Norma Torres

Mrs. TORRES of California

Mrs. TORRES of California. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave

Mrs. TORRES of California. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mrs. TORRES of California. Madam Speaker, on Monday the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 252, providing for consideration of two bills: H.R. 7, the Paycheck Fairness Act; and H. Res. 124, expressing opposition to banning service in the Armed Forces by openly transgender individuals. The rule provides for consideration of H.R. 7 under a structured rule. The rule provides 1 hour of debate, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Education and Labor. It self-executes a manager's amendment. It also makes in order nine amendments. The rule provides for consideration of H. Res. 124 under a closed rule, and it provides 1 hour of debate, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Armed Services. Madam Speaker, 56 years ago, President John F. Kennedy signed the Equal Pay Act. He referred to this law as a ``structure basic to democracy''--equal pay for equal work, in essence, equality. But the sad reality is that, over 56 years later, women are still paid less than their male counterparts for the same work. I know, because it happened to me. One of my first jobs was in a male-dominated industry selling steel. It didn't matter if I performed as well, if not better, than my male colleagues; I was still paid less. I had to leave that job, which I loved, because I wasn't getting my fair share. It was a shame then, and it is a shame now. In the sixties, women made 60 cents on the dollar. Now the average woman makes 80 cents compared to her male counterpart--80 cents. For women of color, the gender wage gap is even more severe: For every dollar made by her non-Hispanic White male counterpart, an African American woman makes 61 cents, a Native American woman makes 58 cents, and women who look like me, Latinas, make 53 cents on the dollar for similar work. That is less than the average woman made in the 1960s. Do I not work just as hard as my male counterparts? Do I deserve to make 53 cents on the dollar? Do I not have to support my household as much as a man? Latinas lose, on the average, $28,386 every year. That amounts to more than $1 million over her career. What would an extra $1 million mean for the working woman or for her children? That she never has to chose between paying for childcare or buying groceries or not worrying about how to send her kids to college. Maybe she could even fulfill the American Dream of purchasing a home. Some people brush this off by arguing that women choose different or easier jobs than men, like being a teacher or a nurse. To those people, I ask: Who sets those salaries? When was the last time you were underpaid to teach 40 children in a classroom setting? Nursing assistants each suffer roughly three times--three times--the rate of back and other injuries as construction workers. Are you going to tell me that the nurse who spends 12 hours on her feet taking care of those most in need doesn't deserve higher pay, or the 911 dispatcher who is working the graveyard shift, fielding call after call after call, coordinating an effective emergency response so that they themselves can save lives or the first responders can save lives? Don't tell me women's work is easier. We need equality--in practice, not just in law. H.R. 7, the Paycheck Fairness Act will make equal pay a reality. It addresses the many complicated facets of sex-based discrimination. Even when it is crystal clear, it is incredibly difficult to win a lawsuit to prove that employers are discriminating on the basis of sex. The Paycheck Fairness Act requires employers to demonstrate that wage disparity is based on a bona fide factor other than sex, such as education, training, or experience. In workplaces where women are empowered to know how much they are making compared to their male colleagues, the gender gap shrinks by 7 percent; however, some workplaces penalize employees for discussing their salaries. The Paycheck Fairness Act would prevent retaliation against employees for wage transparency. Sex discrimination causes women to make 6.6 percent less than equally qualified male counterparts on their first job. Over time, as raises and bonuses are decided based on a women's prior salary history, this gap is made even worse. The Paycheck Fairness Act prevents employers from asking for a salary history. Another factor that contributes to gender pay disparity is that women are less likely to negotiate for a higher salary. Studies show that men are expected to negotiate, but when women ask for more money, they are penalized and still paid less. The Paycheck Fairness Act creates a grant program to fund negotiation and skills training. Currently, employees must opt in to class action lawsuits brought under the Equal Pay Act, running contrary to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This makes it more difficult for women to use the courts to correct equal pay disparities. The Paycheck Fairness Act allows them to opt out, removing barriers to participate in class action lawsuits and, therefore, addressing systematic gender-based inequality. I have offered two amendments to the Paycheck Fairness Act bill to highlight the serious effects of the gender pay gap on women of color. The Paycheck Fairness Act is a step in the right direction. Women who look like me should not make 53 cents on the dollar for the same work as our White male colleagues, and even less than the average woman made 60 years ago. It is wrong, and it is unjust. That is why it is crucial we pass H.R. 7, the Paycheck Fairness Act. Now, I would like to turn your attention to H. Res. 124, expressing opposition to banning service in the Armed Forces by openly gay transgender individuals. For me, this issue hits close to home. I am a proud mother of an Air Force veteran. It wasn't a decision they made lightly. It was one made with great personal sacrifice, and the U.S. Government made a promise to them that they would be safe to be themselves. Imagine how their mothers and fathers must feel knowing that our Nation has broken a promise to their children. This doesn't make us safer. We should welcome every qualified person who is willing to stand up to deploy and enlist in our Armed Forces to serve alongside people like my son. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. TORRES of California. Madam Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to inform my colleague from Texas that the women in Texas make $0.72 to their male counterparts. I think Texas women deserve to have equal pay. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline).

