Barbara Lee

Ms. LEE of California

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chairman, this amendment has nothing to do with securing our southern border or fentanyl or anything else. What this amendment actually does is misrepresent the actual reality of our policy. There is not and has not been a COVID vaccine requirement for travelers outside of the United States. This amendment would prohibit the use of funds to enforce or implement a COVID vaccine mandate for individuals traveling outside of the United States, which does not exist. This amendment has nothing to do with the southern border or fentanyl. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chairman, U.S. relations with Mexico are strong and vital. Our two countries share a 2,000-mile border with 55 active ports of entry, and our bilateral relations with Mexico have a direct impact on the lives and livelihoods of millions of Americans. I was born and raised in the border town of El Paso, Texas, and I know the importance of the exchanges and support between Mexico and the United States. Our significant cooperation on issues, including trade and economic reform, entrepreneurship and innovation, and energy, are as critical today as they have ever been. Cutting ESF assistance to Mexico would have severe detrimental impacts, crippling the work we do to reduce violence, build a better business environment, and address the root causes of migration. Without our continued support, our assistance to keep youth released from prison from recommitting criminal offenses and being recruited by cartels and other organizations would not be able to continue. The work we do to level the playing field for investors, which includes bringing greater transparency to corrupt business practices and promoting growth in key sectors central to the United States' businesses, such as semiconductors, for example, would be negatively impacted. Cutting ESF would undermine our work to create economic opportunities in high out-migration areas in Mexico's least developed areas and states. A prosperous and safe Mexico should not only and will not only benefit the Mexican people but us, as well. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chairman, I recently returned from representing the United States at the United Nations General Assembly, and I would be happy to talk to any of my colleagues about the value of our partnership with the United Nations system. It is not perfect--no large bureaucracy is--but our ability to improve its operations, make sure its stances reflect our values, and have the United Nations serve its mission for peace hinges on the United States being an active, participating member of the organization. Organizations like UNICEF deliver last-mile education and health services in over 120 countries. If you have ever seen kids in South Sudan--and I have many times--walking with their blue UNICEF backpacks to school or visited with 1 of the 365 million kids under the age of 5 who received malnutrition services last year, you would know that their presence is real and felt by millions of kids and their families around the world. This amendment would cut off contributions to UNICEF. What will these young people think about the United States, quite frankly, when they grow up? I don't think they would be very happy to know that we actually cut off humanitarian assistance, especially what UNICEF delivers on behalf of the United States. The United Nations Development Program worked with 26 countries in 2021 to implement national action plans to tackle radicalization and registered 38 million new voters. Eighty percent of these 38 million were women. They helped 82 countries adopt digital platforms for commerce and governance, cutting down on corruption. This amendment would cut off contributions to UNDP and many others. I fully support the authorization of these entities, but we all know that will not happen overnight. While we work toward that goal, we can't cut off participation and support. Once again, we are retreating from our responsibilities as a global leader throughout the world. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

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

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chairman, it is clear from the science that the most existential crisis the world faces is from the growing climate crisis. It is an emergency. Without intervention, our warming planet will have negative impacts on the United States and throughout the world. This bill already ignores the changing climate and its implications for so many other global challenges, including promoting food and water security, global health, the protection of tropical forests and other vital natural resources, and social and political stability in strategically important regions. According to the World Bank, changes in the environment could put 132 million people back into extreme poverty by 2030, only a few more years. It also could drive the internal migration of an additional 216 million people by 2050. The State Department through the office that this amendment is defunding must be able to work with other countries and use every tool available to us to prevent the worst of increasingly ferocious natural disasters, failing crops, loss of biodiversity, and the rise of new diseases. The climate crisis poses threats to the stability of countries, heightens social and political tensions, and adversely affects food prices and availability. This again, as I said earlier, is according to our own military. The need for foreign assistance will only increase if we do not address this significant driver of crises around the world. At COP27, this is what we heard over and over and over again, so it is critical that we continue to fund the work of this office. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, the gentlewoman says that this office is going to destroy the prosperity of America, but I would suggest that this amendment will continue to destroy our planet. Our young people deserve better. 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 opposition to this amendment.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chairman, I understand the underlying wish for all of us to get back to the way things were prior to the onset of the COVID pandemic. However, a total ban seems a bit excessive. The government as a whole is in competition with the private sector for workers. The priority of where they live has changed for some workers, and without being offered this flexibility, the State Department may find it more difficult to recruit or retrain exceptional employees, which seems to be the goal of some on the other side. Technology now exists that was never contemplated only a few years ago and opens new possibilities for how to be effective, productive participants in any office, whether physically present or not. We need to ensure that our national security and effective diplomacy is conducted by the most capable employees. Options should be available to the Department. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chairman, boy, is this the level we have gotten to, to tell the State Department what meetings they cannot attend? Will we start saying what meetings they have to attend? The Clinton Global Initiative is a platform for government philanthropy, business, media, and academia to discuss identified problems and brainstorm solutions. We should be encouraging such collaboration. The problems facing the world are daunting, and solutions will not come from one place. Let's take good ideas from wherever we can and not micromanage who goes to what meetings. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chairman, I understand what this amendment does, and I don't accept the fact that it is a corrupt organization. I do know the importance of these meetings and conferences in terms of us coming together for solutions to lead us to global peace and security. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, finally, I will just say what this does: It is another attempt to chip away at our diplomacy. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. The Acing CHAIR. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, this science and technology agreement, or STA, with the PRC was extended for 6 months this past August and does not commit us to a longer-term extension. The extension will allow the administration time to amend and strengthen the terms of the STA. Without the STA, the United States would lose valuable insight into China's technical advances. Additionally, many STA outcomes have been deeply beneficial to the United States and the rest of the world. This includes determining the importance of folic acid supplementation in preventing birth defects and decreasing China's air pollution which blows across the Pacific contributing to our West Coast air pollution. Opponents of this agreement cite concerns that the PRC would exploit civilian research partnerships for military purposes; however, all legitimate concerns about information sharing can be addressed through modifications to the STA, rather than eliminating it entirely. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, this amendment would not allow only renegotiation. That is why I oppose it. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, once again, the subject of this amendment has been a public servant. This public servant has worked at USAGM for nearly 25 years speaking truth to Iranians and promoting democratic values of American society. Once again, if we have policy issues, let's discuss it, but, please, we have to stop demeaning our public servants. 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. The subject of this amendment, again, has served in the government for 15 years, including time in two inspectors general offices. Once again, the other side continues to try to really destroy our dedicated public servants. I don't quite understand it. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, bad behavior is not being rewarded. Public servants are doing their jobs, and they are carrying out the policies of the United States of America. This is a personnel decision. All of these would be personnel decisions. Unfortunately, they are being politicized, and it is really a shame and disgrace that our public servants, who represent us so well, are the subject of these despicable attacks. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.