Betty McCollum

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 683, expressing the regret of the House of Representatives for the passage of laws that adversely affected the Chinese in the United States, including the Chinese Exclusion Act. In 1882, the U.S. Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act to prohibit people of Chinese descent from immigrating to the U.S. and becoming naturalized citizens. While the Chinese Exclusion Act was finally repealed in 1943, severe restrictions on Chinese immigration continued until the Immigration Act of 1965. For sixty years of our history, America closed its doors to the Chinese people. During this period, Chinese immigrants already living in the United States were prevented from becoming citizens, regardless of how long they had called this country home. This official discrimination by the government of the United States against people of Chinese descent was deeply wrong and a fundamental violation of America's principles of equality and justice. The pain caused by the Chinese Exclusion Act and other discriminatory policies cannot be undone. Still, Members of Congress have an obligation to recognize these injustices as a means of apology to all Chinese-Americans. Today, one hundred and thirty years after passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act, Congress is voting to express our regret on behalf of the American people. May this action also strengthen the resolve of this body to protect and defend the civil rights of all peoples, in all times. I urge all of my colleagues to support this measure.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, during the Vietnam War another ``secret war'' was taking place in Laos with thousands of Hmong fighters assisting the U.S. The Hmong who risked their lives for the freedom of their country and in the aid of the U.S. suffered tremendously as they served with great courage. This weekend in Maplewood, Minnesota, a little known group of Hmong pilot veterans of the secret war gathered and were recognized by the U.S. Air Force in appreciation of their heroism. Supported by the U.S., some 38 Hmong pilots were trained to fly counterinsurgency missions between 1967 and 1975. Seventeen of those pilots are alive today and were honored, along with posthumous awards for 21 deceased colleagues, by Air Force Chief of Staff, General Norton Schwartz. I, too, would like to recognize and honor those brave Hmong pilots who are living examples of courage, along with the pilots who sacrificed their lives. The secret war was a difficult and painful time for the Hmong people. Today, decades later, Minnesota is the home to many who lived through those years of war and suffering. As Hmong Americans of all generations contribute to making Minnesota and the U.S. a stronger and more prosperous land, we must never forget the service, sacrifice, and courage of the Hmong warriors who fought on land and in the sky for freedom during the secret war. Again, I join in the recognition and remembrance of 38 Hmong pilots who risked their lives for freedom.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I was unable to vote on the following amendments to H.R. 5325 because I was attending an official event in my home state of Minnesota with President Obama. On rollcall vote 306, I would have voted ``no'' on the Scalise Amendment. On rollcall vote 307, I would have voted ``no'' on the King Amendment. On rollcall vote 308, I would have voted ``yes'' on the Moran Amendment. On rollcall vote 309, I would have voted ``no'' on the Hultgren Amendment. On rollcall vote 310, I would have voted ``no'' on the Chaffetz Amendment. On rollcall vote 311, I would have voted ``no'' on the McClintock Amendment. On rollcall vote 312, I would have voted ``yes'' on the Kaptur Amendment. On rollcall vote 313, I would have voted ``yes'' on the Tonko Amendment. On rollcall vote 314, I would have voted ``yes'' on the Hahn Amendment.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, my vote on the amendment to H.R. 5855 offered by Congressman Ted Poe was not recorded due to a technical error. I intended to vote ``no.''

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan for the time. Mr. Speaker, I want the Affordable Care Act to be fully implemented for the benefit of all Americans. I also support a healthy growing medical device industry in Minnesota and across America. I support eliminating this medical device tax, which should never have been included in the Affordable Care Act. But at the same time, I strongly oppose the offset in this bill. This Tea Party Republican-controlled House has voted over and over again to eliminate health reform's protections and benefits, denying millions of Americans access to lifesaving care, including medical devices. The Republican goal is to kill health care reform; my goal is to strengthen it. Today, I will vote to send this bill to the Senate, where I know a responsible offset can be found. My two Minnesota Senators are committed to repealing this tax, and they will find an offset that does no harm. Eliminate this tax and strengthen health care for all Americans, that's my goal.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act, PRENDA, of 2012 (H.R. 3541). Every Member of the House opposes the abhorrent practice of gender selection, including me. In Minnesota, prohibiting sex-selective abortions has passed on a bipartisan basis in the State House of Representatives in 2007 and 2010. Unfortunately, the bill before us is not about protecting girls. It is about politics. H.R. 3541 is an attempt by House Republicans to restrict women's access to legal reproductive health care services by threatening medical professionals with legal action. Under this bill, health care providers could face civil penalties or even criminal prosecution for failing to report confidential conversations they have with woman about terminating a pregnancy. Ten leading medical associations oppose this bill, arguing that ``H.R. 3541 would require that medical and mental health professionals violate doctor-patient confidentiality and report known or suspected violations.'' Physicians take an oath to be trusted counselors for their patients, not secret informers for the government. Many recite the modem version of the Hippocratic Oath, which states: ``I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know.'' It is wrong for Congress to empower politicians to interfere in the very personal and private relationship between a woman and her health care provider. Women must have control over their own health care decisions and be able to trust their doctors to provide confidential medical guidance free from ideologically-driven misinformation or government interference. H.R. 3541 threatens these basic principles. Congress can and should do more to fight gender discrimination and improve the lives of women and girls. I urge my Republican colleagues to join House Democrats in our efforts to increase women's access to affordable, comprehensive health care, achieve pay equity and ensure all girls can obtain a quality education. Bipartisan support for such policies would be the strongest statement about America's commitment to gender equality. I urge all my colleagues to oppose H.R. 3541.