Kristi Noem

Mrs. NOEM

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to clarify. I firmly disagree with my colleague on the other side of the aisle who just talked about Social Security and Medicare. In fact, the economic statistics that have recently come back have talked about how the Medicare trust fund and how Social Security are actually doing better since we did this historic tax cut bill because more people are working. They are earning more money. They are paying into those programs, and those programs are more secure into the future because we did historic tax reform. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of the Protecting Family and Small Business Tax Cuts Act--a key component of tax reform 2.0. I strongly support this legislation, because I worked on it for many years, but also because of the stories I hear across South Dakota every day. I had, several months ago, a single mom of two kids come up to me. She is a bank teller. She told me that because of tax reform that her check is $80 bigger every 2 weeks. That meant that her 10-year-old son could get new basketball shoes this year instead of going out and trying to find some that were used from another student who had outgrown them. I also had another woman from Platte, South Dakota, contact my office and tell me that because of tax reform and tax cuts--her family doesn't usually get much money. They don't make a lot of money. Their wages aren't great. But because of that bill, they have more money in their pockets today. It has made a huge difference in paying their day-to-day bills. Mr. Speaker, there are dozens of other stories that I could tell you from folks across the State of South Dakota of the benefits of tax reform. Our energy costs have gone down. Our utility bills have gone down. Companies have paid increasing wages for families. They have also paid out bonuses. The tax cuts have been life changing for many in our State. With that passage and with the passage of this bill today, we will have the opportunity to ensure the upward economic trajectory we have experienced because of a permanent culture of growth and stability that is rooted in the Tax Code. So tax reform 2.0 is going to make sure that with the benefits families are enjoying today they will still be able to enjoy them long into the future. While no tax plan is perfect in everybody's eyes, I am optimistic that this package today will have a huge benefit for the people of South Dakota. Our Tax Code should help people, not punish them. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in support of my legislation today.

Mrs. NOEM

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Red Arndt for his many years of service to the Lewis & Clark Regional Water System, as well as his lifetime commitment to bringing safe and reliable water to the rural corners of this country. Born Lennis Arndt on May 1, 1948, he earned the nickname, Red, while in grade school from his full head of red hair. The name stuck, and most people only know him today as Red Arndt. Red grew up in Springfield, Minnesota, about 90 minutes from his current hometown, Luverne where he first started working in 1989 as their public utilities director. Shortly after beginning his new position, Red heard about a proposal to bring water from the Missouri River in South Dakota to the surrounding states. A major undertaking with more people doubting the idea than supporting, Red saw the opportunity and potential, recommending to the mayor and city council that Luverne join and become one of the first members of the corporation that would later become the Lewis & Clark Regional Water System. Seeing Lewis & Clark develop from conception to construction was a labor of love for Red, and a mission he fought hard to achieve. Red, one of only two original directors from 1990 still on the board, held a shovel when the ground was first broke in 2003. He has made over 60 trips to Washington, D.C.; many more to the state capitals; and has attended countless county, city and community meetings. Fighting to get Lewis & Clark off the ground was just a starting point for Red. He has worked tirelessly on behalf of the project, serving as the vice-chairman of the board beginning in 1994 until becoming the board chairman in 2006, a position he still holds. Lewis & Clark has experienced ups and downs during those years, yet under Red's leadership, over 200 miles of pipeline have been laid in the ground-- currently delivering much needed water to 14 member communities and reaching over 300,000 people across South Dakota, Minnesota and Iowa. He has seen over $470 million in funding to Lewis & Clark, including $57 million in advance funding from the three states. Red's indisputable dedication was demonstrated when he participated in the ribbon cutting ceremony for the water treatment plant in August 2012, a mere two weeks after having open heart surgery. His fellow directors surprised him at the ceremony by presenting him with the Lewis & Clark Trailblazer Award, which is the organization's highest honor. In May 2016, Luverne was finally able to celebrate their connection to Lewis & Clark, with Red reveling in taking the first swig of water. It was at this ceremony that the meter building in Luverne was dedicated in Red's honor. Red will be the first to acknowledge that this endeavor, benefiting generations to come in the tristate area, has been a true team effort. But, there is no question Red's vision for the future, dogged dedication and strong leadership have been a driving force through the years. When he is not dedicating his time to Lewis & Clark, Red is a proud father of three boys (all sharing his red hair) and grandfather of three red-headed little girls. His family is his pride and joy. You will often find Red wearing a pin honoring his son who served in the United States Air Force. As a dessert-first type of guy, Red lives life to the fullest, enjoying travel, fishing and numerous other outdoor activities in his free time, as well as hanging out in his ``man cave.'' I am grateful for his commitment to public service, his hard work on behalf of Lewis & Clark, and, more importantly, I am proud to call him a friend. Mr. Speaker, I commend Red Arndt for his many great contributions and wish him the best as he continues to make the most out of the life God has given.