Mrs. TORRES of California. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Trahan).

Mrs. TORRES of California. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Frankel).

Mrs. TORRES of California. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman from Florida an additional 30 seconds.

Mrs. TORRES of California. Madam Speaker, having more women enter the workforce does not mean that women are earning equal pay for equal work. Madam Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney).

Mrs. TORRES of California. Madam Speaker, I have no additional speakers, and I reserve the balance of my time to close.

Mrs. TORRES of California. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. The smart and innovative women of Arizona's Eighth Congressional District deserve to have a voice in this debate, and I am going to give it to them. They earn 80 cents to every dollar that their male counterpart earns. They deserve to have fair wages for the equal work that they are performing. Before I begin my closing statement, I would like to take a moment to honor a valuable member of my staff: Justin Vogt. Justin has been my legislative director for 2 years. During that time, he has been a phenomenal member of my team, designing innovative legislative initiatives, providing wise counsel, and serving as a generous mentor to my junior staff. Now he will move on to be an excellent staff director for the Economic Opportunity Subcommittee of the Veterans' Affairs Committee. We are sad to see our waffle maker, Justin, leave our office, but we are so proud of all that he has accomplished. Madam Speaker, 60 years from now, I hope that we have moved forward as a Nation. I hope that our daughters and granddaughters grow up in an America that recognizes their value through the quality of their work and not their gender. Imagine that. The Paycheck Fairness Act gets us closer to securing a future for them. A recent McKinsey study found that, if women's full potential in the labor market was reached, $4.3 trillion would be added to the labor market in 2025. Our economy would benefit from that woman power. There has been enough talk about lawyer fees. Women attorneys deserve equal pay for equal work, too. This argument is nothing more than an attempt to avoid talking about the pervasiveness of wage discrimination in this country. The policies in the Paycheck Fairness Act work. Just look at California. In 2017, Californian women made a median of 89 cents to every dollar made by their male counterparts. In just a few years, we decreased gender pay disparity by more than any other State. I have heard it said that addressing wage equity is bad for moms. What is bad about getting fair pay? Equal pay for equal work. Mothers make 71 cents for every dollar earned by fathers in similar jobs. If we paid women fairly, maybe they would get a chance to spend more time with their kids. If my colleagues care about moms spending time with their kids, let's pass National Paid Family Leave Act standards. Let's create better working conditions for pregnant women. Let's fund programs for affordable childcare. This is just the beginning. The cost for American women, their families, and our economy is much too high to wait any longer. Madam Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and a ``yes'' vote on the previous question.

Mrs. TORRES of California. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mrs. TORRES of California