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Madam Chair, I rise in support of H.R. 5854, the FY13 Military Construction-VA Appropriations Act. This subcommittee has a strong record of bipartisan collaboration and I want to commend Subcommittee Chairman Culberson and Ranking Member Bishop for their leadership in advancing this important bill. However, I remain disappointed that the Republican Majority continues to depart from the spending caps agreed to in the Budget Control Act of 2011, which already mandates deep spending cuts across the Federal budget. As we continue passing appropriations bills under the constraints of the Republican Budget Resolution, it is crucial that we protect our veterans and military families from any deep and harmful budget cuts. Members of the Committee were able to do so in this bill by providing ample funding for veterans healthcare, education, and construction improvements on our military bases. It also takes much needed action to improve the VA and Pentagon's health records sharing program. It is an honor to serve on the subcommittee that ensures that our armed forces, their families, and our veterans get the critical resources they have earned. After listening to veterans in my District and meeting with military families on bases across the country, I worked to further strengthen H.R. 5854 to reflect their priorities. I am pleased that this bill contains language that helps women veterans gain access to important medical needs, including prosthetics for women amputees. This bill also contains language that fully supports the Defense and Veterans Affairs Departments in their efforts to increase their use of clean alternative energy sources. Lastly, it encourages our military to continue their strong commitment to providing the best quality child care and housing on base. Although the Subcommittee reported a ``clean'' bill, I was disappointed that a harmful and unnecessary amendment restricting project labor agreements was adopted during Full Committee markup. I am strongly opposed to the inclusion of the provision and it is my hope that members vote to remove it before final passage of the legislation. America has a debt to pay for the service and sacrifices our veterans have made for all of us. The funding provided in this bill is absolutely essential to provide the services and support to all our veterans, especially those returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. We can and must meet our commitments to the millions of veterans, service members and their families here and across the world. Passage of this bill would help accomplish this and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the teachers, administrators and students of Garlough Environmental Magnet School in West St. Paul, Minnesota which has been named a recipient of the first annual U.S. Department of Education's Green Ribbon Schools Award. On behalf of the families in Minnesota's Fourth District, I am proud to extend my sincere congratulations to Garlough Environmental Magnet School. The Fourth Congressional District of Minnesota is fortunate to be home to many schools that deliver high quality environmental education. For the past five years, Garlough Environmental Magnet School has been a leader, setting the standard for environmental excellence, winning high praise and numerous accolades throughout the State and Nation while nearly doubling its enrollment in the process. Part of their success is due to outstanding community partnerships that enable students to get out-of-classroom learning experiences. One of the cornerstone partnerships is with the Dodge Nature Center. Starting in 2007, Garlough teamed up with the conveniently located community nature center to provide students outdoor learning opportunities. The nature sanctuary serves as a 320-acre living science lab where students can participate in field studies, use scientific equipment in biological measuring, and study the sanctuary's beehives and farms. Garlough's combination of a targeted curriculum with outside learning opportunities has produced natural experiences that have enhanced students' intellectual, social, emotional and physical development. Garlough Elementary is a natural choice for the first-ever round of the U.S. Department of Education Green Ribbon Schools Awards. In September 2011, in coordination with the Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of Education initiated a new federal- recognition program that honored schools implementing environmentally- friendly policies. The selection process targets schools that exercise a comprehensive approach to creating green environments though reducing environmental impact, promoting health, and ensuring high quality environmental and outdoor education. The Green Ribbon Award highlights the necessity of educating our students in preparation for the 21st century global economy, an economy that will rely more on green industry and technology. As our Nation continues on into the 21st century, our global competitiveness will be tied into jobs that center on technology, science, math, and renewable energy development. To ensure that the United States continues to be an international leader, schools must create engaging curriculum that focuses on preparing students for success. Garlough Environmental Magnet School sets a great example for this strategy. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to submit this statement for the Congressional Record in honor of Garlough Environmental Magnet School's recognition as a U.S. Department of Education Green Ribbon School.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Food and Drug Administration Reform Act of 2012 (H.R. 5651), which will strengthen Minnesota's health care system and economy. The Food and Drug Administration Reform Act reauthorizes the FDA's drug and medical device user fee programs at a critical time. If these user fees are not reauthorized before the end of June, the FDA will not have the funding it needs to ensure life-saving drugs and medical devices are available to patients in a timely fashion. This bill also accelerates approval of treatments to address rare diseases, reauthorizes two successful pediatric programs, and helps to prevent drug shortages that are affecting families across the country. Overall, the reforms in H.R. 5651 bring the FDA into the 21st century by making the agency more responsive to changes in the U.S. health care system and better equipped to oversee a globalized market for medical products. This legislation will deliver safer treatments, faster innovation and better care for millions of American patients and families. This legislation is especially important for America's medical device sector. The approval process for medical devices at the FDA slowed by as much as 60 percent since 2005, according to the General Accountability Office. While longer approval times do not contribute to patient safety, they have delayed or even denied life-saving treatments to patients and undermined the international competitiveness of the U.S. medical device industry. There is general agreement that the broken approval process for medical devices is doing real harm to patients and workers. This is especially concerning for Minnesota because our state is a hub of medical device innovation; the sector employs thousands of highly-skilled workers in our state. H.R. 5651 reforms and reauthorizes the medical device user fee program through fiscal year 2017, providing years of stability and increased regulatory certainty for companies that range from local small business start-ups to global Fortune 500 enterprises. Moreover, the bill will foster innovation in the sector by speeding market access for new and improved medical devices without compromising patient safety. The Food and Drug Administration Reform Act is a rare bipartisan success story. This legislation comes to the House floor after months of close bipartisan collaboration. The Senate approved a bill very similar to H.R. 5651 by a vote of 96 to 1. The House Energy and Commerce Committee voted 46 to 0 to move H.R. 5651 to the floor. Both Democratic and Republican members of Congress understand that a high- quality health care system requires a strong and effective FDA. Today's bill is a major step forward for the FDA and a demonstration of legislative compromise for the good of the American people. I urge all my colleagues to support H.R. 5651.