Mrs. NOEM

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and his work protecting life in this Nation. Mr. Speaker, taxpayers should not have to bear the abortion industry's financial burden directly or indirectly, and yet, every single year, the American people are forced to deposit $60 million into the bank account of Planned Parenthood, an organization that performs more than 300,000 abortions annually. Now, I understand that this money cannot be directly spent on abortions, and we have been successful in protecting taxpayers from funding these procedures through the Hyde amendment. But by subsidizing organizations like Planned Parenthood, which promote and perform abortions, taxpayers are propping up the abortion industry, and that is just not right. That is a burden that they should not have to bear. I know some will try to claim this move as damaging women's health, but that is false. The President's decision will not take a penny from women's health. Instead, it redirects those funds to clinics and centers that offer comprehensive life-affirming care to women from the moment of conception on. And in many areas, health centers like this far outnumber Planned Parenthood clinics. For example, in my home State of South Dakota, there are six federally qualified health centers operating in 45 service sites, but just one Planned Parenthood center. For decades, the abortion industry has tried to normalize this operation. But I want to be clear: Abortion is not healthcare, and it is not family planning either. Abortion is the intentional ending of an unborn baby's life. There is nothing more fundamental to our society than our kids. Our founding documents speak on behalf of us and our posterity. The American Dream itself rests on the idea that our children will have more opportunity than we do, and that is how America works. And no matter how small they are, whether they are born or unborn, we should never stop passionately arguing for their life and their liberty.

Mrs. NOEM

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Chairman, this initiative is incredibly important. We have huge challenges in the Great Plains region. Our Tribes are stressed and impoverished more than any other Tribes in the Nation. Many times, those youth struggle with hopelessness, a lack of belief in a strong future and opportunities that they have. I want to thank our ranking member for supporting the amendment. It is incredibly important that we offer opportunities to those Tribal youth and give them the chance to go on to post secondary education opportunities. Mr. Chair, I would like to use the balance of my time that I have here today to speak about my strong support for this farm bill that we have on the floor. While not everybody farms, everybody eats. And whenever I talk about agriculture to other people that don't have it in their district or in their region, I talk about how this farm bill is a national security issue. You see, when we grow our own food in this country, we control our own future. If we rely on another country to feed us, then they control us. And as we do business and trade with other countries, we create a much friendlier environment and neighborhood worldwide because we are doing business with those countries. We decided years ago in this country that we wanted to have an affordable and a safe food supply. And today, we have the safest food supply in the entire world because this country has a farm bill--a farm bill that provides safety nets for our farmers and ranchers that are out there taking highly leveraged risks each and every year to put a crop in the ground and to harvest that and to feed this country and the world. So maintaining control of our food supply--and the world's most affordable and abundant food supply at that--is essential. Because once we depend on another Nation to feed us, then they will continue to control us. So this is about having a safety net and making sure that every single family in this country has affordable and safe food. We do this in this bill by maintaining a strong crop insurance program. We remain committed to strong livestock disaster programs which were essential in making sure that South Dakota ranchers could recover from that devastating Winter Storm Atlas that killed tens of thousands of cattle that we experienced. It helped them rebuild, and it helped them continue to grow beef in our country. Commodity programs are improved in this bill as well. I am proud that the language I drafted was included to make these programs work better for the future. We also increase investment in farm country. We dedicate resources for rural broadband development. We do this while also investing in essential research opportunities, and continue to drive innovation. As a lifelong farmer and rancher, I understand the uncertainty our farmers face every day. In fact, across the country and across my home State of South Dakota, farm income in the last several years has dropped over 50 percent. I know how highly leveraged farmers are, and how important it is that we manage that risk. We can't control all of the risk factors that these families face. Hail storms and droughts will strike, but we can make sure that our policies that we write here today enable them to fulfill our own nutrition needs while also feeding the world. So I want to urge my colleagues to support this bill, to support this amendment, and make sure that we continue to provide the food that feeds the world. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. NOEM. Madam Chair, many States in which agriculture is important are also home to Native Americans Tribes. South Dakota, for example, has nine federally recognized Tribes. Many of these communities are poor. They lack basic services and have high rates of unemployment. No one suffers from these conditions more than the youth: the children, high school students, and hopeful college students who live there. That is why it is so important to ensure that native youth have the opportunity to obtain a higher education; to attend college; and that they are given the tools that they need to succeed. So my amendment is designed to work in concert with programs that assist native students, like the Wokini Initiative. It was designed by my alma mater, South Dakota State University. In the Lakota language, Wokini means ``new beginnings.'' It is the title of the program that this amendment establishes. This amendment simply authorizes USDA to match funds spent by land-grant universities on efforts to help native students succeed and ultimately graduate. Madam Chairwoman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. NOEM. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mrs. NOEM

