, especially healthcare decisions, not this body, nor politicians, nor Justices. That process has been now aided and enabled by Republicans in this Chamber, so it is time for some accountability right here and right now. Time to put our Speaker and the Members of his party on the record in front of their constituents. It is time, really, to restore the right to abortion. One year after the fall of Roe, we refuse to back down from the fight for reproductive freedom. Our bodies, our choices. That is what this, in essence, is about: freedom. We are here using every single tool at our disposal to force action on this issue. I am proud to join with our fellow Pro-Choice Caucus leaders, our membership, Representative Diana DeGette and Representative Judy Chu, in leading this discharge petition on the Women's Health Protection Act and demanding that the Speaker let us vote. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to sign it.

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 251, I mistakenly voted ``nay'' when I intended to vote ``yea.''

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Madam Speaker, extreme MAGA Republicans have manufactured a crisis and are now extorting the American people with a terrible choice. Either they inflict cruel cuts that hurt everyday families, or they are forcing or trying to force a devastating default on our debt. They are gambling with working people's livelihoods and the global economy, driving us to the brink of economic catastrophe. It is all because they would rather have working people bear the burden of these terrible cuts instead of making billionaires and big corporations pay their fair share in taxes. Madam Speaker, make no mistake. Our constituents are watching, especially those in Speaker McCarthy's district, where 75,000 people would lose Social Security payments; 285,000 people's healthcare benefits would be at risk; and the retirement savings of 89,000 people would be in jeopardy, not to mention the number of veterans who would lose their healthcare in Speaker McCarthy's district. Madam Speaker, from day one, Democrats have been the most responsible and the loudest voices in defending working families from Republicans' extreme behavior. We will continue to call out these games and hostage taking. We must pay our bills.

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday, March 29, 2023, I was unavoidably detained and unable to cast my vote on seven roll call votes. Had I been present, I would have voted NO on Roll Call No. 167; NO on Roll Call No. 168; NO on Roll Call No. 169; NO on Roll Call No. 170; NO on Roll Call No. 171; NO on Roll Call No. 172; and NO on Roll Call No. 173.

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, April 17, 2023, I was unavoidably detained and unable to cast my vote on two roll call votes. Had I been present, I would have voted YES on Roll Call No. 183 and YES on Roll Call No. 184.

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, April 18, 2023, I was unavoidably detained and unable to cast my vote on three roll call votes. Had I been present, I would have voted NO on Roll Call No. 185; NO on Roll Call No. 186; and NO on Roll Call No. 187.

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday, April 19, 2023, I was unavoidably detained and unable to cast my vote on two roll call votes. Had I been present, I would have voted NO on Roll Call No. 188 and YES on Roll Call No. 189.

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, April 20, 2023, I was unavoidably detained and unable to cast my vote on three roll call votes. Had I been present, I would have voted NO on rollcall No. 190; YES on rollcall No. 191; and NO on rollcall No. 192.

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday April 25, 2023, I was unavoidably detained and unable to cast my vote on two roll call votes. Had I been present, I would have voted YES on Roll Call No. 193 and YES on Roll Call No. 194.

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, on Thursday March 30, 2023, I was unavoidably detained and unable to cast my vote on nine roll call votes. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on rollcall No. 174; YEA on rollcall No. 175; YEA on rollcall No. 176; NAY on rollcall No. 177; NAY on rollcall No. 178; NAY on rollcall No. 179; NAY on rollcall No. 180; YEA on rollcall No. 181; and NAY on rollcall No. 182.