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor my dear friend and outstanding tribal leader, Mille Lacs Band Chief Executive Marge Anderson. After 30 years of service to our community, Marge is retiring. I know I'm not alone in saying she will be missed. Ms. Anderson first reached out to me when I was in the Minnesota State house. The education she provided on Indian treaty rights and the U.S. Constitution's guarantees of tribal sovereignty are lessons I still carry with me. The first woman elected to serve as chief executive for the Mille Lacs Band, Marge promoted tribal self-governance, economic development, education, health care, and infrastructure. Chief Executive Anderson has also been recognized for her dedication to the welfare of Native American children, families, and communities by regional tribal organizations all around this country. I thank her for her inspired leadership, for her protection of tribal sovereignty, for her guidance and her friendship. Marge, Miigwetch--thank you.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 205, the HEARTH Act. Under current law, many Native Americans living on tribal land have to fight government bureaucracy to buy a home. Just like other Americans pursuing the American dream of homeownership, they find a house, get a mortgage approved, and make an offer. It's at this point that the dream often turns into a nightmare for tribal members. Before they can close on a house, they have to get approval from the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to lease the land--and this approval process can take as long as two years. During this extremely long wait, the mortgage approval usually expires and sellers can rarely wait this long. With such a daunting and long process, it's no wonder that tribal members give up and decide to move off the reservation and away from their families and communities, just to own a home. The good news is that the bill before us today would allow tribal governments to lease the land directly, reducing the approval time and making this process much easier for Native Americans to buy homes on tribal land. The tribes would initially receive approval for their own leasing regulations from the Secretary of Interior, and could then process lease applications internally, rather than having them all be processed by the BIA. This leasing structure would also encourage community and economic development on tribal lands, and spur renewable energy development in Indian Country. Tribal governments will be able to control their own land and direct the necessary resources to construct community centers and fill commercial spaces. This tribal control is critical, and I wholeheartedly support it and encourage my colleagues to join me in voting yes. This bill is badly needed so that Native Americans do not have to endlessly wait to pursue the American dream. As a member of the Congressional Native American Caucus, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 205.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, over the past four years, the Department of Defense has spent $1.55 billion for its 150 military bands and more than 5,000 full-time, professional military musicians. In FY 2013, from funds authorized in this bill, the Pentagon plans to spend another $388 million for military bands. My amendment is very simple. It caps spending on military bands in this bill at $200 million. I was raised in a military family, Mr. Chair, and I understand the important role that bands have in our nation's proud military tradition. That's why my amendment provides $200 million for the Pentagon to continue this tradition. But as families and communities across this country see critical services reduced or eliminated because of Republican budget cuts, I think it's time we ask the Pentagon to make a small sacrifice in its musical budget. Just last week, 218 of my Republican colleagues voted to eliminate health coverage for at least 300,000 children by cutting the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP). Today, I urge my colleagues to cut funding for military bands with the same sense of urgency that they cut care for poor kids. In passing H.R. 5652, the Sequester Replacement Reconciliation Act of 2012, House Republicans voted to shield the Pentagon from the automatic spending cuts agreed to in the Budget Control Act. They did it by cutting over $300 billion from domestic programs for our most vulnerable citizens. In order to protect the Pentagon from sequestration--including military bands--and actually increase defense spending, the House voted to: Cut nutrition assistance for low-income seniors, people with disabilities, and families. Eliminate funding for Meals On Wheels for seniors. Slash child care services for working parents, and protective services for abused children. Deny school lunches to more than 200,000 children. Repeal the Prevention and Public Health Fund, which supports breast cancer screenings for women, immunizations for children, and community education efforts. Repeal funding for state health insurance exchanges, which will make it easier for families to find affordable health insurance. Those were cuts that will have a real, severe impact on families in Minnesota and throughout the United States. For my 218 Republican colleagues who voted last week to replace the defense sequester cuts by slashing domestic programs, this should be an easy vote. Surely, no one in this body can claim that funding for the Air Force Wild Blue Country Band, or the Navy Crescent Brass Quintet Band, or the Army String Band, or the Navy Show band, or the Air Force Singing Sergeants is more important than funding programs critical to our nation's children, seniors, and working families. One of our primary duties as Members of Congress is to provide the resources and policy guidance necessary to protect our nation. We must make certain that every dollar in this bill contributes to our national defense. In a fiscal crisis, $200 million must be enough for the Department of Defense to continue its time-honored musical tradition. If House Republicans are asking low income families, seniors, and disabled Americans to go without the services they rely on, it's time the Pentagon makes do with $200 million for military bands. It's time we ask the Army to do with fewer than 100 bands. It's time we ask the Air Force to scale back its Country Western band. It's time we ask the Pentagon to share some of the sacrifice that American families are being asked to bear. And with $200 million, the military music will surely continue to grace our nation's parades and ceremonies, and provide comfort to our military families at funerals. Mr. Chair, this exact amendment was adopted unanimously by voice vote and passed by the full House of Representatives in last year's National Defense Authorization bill, H.R. 1540. Why? Because in this time of fiscal crisis and deep cuts to discretionary spending, it makes no sense to borrow nearly $400 million from Communist China to pay for military bands. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak in opposition to this bill. The Violence Against Women Act has never been a divisive piece of legislation until this Tea Party Majority came into power. Instead of bringing the bipartisan bill already passed by the Senate to this floor for a vote, House Republicans are attempting to pass a partisan and discriminatory bill that eliminates protections for violent crime victims. The Republican bill on the floor this week eliminates long-standing critical protections for immigrant women who are the victims of crime and abuse. This bill rejects the new protections adopted by the Senate for gay and transgender individuals. The LGBT community experiences domestic violence at roughly the same rates as other populations, but these survivors often face discrimination when seeking the services they need to escape abuse. The bipartisan Senate bill included provisions to ensure LGBT victims can find refuge and access needed services. This bill also eliminates the new provisions for Native American victims. One in three native women is raped in her lifetime, three in five suffer domestic assault, and a majority of the perpetrators are non-Indian. Considering these horrific statistics, I am dismayed that the bill the Republican majority brought before us today does not include adequate protections for Native women. The provision included at the last minute--section 1006--actually takes a step backward by placing the burden on the woman seeking protection, who would have to travel to a federal court and hire legal counsel. It forces tribal women to rely on federal law enforcement, who already decline to prosecute more than half of the violent crimes in Indian Country, and an even higher percentage of sexual assault cases. According to the National Congress of American Indians, in one alarming case, a woman was assaulted by her non-Native boyfriend and had her nose broken. When she filed a police report, she heard that the injury was just broken cartilage, and that the case would not be prosecuted because U.S. attorneys will not take a domestic violence case unless the disfigurement is permanent. This is the status quo that the bill before us will maintain. It is unacceptable, especially with a better bipartisan alternative available. The Violence Against Women Act reauthorization bill passed by the Senate, S. 1925, had provisions that provided for tribes to prosecute a non-Indian for domestic violence in a constitutional manner. Defendants would still have access to free counsel, to due process, and to a jury of their peers including non-Indians. These common-sense provisions were developed during years of consultation with tribes and were recommended by the U.S. Department of Justice after studying the crisis. Tribal communities need this authority at the local level to protect their mothers, sisters and daughters from abuse. If the House passed the bipartisan Senate bill, it would send a clear message that this country does not tolerate violence against women, regardless of their ethnicity or sexual orientation. Moreover, it would show Congress' commitment to reducing domestic violence, protecting women from sexual assault and securing justice for victims. Over a decade ago, VAWA passed the House and Senate by votes of 371 1 and 95 0, respectively, and then this overwhelming support was repeated in 2005. Yet here we are today, with my colleagues across the aisle turning this into a divisive and partisan issue. It is wrong, it is unfair to victims of domestic violence, and it is the latest example of this Tea Party Republican Majority's failure to find common ground even on issues that have been historically non- controversial. We must do better for all women who experience violence, which is why I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill. I remain hopeful that the House will have the opportunity to consider the Senate-passed bipartisan language instead. The purpose of VAWA has always been to ensure that all victims of violence are protected and that their basic human rights are upheld, no matter one's sexual orientation, ethnicity, or legal status in this country, and this bill shirks that responsibility.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. I oppose this bill. For the first time, the Violence Against Women Act is now a divisive piece of legislation. We could be voting on a bipartisan bill already passed by the Senate, but instead, the Tea Party majority of the Republicans has chosen to bring a bipartisan discriminatory bill to the floor today, and it eliminates protections for victims of violent crime. All women who experience violence have the right to be protected. They need to know that their attackers will be tried in a court of law. And the purpose of VAWA has always been to ensure that all victims of violence are protected and that all their basic human rights are upheld no matter what one's sexual orientation, ethnicity, or legal status in this country is. This country failed to protect all women, and that's why this legislation failed to get the support from the advocates and from women all across this country. I oppose this measure, and I encourage my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 4045. This bill will ensure that all the servicemembers returning from overseas, including the Minnesota National Guard's Red Bulls, will receive the full benefits they were promised. Last year, after more than 2,000 of Minnesota's brave soldiers had already been mobilized for war, the Department of Defense reduced the amount of leave that the servicemembers would receive. For the Pentagon to apply this change to soldiers already deployed is simply unacceptable. Our men and women in uniform must be able to count on the benefits their Nation promised them when they left home. H.R. 4045 will correct this serious error by exempting servicemembers, like the Red Bulls, who had already deployed before the Pentagon's policy shift. Passage of this bill is a victory for the entire Minnesota delegation, which worked so hard on it. I especially want to thank Mr. Kline for his perseverance on this issue and for getting it to the floor today. Thank you very much, Mr. Kline. But, as I said, I applaud all my colleagues for coming together on behalf of the Minnesota Red Bulls and all of the servicemembers and their families. America's men and women in uniform dedicate their lives to defending our Nation and its values, and we are grateful for their outstanding service. As a daughter of a World War II disabled veteran of the Army Air Corps and as a member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Affairs, it is a special honor to work on behalf of those who have served our country and to make sure that they receive every benefit that they've earned. As the Red Bulls return to Minnesota from another deployment, they know they can count on their entire Minnesota congressional delegation to have their back. I urge my colleagues to support this critical legislation.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, today's global challenges demand global solutions. From poverty and hunger, to climate change and the financial crisis, the complexities of the 21st century require not only American leadership, but also effective global institutions. While the world continues to change at a rapid pace, the World Bank--with its wealth of experts and resources for fighting poverty--is a critical multilateral instrument for addressing these global challenges. During his 5-year term, outgoing World Bank President Robert Zoellick has helped lead a turnaround at the World Bank and reestablished for the United States a key partner in advancing vital U.S. interests abroad. President Zoellick has placed new focus on pragmatic, common- sense solutions. He recognized that in order to meet the challenges of a changing world, the World Bank had to change along with it. In the last 5 years, the Bank has transitioned from a once rigid top-down approach to development, into a flexible, collaborative, and more democratic institution. President Zoellick recognized a critical reality: that alleviating poverty is vital to economic recovery. Investments in global