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to the Biggs amendment as well. This amendment would repeal the bioenergy programs established in the 2002 farm bill. These programs encourage investment in small towns. Not only do they encourage renewable fuels--and to me, that is a national security issue--but they also create jobs and investments that bring these benefits to our rural communities, our States, and our country. Not only that, but they also create new demand for many agricultural products. H.R. 2 already makes reforms. It eliminates mandate funding and reauthorizes programs that reduce discretionary funding levels. This amendment is not necessary because, instead of improving successful programs, it repeals them, eliminating all their successes, while not saving any taxpayer money. Mr. Chairman, I encourage my colleagues to vote against this amendment.

Mrs. NOEM

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chairman as well for all of his help getting this bill done. I rise today in support of the Black Hills National Cemetery Boundary Expansion Act, and I urge my colleagues to vote for it. This morning, I was up at 4 a.m. and got to the Sioux Falls Airport by 5 a.m. to greet a group of veterans who were taking an Honor Flight. They were getting on a plane and heading to Washington, D.C. to see their monuments and to spend some time with family and guardians reminiscing about their service to this country. I was reminded about the sacrifices that they have made to defend our liberty and our freedoms in this country. They were looking forward to it. As I listened to their stories and heard about their time overseas and in-country, but also on ships and field, it was overwhelming to me what all they had done and what they had experienced in service to this country. In fact, one of the men was in his eighties, and it was going to be the first time today that he actually flew on an airplane. When he was in the Navy, he took a train to the coast and got on a ship. He was excited about this, not only being an opportunity to honor his service, but also to have new experiences along the way. As I thought about them all day traveling out to D.C. and doing our work here, and the fact that this bill was going to be on the floor today, I was reminded again and again that South Dakota has a long and honorable history of service. In fact, we have one of the highest service rates in the Nation in our State. It is a small State, but they are highly patriotic, and they love this country. The fact that the Black Hills National Cemetery needs room to grow is a testament to the sheer number of patriotic South Dakotans who have answered their country's call to serve. I am honored to have championed this legislation in Congress for several years, and I am proud to say that the House has passed it twice already. Today is going to be different though. Today, with all of your support, we can finally do right by our veterans and send this bill to President Trump for his signature. Allowing the Black Hills National Cemetery to expand is the very least that we can do to honor these great patriots who have served our Nation. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the bill.

Mrs. NOEM

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support the Improving Rural Call Quality and Reliability Act. Most Americans can rely on their phone service to keep in touch with loved ones. They can respond to urgent work when away from their place of business and respond to emergencies. But many of my constituents in South Dakota continue to have these critical calls dropped with absolutely no warning. More specifically, companies in the business of routing voice calls sometimes purposely drop long-distance calls headed for remote areas as a way to save money. While this is inexcusable just for the sheer inconvenience, some of these calls involve emergencies, leaving families in unnecessarily dangerous situations. The provisions within this bill are simple. We simply direct the FCC to establish basic quality standards for providers that transmit voice calls. This will help ensure businesses, families, and emergency responders can count on phone calls being completed. Mr. Speaker, I love living in a small town in America. It is where I grew up, and it is where I have chosen to raise my family. Dependable phone service shouldn't be a question for those who make the choice to live in wide-open spaces, especially when we are making new, amazing technological advances on a daily basis. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to pass this legislation and ensure that those in South Dakota and rural areas across the country can rely on their phone calls going through.