Mrs. TORRES of California. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mrs. TORRES of California. Madam Chair, I rise today to offer an amendment to H.R. 7, the Paycheck Fairness Act, and I strongly support H.R. 7 and any effort to address the gender wage gap in this country. A terrible disparity exists in our country. Women on average make 80 cents to every dollar made by their White male counterpart. What is worse is that it is not getting any better. Last year, the gender wage gap actually grew for women of color. For every dollar made by their non-Hispanic White male counterpart, an African American woman makes 61 cents, a Native American woman makes 58 cents, and women who look like me, Latinas, make 53 cents on the dollar for similar work. That is less than the average woman in the 1960s. Do I not work just as hard as my male counterparts? Do I deserve to make 53 cents on the dollar? And do I not have to support my family just as much as any man? Because of the gender pay gap, Latinas lose an average of $28,386. That amounts to more than $1 million over her career. To earn the same amount as her White non-Hispanic male colleagues, a Black woman must work until she is 86 years old. You cannot get those hours back, those years back, or those decades back. The gender wage gap contributes to a wealth of disparity that makes it harder for people of color to get ahead. In 2013, the median White household had about $134,000 in total wealth. For the median Black household, it is $11,000. That is a 13-to- 1 ratio. Addressing the gender wage gap is the first step to addressing larger issues of pay parity among historically underserved groups. My first amendment changes the findings section of the Paycheck Fairness Act to recognize the devastating impacts the wage gap has on women of color. We must acknowledge that the wage gap is not color blind. By failing to recognize the specific effect the wage gap has on women and girls of color, these impacts might go unnoticed. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. TORRES of California. Madam Chair, I am prepared to close. Madam Chair, my amendment shines a light on the plight of women and girls of color and sets the tone to take their struggle into account throughout the rest of the bill. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle might have never heard about retaliation, about blacklisting. When women have the courage to come forward and report these wage thefts and abuses, they are treated differently under current law. That is why this bill is important. That is why this amendment is important. Madam Chair, I would like to thank the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) for introducing this bill, for her dedication to fair pay. Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. TORRES of California. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mrs. TORRES of California. Madam Chair, I rise today to offer a second amendment to H.R. 7, the Paycheck Fairness Act. This amendment ensures that women and girls of color are included in the research, education, and outreach done by the Secretary of Labor. The sad truth is that women, especially women of color, are still paid less than their male counterparts for the same type of work. I know this because it happened to me. One of my very first jobs was in a male-dominated industry, selling steel. It didn't matter that I performed as well, if not better, than my male colleagues. It didn't matter that I sold steel in three languages while they sold in just one. I would do my own data entry to get the job done, while they relied on an assistant. And when I needed to rush a shipment, I was not afraid to walk into the warehouse, pick the material, pack it, and send it to my customer. I was still paid less. I had to leave that job that I loved because I wasn't getting my fair share. It was a shame then and it is a shame today. On average, Latinas still get paid 53 cents to every dollar made by their White male colleagues for the same type of work. Today, we can act to change this. By passing the Paycheck Fairness Act with my amendment, maybe young Latinas and other women of color will not have to suffer and share my experience. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. TORRES of California. Madam Chair, my amendment will expand the Paycheck Fairness Act to ensure the Secretary of Labor is paying attention to specific issues and researching the wage gap; educating employers, the media, and labor organizations on these findings, specifically highlighting the impact on underrepresented groups; ensuring minorities are included in informational and educational outreach programs; and celebrating the accomplishments of employers who are leading the way to specifically address the gender gap issue for women of color. By paying specific attention to women of color in their research, maybe, one day, we can fill that gap to recognize that diversity of perspective can be an asset. I wonder how different my experience would have been if the Paycheck Fairness Act would have been in place at the time. Would I still have become a homeowner? Maybe. Would I still have been a successful mother of three sons? Maybe. Would I have been able to afford to pay for childcare? Maybe. These are the things that women in business and the workforce are having to deal with every single day. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. TORRES of California

Mrs. TORRES of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Congresswoman Slaughter's legacy and the impact she made throughout her decades of dedicated public service. She was a friend and an invaluable mentor, especially during my first term in Congress. She paved the way for every woman in the House by becoming the first Chairwoman of the Rules Committee--the same committee I now serve on. She spearheaded the passage of the Affordable Care Act, one of the most consequential pieces of legislation in recent history. Congresswoman Slaughter was also a fierce and fearless champion for women. She co-authored the Violence Against Women Act and founded and co- chaired the Pro-Choice Caucus--which to this day, continues to be on the frontlines of protecting women's reproductive rights. As we near the anniversary of her passing, I can't help but to be reminded of her unparalleled leadership. She's left a void in the House that is hard to fill. But her memory lives on inside these halls, and it inspires each of us to keep up the fight to better the lives of all Americans. I am grateful for the opportunity to have served alongside her.

Mrs. TORRES of California

Mrs. TORRES of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Police Service Representative III Ulric J. Pattillo, Jr. of Los Angeles. After 40 years of dedicated public service to the people and communities of the City of Los Angeles, Ulric is finally retiring and will be sorely missed. Ulric's incredible career with the Los Angeles Police Department began on February 2, 1979 as a Station Officer. He was commended for conducting himself in a professional manner and doing an outstanding job. He served in this capacity until he transferred to Communications Division as a Police Service Representative on December 1, 1981. Ulric received many commendations during his career, including but not limited to: his service during the Valley Bureau cutover to ECCCS and the 1992 Civil Unrest; recognition for National Dispatchers week; and outstanding support of field officers during emergency situations. He was deeply involved in his community outside of the department by volunteering as a poll worker, serving as an AFSCME Union Shop Steward, being a member of the PSR Task Force, and being selected as Councilperson for the Employee Council and End of Watch Cadre. His friendly character and positive approach left an indelible mark at Communications Division. His dedication to the profession, the community, the Department and the City of Los Angeles is highly commendable, and has earned him the esteem of the men and women of the Los Angeles Police Department, Communications Division. For his remarkable accomplishments, it is my honor to recognize Police Service Representative III Ulric J. Pattillo, Jr. on the House floor today. His decades of commitment and contributions to the City of Los Angeles are worthy of commending and admiration.