health, education, food security, and empowering women and girls not only lift millions of people out of poverty, but create important sources for economic growth. These investments make the world a safer place to do business. Even as it responded to the global financial crisis, the World Bank under President Zoellick raised $90 billion for the International Development Association, the Bank's fund for the world's poorest. The World Bank worked with developing countries to strengthen their social safety nets and build resilience to crisis, and invested in critical infrastructure to remove investment barriers. At the World Bank, President Zoellick leaves behind a real, tangible legacy. His push to institute a ``Freedom of Information Act'' unleashes public innovation by allowing free, open access to the World Bank's trove of economic data. This unprecedented step has ushered in a new era of accountability and transparency. President Zoellick created the Climate Investment Funds, which have already leveraged nearly $50 billion for practical investments in energy efficiency, technology development, and combating deforestation. These remarkable contributions will continue long after President Zoellick leaves the World Bank next month. As co-chair of the bipartisan Caucus for Congressional-World Bank Dialogue, I look forward to working with the World Bank to continue the progress achieved during President Zoellick's tenure. Dr. Jim Yong Kim, the World Bank's next president, should give Congress--a major investor in the World Bank--confidence that an American with a proven track record of success will be advancing this shared vision for global development. Dr. Kim's significant contributions to global health, his commitment to partnerships on the ground in developing countries, and his proven management skills will make him an effective leader of this vital multilateral institution. Together, we can build on the innovation, accountability, and effectiveness that President Zoellick has brought to the World Bank during his successful 5-year term.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, once again the U.S. House is acting on legislation, this time H.R. 4133, to restate what has been stated frequently in Congress, by President Obama, and by virtually every candidate running for federal office in the United States: that the U.S. and the State of Israel have a special bilateral and a very important strategic relationship. Congress strongly supports the State of Israel and we demonstrate our support annually by providing many billions of dollars in direct taxpayer funded assistance to ensure Israel's security. As a former member of the State and Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee, I have helped to pass funding, often in excess of $3 billion in foreign aid, to ensure Israel's security. While Congress is ever mindful of Israel's security, we have a Constitutional duty to first and foremost protect and defend the security of the United States. No one is more aware of this than President Obama. Over the past year, the Obama Administration has been leading a coalition of nations to peacefully prevent Iran--through tough economic sanctions--from starting down the path to developing a nuclear weapon. These sanctions are working and they must be allowed to continue to work. I fully support the efforts of the Obama Administration and our allies to keep the pressure on Iran. The Government of Israel has also been focused on Iran and has articulated repeatedly that a unilateral military strike against Iran is a possibility. According to the Washington Post on February 2, 2012: ``U.S. officials fear being blindsided by an Israeli strike that could have widespread economic and security implications and might only delay, not end, Iran's nuclear pursuit. `` `The Obama administration is concerned that Israel could attack Iranian nuclear facilities this year, having given Washington little or no warning,' said Cliff Kupchan, a former State Department official who specialized in Iran policy during the Clinton administration and recently returned from meetings with Israeli officials. He said `Israel has refused to assure Washington that prior notice would be provided.' ``Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta is one of several administration officials to express concern publicly that Israel is positioning itself for a surprise attack. Last month, the administration dispatched the Joint Chiefs chairman, Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, to the Israeli capital for high level discussions about the possibility of a unilateral Israeli strike. `Israel has indicated they're considering this, and we have indicated our concerns,' Panetta told reporters.'' While Israel's prime minister has not been shy about the possibility of an Israeli military strike, the consequences of such action would be significant for the U.S. According to the New York Times on February 29, 2012, ``American officials who have assessed the likely Iranian responses to any attack by Israel on its nuclear program believe that Iran would retaliate by launching missiles on Israel and terrorist- style attacks on United States civilian and military personnel overseas.'' Despite the strong belief that Israeli military action against Iran would result in direct attacks on Americans and American interests, many right-wing politicians seem to believe that Americans and members of our armed forces, after eleven years of war in Afghanistan and nine years of war in Iraq, are desirous of a war with Iran precipitated by unilateral Israeli military action. As one Middle East expert stated, ``Israel can commence a war with Iran, but it may well take U.S. involvement to conclude it.'' Let me be clear, I do not want U.S. forces engaged in a war with Iran. My constituents do not want a war with Iran. Clearly, I do not want to see Iran developing nuclear weapons, but the Obama Administration and the international community are working to keep the pressure on the leadership in Tehran. In February and March of 2012, the neo-conservative ``go to war with Iran'' echo chamber was appallingly reminiscent of 2002 when the Bush Administration (along with many of the same conservative pundits who are supportive of an Israeli attack on Iran today) declared the definitive presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq a threat to U.S. national security. The result of their deception is now well known. We have seen this same march to war before, built on a foundation of half-truths, distorted intelligence, and politically motivated deceit. President Obama has called out those who would send other peoples' sons and daughters to war, but never put themselves in harm's way. Addressing the annual AIPAC conference in Washington on March 4, 2012, the New York Times reported President Obama as saying, ``Already, there is too much loose talk of war. Over the last few weeks such talk has only benefited the Iranian government by driving up the price of oil, which they depend on to fund their nuclear program. For the sake of Israel's security, America's security and the peace and security of the world, now is not the time for bluster.'' To be clear, an Iran armed with nuclear weapons would be a serious threat to the stability of the Middle East and to the security of the United States and our allies. America's top intelligence analysts, however, have repeatedly stated that there is no concrete evidence that Iran has yet decided to build a nuclear bomb. In his January 2012 testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper stated that ``they are certainly moving on that path, but we don't believe they have actually made the decision to go ahead with a nuclear weapon.'' Yet