Mrs. NOEM

Mrs. NOEM. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. The whole experience of being a first-time parent can be really overwhelming. I remember feeling this incredible sense of joy. But there are always so many questions, too. How are we going to provide for this baby? What kind of person will they become? What if something goes wrong? There is no doubt a lot of things can go wrong in a pregnancy, but we find comfort in the fact that there is a whole team of healthcare professionals there who will do everything that they can to care for that baby or to save that baby, if necessary. But what if they didn't? What if they stepped back and refused to deliver care to your child? It would be unacceptable. Yet when a baby is born alive after a failed abortion, that same healthcare professional may not deliver the lifesaving care that that baby deserves. Melissa Ohden from Sioux City, Iowa, was born alive after an abortion attempt. By God's grace and the work of an incredible nurse, Melissa survived. As she tells it, there were demands made to leave her there to die in the hospital room that day. She says that ultimately a nurse rushed her off to the NICU because, in the nurse's words, ``Melissa just kept gasping for breath.'' That nurse wasn't going to leave her there to die. Madam Speaker, every life has dignity and every life deserves respect. We ultimately need to ban abortion and protect life from the moment of conception. But until that is done, we must fight to protect every single precious little life that we can. The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act will do that and help us be successful in that mission. With that, I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mrs. NOEM

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, today, I rise in support of S. 140. I strongly support this bill, but I want to speak today about one particular piece of it--the Tribal Labor Sovereignty Act--which I helped introduce, along with Mr. Rokita. Mr. Speaker, I often stand in this House to oppose interference from the heavy hand of the Federal Government, and this is no different. In 2004, the National Labor Relations Board, unilaterally, decided that it needed to meddle in the affairs of Tribally owned businesses on Tribal lands. This is a board that was set up to oversee union elections but has become the bureaucratic arm of big labor. By further expanding its jurisdiction, the National Labor Relations Board threatened the foundation of Indian law, the principle of Tribal sovereignty, and the limits of a small Federal Government. Since the Obama administration implemented this incredible government overreach, dozens of Tribes have supported legislation to clarify that the NLRB's jurisdiction does not extend to Tribes. The conservative, small government legislation we consider today would make that necessary correction. Native American Tribes around the country, and especially in my home State of South Dakota, are plagued with grinding poverty, high unemployment, substance abuse, and poor healthcare. They continually seek economic development through self-determination, and the last thing that they need, when trying to improve economic opportunities for their citizens, is a Federal bureaucracy further meddling with their efforts. Quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, I believe that subjecting Native American Tribes to National Labor Relations Board rules is yet another sign that some still want the Federal Government to interfere with Tribal decisionmaking. I have sponsored the Tribal Labor Sovereignty Act, and this House has passed it multiple times. I am proud that many South Dakota Tribes have long supported the bill, including the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, the Oglala Sioux Tribe, and the Great Plains Tribal Chairman's Association. I urge my colleagues to withdraw the heavy hand of government and again support Tribal sovereignty.

Mrs. NOEM

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a farmer, a rancher, a small- business person, but most importantly as a mom. I rise to support the conference report on H.R. 1, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Mr. Speaker, in my home State of South Dakota, the average household income is $54,000 per year. Out of that $54,000, our families pay double the national average in energy costs just because of where they are located. These are hardworking families and they deserve a break. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act gives them that break. By lowering tax rates, doubling the standard deduction, and doubling the child tax credit, that family in South Dakota making $54,000 can go from an $833 tax liability to a $781 tax refund. That is a $1,600 difference in after-tax income. That is $1,600 that can go back to benefit their families and their communities, rather than into the greedy hands of those in Washington. On top of that, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is designed to build a healthier economy--an economy in which that family making $54,000 can get a raise, an economy that actually grows jobs. I am proud to have served on the conference committee that put this report together. I thank Chairman Brady for his leadership throughout the process. We worked literally hundreds of hours putting this together and getting the child tax credit where it is today. We had vigorous debates about the benefits to rural America. I am thrilled to be able to go home and tell South Dakota farmers and ranchers they will have new expensing tools, a new small business deduction, and significantly lower individual rates. While I am disappointed that this bill doesn't completely repeal the death tax, it does provide more relief for producers and small-business owners. While no plan is perfect in anyone's eyes, this legislation puts more money in the pockets of hardworking taxpayers. The bottom line is this: the American people deserve more control over their paychecks. They worked for that money, and it is time folks in Washington respect that.