Mrs. TORRES of California

Mrs. TORRES of California. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 144 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mrs. TORRES of California. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Woodall), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave

Mrs. TORRES of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mrs. TORRES of California. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 144, providing for consideration of H.J. Res. 46, relating to a national emergency declared by the President on February 15, 2019. The rule provides for consideration of the legislation under a closed rule. The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. Additionally, the rule provides that the provisions of section 202 of the National Emergencies Act shall not apply during the remainder of the 116th Congress to a joint resolution terminating the national emergency declared by the President on February 15, 2019. This provision was included to avoid privileged legislative action on redundant resolutions. Mr. Speaker, today we must stand up for democracy; we must stand up for the rule of law; and, most importantly, we must stand up for the United States Constitution, the Constitution that we took an oath to defend when we were sworn into office. Mr. Speaker, the Constitution we swore to defend granted Congress the power of the purse. That means Congress decides how we spend the American people's hard-earned money. Congress spoke when we passed, and President Trump signed, a spending bill that granted him $1.4 billion for fencing along the border. Now President Trump is acting like a dictator by ignoring Congress and declaring a national emergency. As a result, billions of taxpayer dollars would be taken from high-priority military construction projects that ensure our troops have the essential training, readiness, and quality of life necessary to keep the American people safe. Mr. Speaker, as a former member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, I have visited countries where the rule of law takes a backseat to the whims of their Presidents. Just look at Venezuela, where Nicolas Maduro has removed every single obstacle to his power. When he objected to the rulings of the judges, he ended their terms early and replaced them with his political allies. When the democratically elected congress didn't agree with him, he created a new congress filled with his supporters. Last year, he even banned prominent opposition leaders from running into the Presidential election. He has demonized the press and even took CNN en Espanol off the air. Last night, he detained one of America's journalists, Jorge Ramos, of Univision. Fighting with judges, manipulating elections, attacking the press. Mr. Speaker, does any of this sound familiar? Now you have a situation where food is so scarce that the average Venezuelan has lost 24 pounds in the last year and more than 3 million have fled the country. The Maduro presidency, now that is a true national emergency for the people of Venezuela. The collapse of democratic institutions is also happening in Nicaragua and Guatemala. The President of Guatemala and his allies in congress are taking the country down the same path, removing every check on their power. They have expelled the international prosecutors who dared to investigate them. And just as Guatemala's Government has tried to undermine and delegitimize the police and prosecutors who are investigating, President Trump has called Robert Mueller's investigation a ``witch hunt'' and denigrated the brave men and women of the FBI. Mr. Speaker, we cannot allow this President--or any President, Republican or Democrat--to take us down the same path as Venezuela, Guatemala, and Nicaragua, all to build a wasteful and ineffective wall along our southern border. These women and children coming from Central America do not represent a national emergency. That is why 58 former national security officials, both Republicans and Democrats, issued a statement saying there is ``no factual basis'' for the President's emergency. Our call to duty today is to protect, to defend our Constitution. We will vote, and we will see how many in this body have that same respect for the rule of law. Mr. Speaker, I urge our Republican colleagues to join us in this effort. It is not too late for my colleagues across the aisle to tell the President that this is wrong, that the Constitution that we swore an oath to uphold really matters. We stand here today to stop this power grab of our own democracy. A ``yes'' vote will affirm our democracy. A ``no'' vote further erodes the trust in our democracy and, again, expands executive power. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues on which side they stand. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. TORRES of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I can think of many other things that we could be talking about that truly, truly, truly call out and scream out for a national emergency. Homelessness in our communities: Thousands of people in our communities sleep on a street, under a bridge, children sleeping in vehicles every single night. I think about the opioid epidemic, and how many of our families are simply immune to the issues around drug abuse and how addiction overcomes them? I think about last year around Christmastime when 800,000 of our Federal workers were going without a paycheck and went without a paycheck for 35 days. Yet my colleagues on the other side of the aisle could not find 1 minute and 6 seconds to give them a paycheck, to open up the Federal Government, to do their duty. Instead, in the Rules Committee, we took up an emergency order on labeling of cheese curds. They found that to be more important than the lives and the families of 800,000 Federal workers. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mrs. TORRES of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, we can talk about the scary people from our southern border. I am not that scary looking, am I? I think not. The fact is that the number one trading partner for California and Texas is Mexico, a friendly country. For Central America, we are standing up for our responsibility to uphold democracy in the Northern Triangle, to address the root cause of migration. That is where our focus should be. Do we need an immigration reform package that brings 11 million people out of the shadows? Absolutely. These are the 11 million people who our agricultural partners depend on to deliver fresh food to our table. But we are not doing that here. What we are doing here, what the President has chosen to do, is political theater, political theater for 2020. In essence, a vote against this resolution means a vote against the families of the military people who are depending on us to provide infrastructure, schools for their children to learn, and quality housing. Do Democrats think and believe that fortifying our borders is important? Absolutely. We have committed billions of dollars to ensure that we stop the narcotrafficking that happens at our ports of entry. That is where it is happening. We need to work together on these issues, not relinquish our responsibilities, our legislative responsibility, and the power of the purse that we hold. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.