today, the House of Representatives is voting on H.R. 4133 which calls upon the U.S. to provide Israel with ``defense articles and defense services through such mechanisms as appropriate, to include air refueling tankers, missile defense capabilities, and specialized munitions.' By providing this specialized military capacity--all required by Israel for an airstrike on Iran--the U.S. would be removing the very limiting factors that may be preventing Israel from launching an attack that could draw the U.S. into another war. The Director of the Central Intelligence Agency from 2006 to 2009, Michael Hayden, has been quoted as saying that airstrikes capable of seriously setting back Iran's nuclear program were ``beyond the capacity'' of Israel, in part because of distance that aircraft would have to travel and the scale of the task, according to a February 19, 2012 New York Times article entitled, ``Iran Raid Seen as a Huge Task for Israeli Jets.'' The same Times article states, ``Israel has American-built F 15I and F 16I fighter jets that can carry bombs to the targets, but their range--depending on altitude, speed and payload--falls far short of the minimum 2,000 mile round trip. . .Israel would have to use airborne refueling planes, called tankers, but Israel is not thought to have enough.'' The same article identifies ``another major hurdle is Israel's inventory of bombs capable of penetrating the Natanz (nuclear) facility, believed to be buried under 30 feet of reinforced concrete, and the Fordo site, which is built into a mountain. Assuming it does not use a nuclear device, Israel has American-made GBU 28 5,000 pound `bunker buster' bombs that could damage such hardened targets, although it is unclear how far down they can go.'' By supplying air refueling tanks and bunker buster bombs to Israel that would then be used in a military strike against Iran, the U.S, would be explicitly supporting the military action in the eyes of the Iranians and the world, even if Israel never notified the U.S. of its actual intent to strike. Such a level of vulnerability and exposure on the part of the U.S. is not tolerable. Israel is an ally, but their primary interest is their own national security, not the security of the U.S. On a final note, the fact that the New York Times referenced that Israel has the option of using a ``nuclear device'' against the Iranian targets should be cause for tremendous alarm for Americans. Even the consideration of using a nuclear weapon against Iran to prevent it from pursuing a nuclear weapons program should be categorically rejected by Israel, the U.S., and all nations committed to nuclear non- proliferation. The worst kept secret in the world is that Israel possesses nuclear weapons. The U.S. and this Congress should be guaranteed that our ally, Israel, will never use those weapons as a first-strike capability. Israel's security is important and I have voted dozens of times to provide funds, weapons, and support. H.R. 4133 is more than ``a sense of Congress,'' more than feelings. It sends a signal to the world that Israel should be provided with the military capacity by the U.S. to strike Iran. That I do not support. Out of respect for the importance of the U.S.-Israel relationship I intend to vote ``present'' on H.R. 4133, but I must express my strong opposition to endorsing any actions by a foreign power that could potentially drag the U.S. into a military conflict with Iran.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor the 95th anniversary of the Junior League of St. Paul, JLSP. The Junior League of St. Paul was founded in 1917 by Elizabeth Ames Jackson, a native of St. Paul and two of her friends Elizabeth Crunden Skinner and Anne Turney White. This chapter was the 19th Junior League created in the United States following the founding of the first Junior League in New York City in 1901. The Junior League is committed to promoting voluntarism, developing the potential of women and improving communities through the effective action and leadership of trained volunteers. During its early years, the JLSP collaborated with local community organizations, including the World War I Red Cross Relief Campaign and the Community Chest, to help build a better St. Paul and reflect the overall mission of the organization. Over the years, the Junior League of St. Paul moved beyond only collaborating with local, existing organizations, to fostering new organizations. As the community evolved, so did the JLSP. From the creation the Children's Hospital Association, Keystone Community Services, United Arts and Lifetrack Resources to the Hmong Art Project, Silent Witness, and most recently Building Bonds through Reading and Play the Junior League of St. Paul has a long legacy of responding to needs of the community and laying the foundation for organizations that continue to provide needed programs and services to residents in St. Paul and the surrounding communities. These charitable and educational activities go beyond simply helping the members of the community--they also provide meaningful volunteer opportunities and leadership development to the women who are involved with the JLSP. The skills and talents the members develop through League activities help them in other aspects of their lives. The Junior League of St. Paul has been a valuable asset to St. Paul through their efforts to identify and take on the challenges they see impacting the community. Their hard work is reflected in the numerous organizations they have worked with, the many people who have been served by various JLSP programs, and by its members current and past. I am proud to comment the Junior League of St. Paul on 95 years of success and wish them much success in the years to come. Mr. Speaker, in honor of the 95th anniversary of the Junior League of St. Paul, I am pleased to submit this statement for the Congressional Record.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 4628, which places partisan politics ahead of America's students and the health of Minnesota communities. If Congress does not act by July 1, interest rates on student loans will double for 7 million American students. This is a financial crisis for these students and their families, who will be forced to pay an additional $1000 this year in loan repayment costs. America's college students are already graduating with an average debt burden of $25,000--higher than any time in our nation's history. President Obama and Democrats in Congress are committed to lowering the costs of college and have introduced legislation to block this impending rate increase. For months, Republicans in Congress have completely ignored this problem. The fiscal year 2013 budget that House Republicans adopted in March did not include a fix for skyrocketing student loan rate increase, but it did provide millionaires and billionaires an average tax cut of $400,000. The Republican Chairman of the House Education and Workforce Committee--my colleague from Minnesota--opposed extending the current low interest rate as recently as last week. On April 20, The New York Times reported Chairman Kline saying a fix would be ``too costly'' and that ``we must choose between allowing interest rates to rise or piling billions of dollars on the backs of taxpayers.'' Thankfully, House Republicans ended their opposition to lower student loan rates this week under pressure from President Obama and millions of American students. The majority introduced H.R. 4628 to extend the current 3.4 percent interest rate on federal Stafford loans for an additional year at a cost of $6.3 billion. Unfortunately, House Republicans are cynically choosing to offset the costs of H.R. 4628 by repealing the Prevention and Public Health Fund created