Mrs. NOEM

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of H.R. 1, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. We have worked hours--literally hundreds of hours--on this legislation, and I commend Chairman Brady and the staff of the Ways and Means Committee for all of their hard work. Mr. Speaker, we have gone through this bill line by line. I have personally fought for policies and ideas in this bill to make sure that it works for families, to make sure that it increases wages, and creates more opportunity for folks all across America. My goal in this was two-fold. Number one, I wanted to strengthen families. Number two, I wanted to create a stronger future for America. This tax reform package puts us well on our way to achieving these goals and achieving some remarkable wins for the American people. I say this because this plan simplifies the Tax Code. It simplifies it to the point that most people can file their taxes on a form the size of a postcard. It also gives significantly lower rates. It dramatically expands the child tax credit. It keeps the child care credit. It protects flexible spending benefits. These provisions for working families are important to me. My home State of South Dakota has the highest rate of working families in the Nation. The moms and dads in my State aren't working just for fun. They are working to pay the bills to provide for their families. They need money to put food on the table and to put a roof over their kids' heads. These provisions are going to help them pay their bills, take care of their kids, go to work, and maybe, just maybe, get a little extra money that they can take their kids off for a weekend and do something fun together. That is important. When these kids grow up, I want them to be able to find good, high- paying jobs. So I fought hard to make sure that our farmers, our ranchers, and our small businesses could thrive under this new Tax Code. We got some pretty big wins for those folks. In this bill, we fully and permanently repeal the death tax--that un- American, unfair double tax. W give people better expensing tools and we drive down the rate for small businesses. If we are going to make sure that our kids can thrive, we need to create opportunities for them to make sure that they can do it right here in America, and this tax reform package lets hardworking job creators do that better. Mr. Speaker, I understand that no tax reform plan is going to be perfect in everybody's eyes, but this proposal is a strong step forward. It reflects real, sustainable policy changes that are going to let people keep more money in their pockets. I have heard from many throughout this debate, who have spoken up against these tax cuts and these reforms--people who trust the government with this money more than they trust the American people. Mr. Speaker, I fundamentally disagree. The American people deserve more control over their paychecks. They have worked hard to earn that money. They have taken time away from their families to earn that money. They ought to be the ones deciding how, where, and when to spend it. So for the purposes of strengthening families and offering folks a stronger future here in America, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1.

Mrs. NOEM

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 76th celebration of National Bible Week. As I reflected on what I would share with everyone tonight, I couldn't get away from my background and my family heritage of being raised by Christian parents, who were raised by Christian grandparents, who worked hard and believed that the instruction book for life was the Word of God. Bryon and I have chosen to raise our children in much that same way. In fact, when I was telling my family--we have a group text that we text in all the time with my kids, my husband and I. I was telling them that it was National Bible Week. I said to them: Do you kids remember what the Junior Bible Quiz answer is? For the very first question in the Junior Bible Quiz book is: What is the Bible? And my middle daughter, Kennedy, who is 20 years old, immediately texted back, and she said: The Bible is the inspired Word of God and is His revelation to all people of Himself and His plan for salvation. I said: Good job, Kenners. You see, because we--my grandparents grew up going to church and became very frustrated that it was religious; that it wasn't a personal relationship with the Lord. In fact, so much so, that they decided that they would plant their own church. It is the church that I go to today, that our entire family goes to today. But for a year, they held Bible studies in homes seeking God's will for their lives and what it meant to have a personal relationship with Him and to spread it to their community. They were very poor, but they knew that everything in their life, their success, and their family's hope and future relied on the Lord's will and them being obedient to it. Mr. Speaker, I grew up as a young girl coming downstairs in the middle of the night for a drink of water to find my dad on his knees reading his Bible in the middle of the living room. He had a bad back. He worked hard. He was always in pain, and whenever he had a difficult time on the farm or couldn't sleep because of the pain that was in his body, the first thing he would do would be to read his Bible. Oftentimes, we didn't realize how much time he really did spend worshipping God, and reading His words to find comfort and release through some of the difficult times that he had gone through. I remember being 13 years old and being very insecure. In fact, my mom said she worried about me. She wondered if I was going to be a young girl who would grow up proud. I didn't have many friends. I didn't think I was attractive. I didn't think I had any gifts. She sat me down at the kitchen table, and she read to me Scriptures out of the Bible that told me how God saw me; that God saw me above and not beneath; that He saw me as someone who had plans for me from the time I was in the womb. And you know what? I bought it. I completely changed my attitude and my perspective of myself that day because of God's Word that was spoken over me by my mother. So we as a family, from the time I was little, went to church Sunday mornings. We went Sunday nights. We went Wednesday evenings. We knew that if the doors were open on church, we were to be there, and we were to be meditating on God's Words in our lives. That is how Bryon and I have chosen to raise our kids as well. We put them in Junior Bible Quiz because we wanted God's Word hidden in their heart. I am thankful that today they still have God's Word hidden in their heart. Mr. Speaker, Jesus tells us in Matthew 7: ``Anyone who listens to My teaching and follows it is wise, like a person who builds a house on solid rock. Though the rain comes in torrents and the floodwaters rise and the winds beat against that house, it won't collapse because it was built on bedrock.'' How often does it feel like we are stuck in that storm, as though the floodwaters are rising around us and around people of faith, as though the winds are beating on our door? It is during these times that we must lean on our foundation, the Bible, our instruction book. It is in that Bible that God reveals how He would like to use us as instruments of faith and as defenders of freedom that show Christ's love and compassion to our community, Nation, and world. Allowing Him to guide us through His Word is the surest way to navigate any storm. But so many times, people try to navigate our policy debates in this Chamber by fighting to change one another's minds. Mr. Speaker, I am convinced what we ought to be doing is seeking God to change their hearts, gearing their hearts toward Him. I recognize that that takes trust, and it takes faith, but that is what we are directed to do. It is written in Proverbs: ``Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge Him, and He will make your paths straight.'' Mr. Speaker, I pray that we are being servants for God's good, that we allow Him to light our path, and that we humble ourselves enough to build our house on His firm Biblical foundation. In this way, whatever we do, we do it to the glory of God.

Mrs. NOEM

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his leadership on this piece of legislation, which will, quite literally, save lives. I am so grateful that we are having this debate on the House floor at this point. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 36, the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. I believe that every life, including an unborn baby's life, has dignity and value. But more than 40 years ago, the Supreme Court handed down a decision in direct contradiction to those principles. In the decades since, I have joined with many families and my colleagues in the House and many across the Nation fighting to undo the damage that has been done. We have got a long way to go in this country, but the passage of H.R. 36 would be a step in the right direction. A strong and growing body of medical research provides evidence that pain receptors develop in unborn babies at no later than 20 weeks. Medical professionals have testified about seeing babies that age recoil from painful stimuli. Others have been able to measure increases in stress hormones when babies inside the womb are subjected to pain. If fetal surgery is performed, that baby is given anesthesia in many cases to shield them from the pain of surgery. Yet our Nation's laws allow for these babies to endure the pain of a life-ending abortion. It is absolutely heartbreaking. My husband and I knew that our lives had completely changed the minute that we heard our oldest daughter's heartbeat. I will never forget that moment. I hope that she knows how proud we are of the generous and compassionate person that she has grown up to become. She has grown up quickly, and I love to think back about those days when she was still a little girl and when she wasn't much taller than I. We read a lot back then. We read books. We read the Bible. One of her favorite books was Dr. Seuss' book, ``Horton Hears a Who!'' which says: ``A person is a person no matter how small.'' Each time we read that line, I thought back to those first moments when I heard her muffled heartbeats and thought about Kassidy and thought about ``a person is a person no matter how small.'' I had that blessed moment three different times with my three different children, and I pray every day that each and every baby's heartbeat would be heard by parents who understand the gift that that life is from our God who loves them dearly. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defend the smallest among us this week and pass H.R. 36, the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. I thank the gentleman for his leadership.