by the new health care reform law. Cutting health care for millions of Americans to prevent rising student loan rates is an unacceptable and unnecessary choice. Minnesota communities rely on this Fund to pay for cancer detection, childhood immunizations, newborn screening and other critical health care services that help to keep our communities healthy and save our country billions in long-term health care costs. Women in Minnesota will be disproportionally impacted due to the loss of access to services such as breast and cervical cancer screening. Nearly 800 community organizations across the country oppose H.R. 4628 because of these damaging cuts, including the American Lung Association, American Heart Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, the Association of Maternal and Child Health, and the National Association of County and City Health Officials. The White House opposes H.R. 4628 and told the House Republican majority to expect a veto from President Obama. This partisan legislation will only further delay a solution for students. Democrats in Congress have a plan to protect students against rising loan costs without adding to deficits or harming communities. I am a co-sponsor of H.R. 4816, which prevents the doubling of interest rates on student loans and offsets the costs by eliminating wasteful taxpayer subsidies for the five biggest oil corporations that are making record profits. This legislation is a win for students and a win for American taxpayers. H.R. 4816 reflects the priorities of the American people and creates a path for bipartisan consensus. I urge my colleges to reject H.R. 4628 and, instead, pass the common- sense alternative offered by House Democrats.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3336. This misguided bill would remove crucial oversight of the trillion dollar derivatives market and strip away key reforms contained in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform law. Although the stated intent of H.R. 3336 is to increase credit availability to small businesses, it would do nothing more than provide a loophole for participants in the derivatives market to escape oversight and evade accountability. For the past two years, the CFTC and other government regulators of Wall Street have accepted public comments and participated in public hearings in an effort to implement sensible regulations that do not constrain credit lending to small businesses. Furthermore, the Dodd-Frank law already contains protections for small financial institutions, commercial businesses, and investors that use derivatives for legitimate hedging of risk. H.R. 3336 would exempt large financial institutions with up to $200 billion in credit derivatives exposure from CFTC oversight. In addition, the bill could also exempt major oil companies such as Shell Oil and Koch Trading from oversight for their swaps dealing activities in the energy market, allowing for more financial speculation that drives up the price of gasoline. Given the crucial role of derivatives in the 2008 financial crisis, eliminating these important CFTC protections would jeopardize investor confidence and threaten the stability of our financial sector. I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 3336.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 4348, the Surface Transportation Extension Act, Part II. With this legislation, House Republicans are making all the wrong choices for Minnesota, and for the country. House Republicans are choosing to bring another short-term extension of transportation policies to the floor instead of the two-year measure that passed the Senate with an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 74 22. The Senate bill would save or create over two million jobs, including an estimated 28,100 jobs in Minnesota. This legislation has been introduced in the House, and I am an original co-sponsor. The Senate bill is not perfect, and I encourage my Senate colleagues to continue working with stakeholders--including tribal leaders, small businesses, and local governments--to strengthen this bipartisan legislation. But this compromise solution will put people to work right away and provide the certainty that transportation agencies and businesses need. For over a month, House Republican leaders have refused to allow a vote. It is completely unacceptable that Tea Party Republicans in the House continue to stand in the way of two million American jobs at a time when construction workers across the country are sitting on the bench, desperate to work. In this bill, my Republican colleagues also chose to include language that will increase gas prices for Minnesota families. H.R. 4348 grants approval for construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, which would divert Canadian oil away from Minnesota refineries to refineries in the Gulf of Mexico. In a March 2011 Star Tribune op-ed, respected oil economist Philip Verleger explained this diversion would reduce oil supply in the Upper Midwest, raising costs for Minnesotans at the gas station and grocery store. In fact, Verleger said the country as a whole would end up paying nearly $5 billion more for oil than we do today if the pipeline is built. This legislation also includes language offered by Congressman Reid Ribble (R WI) to limit the ability of local governments and citizens to participate in transportation projects in their communities. These changes to the National Environmental Policy Act would restrict local influence in transportation decisions that directly affect residents' health, safety, and quality of life. I urge my colleagues to reject this broken bill, which guarantees more uncertainty for states, fewer jobs for workers, higher gas prices for drivers and less control for local governments. Instead, we should choose the bipartisan alternative and immediately pass the Senate legislation to put two million Americans back to work.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 9, the so-called Small Business Tax Cut Act. This bill is an incredible waste of taxpayer money that will do nothing to grow America's economy or create jobs. House Republicans admit that H.R. 9 will add $46 billion to federal deficits and force our country to borrow more money from foreign countries such as China. They argue deficit-spending is worthwhile because their bill will create jobs and stimulate economic growth. Unfortunately, there is absolutely no evidence to support their claim. The nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation determined the economic impact of this Republican bill is ``so small as to be incalculable.'' The country's wealthiest individuals and corporations are the true beneficiaries of this legislation. H.R. 9 will provide over 125,000 millionaires with an average tax cut of $58,000. According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, nearly half of the bill's benefits go to individuals with annual income over $1 million even though this group comprises just 0.5 percent of all taxpayers and 4 percent of all small- business employers. The largest tax breaks in this bill go to law partners, corporate consultants, lobbyists, hedge fund managers, and other highly profitable, private enterprises that do not need extra support from America's taxpayers. The tax benefits in H.R. 9 are so poorly targeted that reality-show stars Donald Trump, Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian qualify as ``small businesses'' and will receive taxpayer-financed handouts. In fact, this legislation provides tax breaks to pornography shops and corporations that ship American jobs overseas. This legislation represents a new low point for the House Republican majority. It is so flawed that even fellow conservatives are mocking the bill. The Wall Street Journal editorial page calls H.R. 9 a ``tax gimmick.'' Former economic advisor to President Reagan Bruce Bartlett said H.R. 9 ``will do nothing whatsoever to increase employment. It is nothing more than an election year give-away to a favored Republican constituency and should not be taken seriously.'' H.R. 9 is a signal to the American people that House Republicans are officially out of ideas for creating jobs. This bill merely recycles the Bush Administration's failed economic policies that ballooned the national debt and produced the lowest rate of job creation since World War Two. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office analyzed a range of policies that could be enacted to strengthen the economy and promote economic growth: this measure ranked second to last. I urge my Republican colleagues to abandon this dead-end legislation and instead, join with Democrats to support proven job creation measures, including bonus depreciation for main street businesses.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor the 110th anniversary of the Union Gospel Mission in the Twin Cities. The Union Gospel Mission Twin Cities was founded in Saint Paul, Minnesota in 1902. After starting out as a refuge for the homeless and the downtrodden, they now serve as a beacon of hope for not just the homeless, but the jobless, lost, addicted, and battered. Over the years, the Mission has expanded their operations from a small clinic off Jackson Street, to now include rescue homes for single mothers, opening learning centers, career development centers, child care centers, and medical clinics. As the community evolved, so did the Union Gospel Mission to meet the needs of the community. During the Second World War, Americans throughout the country were doing their part, and the men and woman at The Union Gospel Mission Twin Cities were no exception. In 1942, the Mission created a day nursery for mothers, not only allowing these women to make sure their children were cared for, but allowing these same women to work in their communities as well. Today, Union Gospel Twin Cities is helping many Minnesotans by giving them the tools to find jobs, especially to those who have to overcome barriers to do so. One example is the WorkNet Career Development Program in the Twin Cities, which has helped hundreds of Minnesotans by providing access to the training, guidance, and tools needed to find and keep a job in a market where it has been increasingly difficult for many to do so. The Union Gospel Mission Twin Cities provides direct assistance to those in need, in addition to the many different volunteer opportunities that give people an opportunity to give back to their community.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 4089, the Sportsmen's Heritage Act. This bill is the latest attempt by House Republicans to use America's natural treasures for the benefit of a handful of private corporations who are eager to mine, drill and log. Protecting and increasing hunters' access to public lands has been a bipartisan issue for decades, and is something I support. As a result, America's hunters have incredible access to our Federal lands. Today, 75 percent of all Federal lands are open to hunting and fishing. This includes approximately 67 percent of National Wildlife Refuge land and 70 percent of all the land managed by the National Park Service. The Bureau of Land Management allows hunting on 95 percent of the acres it manages. In Minnesota, we are fortunate to have large areas of public land open to hunting, including the Superior National Forest. In the United States, hunting access on public lands is not a crisis requiring legislation; it is a success story that deserves to be celebrated. H.R. 4089 abandons and reverses this legacy. This bill changes Federal laws to prioritize development over conservation and put corporate interests ahead of hunters. H.R. 4089 reduces the decision-making power of Park Rangers and other local land managers by centralizing authority in Washington, thousands of miles away. These highly trained professionals must be allowed to do their jobs, keeping land open to the public while protecting areas from disasters such as forest fires. H.R. 4089 would encourage the destruction of millions of acres of wildlife habitat. Every hunter knows that less habitat leads to less wildlife, which means less hunting. It is obvious that the beneficiaries of H.R. 4089 would not be America's sportsmen and women but instead, the owners of large oil, gas and mining corporations. This legislation repeals important provisions in the Wilderness Act that would open millions of acres of public land to development. H.R. 4089 allows the construction of new permanent road networks and authorizes permits for logging, mining and drilling in designated Wilderness areas. As a strong supporter of conservation on America's public lands and our country's proud hunting heritage, I urge my colleagues to stand up for hunters and oppose H.R. 4089.

Ms. McCOLLUM

Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3606. While this legislation includes some useful provisions, it also eliminates crucial investor protections, which would expose the investments of American families and seniors to financial fraud. H.R. 3606 attempts to create jobs by making it easier for America's entrepreneurs to raise startup and growth capital. Unfortunately, this important goal is overshadowed by provisions in the bill that remove necessary safeguards for everyday investors. This legislation undermines the credibility of research on companies by eliminating conflict-of-interest restrictions. It allows unregulated websites to peddle stocks to ordinary investors without any meaningful oversight or liability, which could give rise to fraud and money laundering. Moreover, H.R. 3606 would allow large banking institutions with hundreds of billions of dollars in assets to de-register and escape SEC regulations that ensure corporate transparency, integrity, and accountability. When this bill first came before the House for consideration I supported it. It was my hope that the Senate would modify H.R. 3606 to address the concerns raised by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), consumer advocates and independent economists. As the New York Times recently put it, passage of H.R. 3606 could result in more sales of ``worthless securities by bucket-shop brokerage firms.'' SEC Chairwoman Mary Schapiro wrote a letter to the U.S. Senate arguing that without appropriate protections, investors ``will lose confidence in our markets and capital formation will ultimately be made more difficult and expensive.'' Senate amendments to restore vital consumer investor protections did not receive the necessary votes to be included in the bill before us today. As currently written, H.R. 3606 poses too great a threat to the stability of markets and the security of American's pension funds, education savings and retirement accounts to earn my support. The United States and its people are still struggling to recover from the near-collapse of the country's financial sector. That crisis was the result of failed oversight and aggressive and irresponsible de- regulation during the George W. Bush Administration. In the four years since President Obama took office, the Dow Jones Industrial Average has increased from 7,949 to 13,197 due in large part to his bold and determined efforts to restore transparency and sensible regulation to Wall Street. Congress should not put this remarkable rally at risk by passing H.R. 3606 and making it more difficult for regulators to detect and prosecute financial fraud. I urge my colleagues to oppose the H.R. 3606.