Mrs. NOEM

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, in closing, the CUFF Act is commonsense. The American taxpayer should not subsidize individuals who are fleeing from law enforcement. Because the Social Security Administration already possesses in place processes that will ensure due process and protect beneficiaries, claims about this bill are overblown and, quite frankly, they are wrong. I am proud that this bill is supported by the Fraternal Order of Police, the National Sheriffs' Association, and the South Dakota Sheriffs' Association. I urge my colleagues to support this bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I have no other speakers, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I just want to remind everyone that the bill we are debating here today would suspend SSI benefits for those who have felony warrants for their arrest and those who have violated probation or parole. That is the discussion that we are having here today. And let's go back over, in summary, what the policy actually does and says. This policy should not be thought of in isolation. This is part of a larger effort to reauthorize the evidence-based, outcome-focused Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting program. H.R. 2824, which passed this Chamber on Tuesday, will be joined with this bill upon passage. It helps to improve the lives of families in at-risk communities, focusing on the first years of a child's life. Unlike most Federal social programs, MIECHV funding is tied to real results, which ensures limited taxpayer dollars are actually delivering the intended results and helping those that are most in need. Under current law, the program is 100 percent federally funded, but H.R. 2824 introduces a Federal match similar to what States must already do in other social programs, such as foster care, Medicaid, child support enforcement, childcare, and others. The rest of the package ensures this program remains a shining example of evidence- based policy by expecting the program to continue to demonstrate effective outcomes. That reauthorization is fully offset by the bill that we are considering here today, H.R. 2792. Instead of focusing on our Nation's debt, we should be doing more of what we are doing right here in these bills: prioritizing Federal spending and focusing on what works by improving the integrity of one program to provide funding for another. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, taxpayers should not be subsidizing those who have felony warrants for their arrest or violating parole and probation. I wanted to remind everyone today that in 1996, the same provision was amended into other programs that we have at the Federal Government level. Temporary Assistance for Needy Families--cash welfare--has these same provisions included in that program. Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program--SNAP or food stamps--has these same provisions in the program. Housing programs, such as public housing, Section 8 vouchers, project-based Section 8, all have these same provisions in that program. In addition, there are similar provisions added to Social Security disability and retirement programs, and the Department of Veterans Affairs benefits has this same provision that we are putting back into statute today when it comes to SSI payments. Mr. Speaker, you can clearly see that this is bringing this program up to the same level of accountability to taxpayers and not subsidizing those who commit crimes against innocent individuals, and is an entirely appropriate debate here today. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I live in the State of South Dakota. I have some of the poorest counties in the Nation in my State, and they happen to be my Native American Tribes. They face 80 to 90 percent unemployment, poverty like no other place in the country, and they are isolated. They also have very high drug and crime rates. In fact, we have seen a record number of murders in these communities, especially on the Pine Ridge Reservation, in this calendar year, and it is deeply discouraging and disheartening to me to think of someone who could have committed a murder in one of my communities in the State of South Dakota, that there is a felony warrant out for their arrest, and that we may not be able to find them. This bill will fix that situation. If that individual is receiving SSI payments, that helps law enforcement locate those individuals who have gone out and committed crimes against innocent people. Rape, murder, kidnapping, they all happen in my Native American Tribes, and this helps law enforcement find them and bring them to justice. It is one of the important things that this legislation will help us do in some of our most vulnerable communities. I also recognize that the previous speaker talked about the fact that we need criminal justice reforms, and that is a very good debate that we should be having in Congress. But this is not the bill to talk about criminal justice reforms because this is not germane to the discussion that we are having today. I wanted to speak for a minute on what is good cause because there is latitude for good cause within statute today, and I think there is some confusion as to exactly how this bill would be interpreted when it is signed into law. In some cases, the SSI will not suspend or seek an overpayment of payments for good cause exceptions. There are two types of good cause exceptions that already exist in statute. The mandatory good cause exception is the SSA cannot suspend payments if a court has found an individual not guilty or has dismissed charges. If a court has vacated the warrant or issued any similar exoneration, then they cannot suspend payments. They also cannot suspend payments if there is a mistaken identity due to identity fraud. The other exception in statute today is discretionary good cause exceptions. The SSA may suspend benefits for mitigating circumstances under two options: Option A is the individual must prove that the criminal offense was nonviolent and not drug related. We also have that the individual has not been convicted of a felony crime since the warrant was issued, and the other point is that the law enforcement agency that issued the warrant reports that it will not act on the warrant. That is other exceptions for good cause. Option B, the individual must prove all of these factors: if the criminal offense was nonviolent and not drug related; the individual has not been convicted of a felony crime since the warrant was issued; the warrant is the existing warrant and was issued 10 or more years ago and the individual lacks the mental capacity to resolve the warrant, which includes those living in a nursing home or mental treatment facility. So as we have listened to opponents of this bill talk, they have discussed all of these issues as to how these benefits could be taken away from individuals that are clearly covered by good cause exceptions that are already in statute, and those situations are not relevant to the debate that we are having today. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Smith), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Human Resources. I thank him for his leadership on this issue.

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to clarify exactly what this legislation does. This legislation will take SSI benefits from individuals and stop those payments to those who have felony arrest warrants or who have violated their probation and parole. I want to go through the process so that everybody recognizes that there is plenty of time for individuals to go through the appeal process. Notice is given if there is a warrant that they need to get rectified with the jurisdiction that has authority. So let me step through this process. Step one is through the Office of Inspector General. Law enforcement agencies give OIG information about individuals who have outstanding felony arrest warrants or who are violating conditions of probation or parole. Then OIG compares this information to its computer files of individuals receiving these dollars or serving as representative payees. If there is a match, OIG verifies the identity of the individual, ensures that the warrants for the individual are still active, works with local law enforcement to attempt to locate the person, and then OIG refers the cases to SSA to begin the suspension process. When this process gets to the Social Security Administration, SSA sends an advance notice to the individual. This notice proposes the suspension of benefit payments and informs the individual of their right to appeal the suspension decision, payment continuation, and the timeframe to take such actions after receiving the advance notice. This notice includes why the SSA is suspending benefits and where, why, and when the warrant was issued. If SSA finds out, through a data match, 35 days is given for the individual to protest. If the individual protests, SSA will not suspend benefits until it figures out if the individual qualifies for a good cause exception. If the individual does not appeal his or her advance notice, then the SSA will suspend the benefits. If the individual does appeal and gives his or her advance notice and provides evidence for the payment continuation, the SSA verifies the evidence and then continues the payments. Other things that we should know about this legislation and what this includes is that warrants may only be resolved in the issuing jurisdiction. Grounds for dismissal of a warrant include identity theft, administrative error, and the individual's own move from the jurisdiction, especially if low income. Warrants for misdemeanors remain warrants for misdemeanors and cannot become felonies. There is also latitude for the Commissioner to make decisions in special areas where there may be something to be considered, such as dementia or low-income abilities. Mr. Speaker, this bill has been thoroughly vetted. We are making sure that the only people who are denied their SSI benefits are those who have felony warrants for their arrest or have violated probation or parole and have not gotten straight with law enforcement and rectified that past infraction. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record two letters of support. One is from the over 330,000 members of the National Fraternal Order of Police, and the other is from the National Sheriffs' Association. National Fraternal Order of Police, Washington, DC, June 29, 2017. Hon. Kristi L. Noem, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Samuel R. Johnson, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Representatives Noem and Johnson: I am writing on behalf of the members of the Fraternal Order of Police to advise you of our support for H.R. 2792, the ``Control Unlawful Fugitive Felons (CUFF) Act.'' In August 1996, President Clinton signed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act into law, which restricted the eligibility of fugitive felons, and probation and parole violators for Social Security benefits. The Social Security Administration's Office of the Inspector General (OIG) reported that this law has contributed to over 59,000 arrests since the inception of the program in 1996. However, three different court decisions have eroded the law's effectiveness and the original intent of Congress, allowing fugitives to continue to collect benefits while on the run. This legislation will restore the original intent of the law by prohibiting an individual who is the subject of an outstanding arrest warrant for a felony or parole violation from receiving Social Security benefits. The legislation will apply only to felony charges and amend the Social Security Act to make clear that the suspension of benefits is not just in cases of ``escape, flight to avoid prosecution, or confinement, and flight-escape.'' The American taxpayer should not be forced to support those who are evading justice. On behalf of the more than 330,000 members of the Fraternal Order of Police, thank you for your support for law enforcement. If I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me or Jim Pasco, my Senior Advisor, in my Washington office. Sincerely, Chuck Canterbury, National President.